The Via Crucis of the CND

There is a lot that companies are faced with the difficulties of maintaining periodic issuance of certificates of tax compliance. Today, in addition to those situations provided by law, the presentation of Negative Debt Certificate, the call CND, it is almost mandatory, in most contracts, even among private entities, serving the same as a “Certificate of Good Background”.

On the one hand, technology has improved the means of obtaining information on the situation of taxpayers before the state, it is certain that it was not enough to reduce bureaucracy of state activity. Thus, if the computerized system of IRS accuses a difference any between tax amounts that should have been paid by the company and the amounts actually collected automatically, the company’s CND is locked, requiring a visit to their agencies to the taxpayer knows the blocking reason for your certificate.

No mention of the cast of reasons, often preventable, include state companies in the “bank of debtors, “is quoted as example the case of tax offsets, authorized by law, which are often not properly computed by the IRS.

But certain is that companies that have a history of important gatherings and day, are desacobertadas, an hour to another in charge of non-payment of a Real miserable.

Not only if the tax in question is the type that the taxpayer himself declares periodically duty, as is the For most federal taxes (IR, CSLL, PIS and COFINS), and if it is determined difference between the company’s statement and the tribute payment form, the IRS immediately sends the case to the Prosecutor of the National Treasury, which in Craft duty demands enter the debt in the Union Active Debt.

At this point, there is more to the taxpayer do at the administrative level, because the debt is ready to motivate the filing of tax enforcement action by the Attorney of Finance.

In case you need to hire the government, selling real estate, borrowing or public facility, among other common activities to the progress of the company, she, in this situation, only left to anticipate the facts constituting lawyer and bailing the judiciary to obtain a certificate of tax compliance in time and time to develop its business activity. Then the company already reeling from the tax burden that plagues the country, which has its sheet burdened wages by hiring staff seconded to take care of the maintenance of its tax compliance certificates (Federal, State, Municipal, FGTS), also contributes to overwhelm the judiciary with purely administrative matters, which should be settled in the relevant departments, but are not.

And that jamming all business activity. It does not have a purpose here to defend tax evaders. In fact, the aim is to shed light on the disproportion assumed that the requirement of the presentation of CND. On the one hand the state seeks to avoid the “default” by reducing the activity of bad payers, on the other hand, there is a real immobilization of healthy business activity.

The technology plays a decisive role in the state’s action. There are certainly ways of developing an effective communication channel between the state and the taxpayer, via internet, for example, able to avoid constant visits to government offices and their passwords and endless queues. Through this channel, the taxpayer could be identified inconsistencies in the system charged with granting reasonable time for your justification, without affixing a guillotine over the neck of the company.

So much has already been done by equipping the state with a view to the monitoring of business activity and resulting revenue. It’s time to invest in the improvement of machines and men who are at the service of that State, for the serious and productive contributors begin to be treated as a partner and not as an enemy.
Sandra Kauffman Zolnerkevic
Partner Del Manto, Kauffman & amp; Menezes – Law Firm
article published in the newspaper Gazeta Mercantil, edition of 12:12:07, page A3

The Super Use of the Taxpayers Council

There is today finding that the Administrative Courts, especially the Taxpayers’ Council, are demanded to ” fix “the situation created by the oversight that often, instead of working in partnership with the good taxpayers paying taxes, act as executioner of business activity.

On the last day 7, was published in the Official Gazette, the Decree n. 3 of the Ministry of Finance, setting a new threshold, now of R$ 1.000.000,00, for the mandatory referral for review of the Board of Tax Appeals of decisions favorable to businesses and citizens, issued by the very classes of Revenue Judgment Federal (1st Administrative Instance).

That is, remains mandatory referral to the Board of Contributors in Brasilia of all processes that the Trial Panel, formed by specialized technical staff of the Internal Revenue Service has issued a favorable decision for companies and individuals, to cancel the collection of taxes and fines in total amounts exceeding R$ 1.000.000,00. So even if the defender of the State, provide no appeal against the decision. The submission to the Council’s review is mandatory.

In a country that lacks sufficient staff to handle the demand of judicial activity and, say, stop court, this exercised by the Administrative Court, and a process at the administrative level takes four to five years to reach the end, it seems preciousness unnecessary the obligation to take the highest administrative court, the cases decided in the first instance whose decision was not submitted feature, not even by the interested party, which is the Federal Government.

This is another country’s management aspect, full of rules, does not prioritize priorities and focus on bureaucracy as a means of control of business activity.

Of course, the issue of Administrative Rule n. 3 of the Ministry of Finance is good news, since, so far, in cases involving charges less than R$ 1.000.000,00, but greater than R$ 500.000,00 were automatically sent to the Board of Tax Appeals.

So it was reduced the number of referred cases. However, considering the trial of approximately 12.000 cases each year, the Board of Tax Appeals (2005 data), the relief could have been greater if they had simply been dispensed automatic remittances to the Board in the absence of the Union appeal so that processes controversy whose remains have been prioritized towards those processes that already have decision in which the parties have been accommodated.
Sandra Kauffman Zolnerkevic
Partner Del Manto, Kauffman & amp; Menezes – Law Firm

Fiscal debt and Serasa

Some days has been circulating in the news the intention of the Attorney General of the National Treasury to edit an Ordinance to regulate the registration debt with the Federal Government in the databases of Serasa.

In fact, there are times that the databases of Serasa have been supplied with lawsuits information, including those relating to the collection of debts owed to the federal government. The novelty would be the record in Serasa debits in outstanding debt, even before the filing of the lawsuit.

Serasa which calls itself a public character entity is private company (multinational), aimed at providing service registration information and credit to customers with whom it has an agreement. It makes no judgment on archived data, neither is considered responsible for the quality of the information stored in their databases.

The federal government, meanwhile, already has record to point the debts of legal entities and individuals before the federal agencies and entities, called CADIN – Informative of Unpaid Credits of Public Sector Federal and allowing the Federal Public Administration standardize procedures for the granting of credit, guarantees, fiscal and financial incentives, and also to by contracting bidding processes in general.

proliferate, rightly, criticism of the intended initiative of Attorney .

The use of Serasa is a means unauthorized coercive for the Union to force the payment of tax debts by taxpayers ( as is the unjustified refusal Clearance Certificate issued Debit), when there is already specific register for this purpose, regulated by federal law.

After all, experience shows that it can be extended the list of reasons for the Union to include corporate and individual taxpayers in such in “bank accounts”, mentioning, as example, customary misunderstandings in cases of tax offsets, authorized by law, which are often not properly computed by the IRS, causing undue inscriptions Debts, with losses for the initiative Private.

Consider also that most federal taxes (IR, CSLL, PIS and COFINS) is declared periodically by the taxpayer himself (DCTF), and if calculated difference between a taxpayer’s declaration and payment of the tax guide, the IRS sends the case to the Prosecutor of the National Treasury, which today enters the debt in Outstanding Debt Union. If implemented the new Attorney project, the debt would also be recorded in Serasa.

The setting tends to be dark, because currently, the error rate for the inscriptions Debts by the Prosecutor’s Office very high, so that the judiciary is overwhelmed with lawsuits filed by taxpayers for the cancellation of debts improperly levied by the Union.

On the other hand, considering that the tax debts have proper and effective arrangements for the collection, the only objective to be achieved with the new appointment seems to be the adoption by the General Attorney of the National Treasury, policy enforcement (not tax) to the taxpayer, absolutely rejected by the courts, including the Supreme Court.

The embarrassment of the company to see its activities limited by the “negativity” in Serasa, will lead to immediate discharge by her debts, including those improper and subject to discussion.

Another aspect to be considered is the type of note that would consist of the Serasa database. To date, information about registered tax debts in outstanding debt are only made available by the Attorney the taxpayer or their attorneys, preserving the necessary confidentiality.

From the new initiative of the Prosecutor, this information private character, will become public, as will be available for all consultants universe of Serasa.

It is argued, however, that before the new embarrassment mechanisms for the exercise of private sector institution, as the inscription in Serasa, the better it would be if the power of the Attorney General of the National Treasury was directed to the real problems that affect the tax authorities regard – Contributing to unstick business activity in the country, which would result in the collection of more taxes, ultimately .
Sandra Kauffman Zolnerkevic
Partner Del Manto, Kauffman & amp; Menezes – Law Firm
Article sent to Task Force on Tax Law of Amcham (American Chamber) in 10:12:07