Taxpayers' desire to correct book-entry credits

firoj3131

Certain taxes subject to the non-cumulative rule is quite old. They argue that monetary correction does not characterize a plus or increase, but merely a means of guaranteeing the value of the currency. On the other hand, the Public Treasury has always defended the argument that the monetary update of these credits depends on a law allowing their application. This issue is also present in PIS and Cofins, considering that the authorization provided for in article  to deal with the non-cumulative nature of these social contributions was granted to the Legislative Branch.

Precisely due to the lack of legal provision, the STJ, in a judgment submitted to the repetitive appeals system, concluded that it was impossible to apply monetary correction EX Mobile Phone Numbers to IPI book-entry credits, which must be appropriated at their nominal (historical) value. However, if any state, administrative or normative act is verified, which is unjustifiably preventing or delaying the use of these credits, the updating of the values ​​becomes legitimate, under penalty of unjust enrichment of the Public Treasury (Special Appeal  judged on June — Repetitive Theme.



The above position was reinforced in November, by the publication of Summary  by the 1st Section of the STJ, ratifying the understanding that, once the Tax Authority's illegitimate resistance is characterized, monetary correction becomes due.  when considering a controversy involving the possibility of the Judiciary establishing a deadline for the public administration to complete a tax administrative procedure, the STJ once again expressed its favor to taxpayers, stating that the measure, in addition to being a direct result of the postulates of efficiency, morality and reasonableness, finds support in the reasonable duration of the process, elevated to the category of fundamental right by Constitutional Amendment REsp  — Repetitive Theme.