Search

Purpose – This article aims to provide an inicial analysis of the regulation process in the current Brazilian tax environment. It also intends to investigate whether those tax administrative regulations have their guidelines extracted from a legal-procedural theory that allows them to be clear, simple and trusty on their rulemaking process. Methodology/approach/design – The text adopts as methodological approach the regulatory administrative procedure that is actually applied by Brazil’s Revenue Service (Portuguese acronym: SRF), Foreign Trade Chamber (Portuguese acronym: Camex), National Committee on Revenue Policy (Portuguese acronym: Confaz), and Revenue Appeal Chamber (Portuguese acronym: Carf), considered the regulatory influence and the economic consequences that they entail. As a guideline to this text, some theoretical assumptions needs to be made on public choice and public interest theories, based on Steven P. Croley criticism, and on legal analysis of economic policy developed by Marcus Faro de Castro. Findings – Debates on proposed reforms of Brazil’s tax system have brought about concerns related to excessive amount of regulations, leading to lack of perception of safety, clarity and confidence in the national legal environment. Practical implications – It provides basic guidelines to developing a regulatory rulemaking process focused on taxation. Originality/value – This article fosters the debate on the Brazilian tax system simplification, transparency, and publicity, focusing on regulatory rulemaking process and on social participating at the discussion agenda about tax public policies and regulation.

In the last months, we have lived an environment of economic slowdown, which has led the Executive to legislate on various topics in order to boost the economy. Thus, this event will aim to generate debate about the latest package of tax regulations to promote investment in Peru with emphasis on the suspension of Rule XVI of the Tax Code and tax stability agreements. En los últimos meses se ha vivido un ambiente de desaceleración económica, lo cual ha llevado al Poder Ejecutivo a legislar acerca de diversos temas con la finalidad de impulsar la economía. Así, el presente evento busca generar un debate acerca del último paquete de normas tributarias para promover la inversión en el Perú con énfasis en la suspensión de la Norma XVI del Código Tributario y los convenios de estabilidad tributaria.

A aplicação das normas tributárias produz efeitos comportamentais e patrimoniais, os quais se projetam sobre o conteúdo dos direitos fundamentais. Tais efeitos restringem a disponibilidade do titular desses direitos sobre os bens que integram o seu conteúdo. Os bens protegidos pelos direitos fundamentais são ações, situações ou posições jurídicas, os quais condicionam a existência de um estado de coisas desejado pelo seu titular. Há bens que são essenciais à promoção de um mínimo de eficácia individual ao direito. Eles se encontram na chamada zona do núcleo essencial do direito fundamental, a qual é protegida absolutamente contra os efeitos restritivos provocados pelas normas tributárias. Há, por outro lado, bens importantes e bens supérfluos a essa eficácia individual e mínima. Eles se encontram, respectivamente, nas zonas dos bens importantes e supérfluos. O efeito de confisco ocorre toda vez que da aplicação da norma tributária decorre a restrição à disponibilidade do titular do direito sobre um bem essencial. Esse efeito equivale à ineficácia do direito. Vale dizer, o efeito de confisco ocorre quando a norma tributária impede ou desencoraja o exercício do direito pelo seu titular. Logo, o postulado da proibição aos efeitos de confisco veda que quaisquer normas tributárias, independentemente do fim que justifica a sua aplicação (fiscais ou extrafiscais), venham a provocar a ineficácia dos direitos fundamentais, especialmente dos direitos à propriedade, à liberdade e à vida humana digna. A construção de um núcleo essencial específico a partir da análise de casos concretos possibilita a criação de regras de aplicação desse postulado aos novos casos a serem enfrentados. Então, toda vez que a norma tributária der causa à indisponibilidade sobre um bem essencial à eficácia mínima do direito, restará inobservado o postulado que proíbe os efeitos de confisco no direito tributário. The application of tax law rules produces financial and behavior effects that will reflect over fundamental rights. Such reflections can restrict the individual’s availability over these rights or its full contents. The protection offered by fundamental rights are legal actions, situations or positions, that will give the limits for the existence of a state of things wished by its holder. There are rights that are essential for the promotion of the individual’s minimum. They are found in an area so called “essential center of the fundamental right”. This area is absolutely protected against restrictive effects caused by tax law. To be said, also, that there are important rights and less important rights to enforce this individual minimum. The tax confiscation effect occurs every time the application of a tax rule restricts the individual’s availability over an essential right. This effect means ineffectiveness of the rule. In other words, the tax confiscation effect happens when the tax rule obstructs or discourages the full exercise of the individual’s right. Therefore, the prohibition of the tax confiscation effect forbids that any tax rule, independently of it’s nature (fiscal or non fiscal), will cause ineffectiveness of a fundamental right, specially when concerning propriety, liberty or human dignity. The construction of an specific essential center of fundamental right, from existing legal cases, makes possible the creation of certain application rules for new cases to come. Therefore every time a tax rule causes the ineffectiveness of an essential right, it’ll have violated the fundamental idea of the prohibition of the tax confiscation effect.