In recent years, the incidence of IRPJ and CSLL on investment grants has yielded several discussions, being the subject of position changes in both the administrative and judicial sphere.
Recently, the first class of the Superior Court of Justice began to decide monocratically for the applicability of the precedent signed in Special Appeal no. 1,517,492 (non -incidence of IRPJ and CSLL on presumed ICMS credits) also to cases that deal with other tax benefits, such as exemptions and calculation base reductions.
The last proceedings of this stir result from the alteration of understanding by the Second Panel of the STJ, which in the records of Special Appeal no. 1,968,755/PR decided to unnecessary proof that tax benefits are investment subsidies, departing from any formal requirements other than those arranged in article 30 of Law no. 12.973/2014.
This was the most recent argument used by the Union to rule out the thesis defended by taxpayers: sustaining the need to meet several formal requirements, such as the demonstration that the benefit would have been granted as a stimulation of the implementation or expansion of enterprises Economic, the Union argued that tax benefits could not be considered investment grants and, therefore, should continue to compose the IRPJ and CSLL calculation basis.
Rightwards such arguments and reinforcing the taxpayer's line of defense, the STJ decided to unnecessary to meet these requirements, so that, in accordance with article 30 of Law no. 12.973/2014 (what is already adopted in practice), tax benefits will be considered to exclude from the IRPJ and CSLL. Substances for investment and, therefore, will be subject to.
