In October, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) determined the suspension, throughout the national territory, of processes that discuss the possibility of redirection of tax execution against a member who regularly departed from a must, despite having exercised at the time of the taxable fact. The suspension is true until the first section of the STJ judge repetitive action on the subject, and set the thesis to be applied to the processes that deal with the same controversy.

In the appeal indicated as representative of the controversy from the Federal Regional Court of 3rd Region (TRF3), the National Treasury claims that the partner was part of the Society at the time of the Constitution of Tax Credit. Thus, argues that the fact that the partner does not involve with the posterior irregular dissolution does not withdraw his responsibility for debt, therefore, in becoming a part of society, he took the liabilities and the asset of the company, does not displease obligations only by disposal of social quotas (under penalty of offense to Article 135 of the National Tax Code).

"When we analyze the process more closely, we verified that the decision against which the National Farm brought the appeal - which will now be analyzed as representative of the controversy - deals with the discussion there is very existing As for the need to identify the taxability in the case of an irregularly extinct society: whether it is the administrator of the time when taxes ceased to be paid, or if the last managers who would have given cause to uneven dissolution. Until this judgment, the understanding of the class was in the sense that responsibility competed to the administrator of the non-payment of the tribute. However, we understand that the decision points to a new orientation of the Superior Court of Justice for the inclusion of the latest partners / managers as responsible, "
Comments Cristiane Schardosim Martins, a lawyer for the Tax Area of ​​Carpena Associated lawyers.