Alexandre de Moraes’s monocratic decision on IOF echoes in the Senate

The decision of Minister Alexandre de Moraes of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), which on Wednesday (16) validated the presidential decree that increased the tax on financial operations (IOF), generated reaction in the Senate. The measure had been overturned by the National Congress, but the Supreme Court restored part of the decrees that expanded the tax collection. During the plenary session, senators highlighted the conflict between the legislative and executive powers, and criticized the monocratic decision.

Senator Esperidião Amin (PP-SC) expressed concern about the decision and stressed the congressional vote that rejected the decrees.

– We vote in favor of the legislative decree that is insurmious against the transformation of a tax that is regulatory into a collected tax. Now a monocratic decision considers that the presidential decree was in accordance with the Constitution, notwithstanding all we know that the decree contains this change of regulatory tax concept to collected tax.

Read too

Government’s victory in the IOF decree; Netflix, US retail, IGP-10 and more

See what should swing the markets this Thursday (17)

Moraes maintains a decree that increased IOF, but revokes billing on the draweed risk

Decision comes one day after executive and congress conciliation meeting on tax increase end without understanding

Senator Oriovisto Guimarães (PSDB-PR) criticized the concentration of power in monocratic decisions in the Supreme Court and defended the collegiate vote.

– A man alone, Minister Alexandre de Moraes, in a monocratic decision, told the Brazilian nation: I alone can be more than 513 deputies, than 81 senators and than the presidency of the Republic. My word is the end of the controversy, I decide everything. It is not possible for the House of Representatives to continue to deliver the PEC that asks for the end of monocratic decisions without taking any power from the Supreme. On the contrary, giving power to the Supreme, leaving the Supreme situation better than this situation of having to decide for one man.

For Senator Eduardo Girão (Novo-CE), the decision hurts the prerogative of the National Congress and raised doubts about the effectiveness of parliamentary work.

– Will the Senate and the House, the Congress, be inert about a vote we made here, 513 deputies and 81 senators? What will be the answer to the Brazilian population of something that is our prerogative? If nothing is done in relation to a reaction to this invasion of competence, it is better to establish prolonged recess until next year.

Senator Carlos Portinho (PL-RJ) reinforced the need for institutional responses to monocratic decisions and the defense of the legislature:

– If there is a violation of our STF decisions, which has constantly happened, we have to give the answer here in Congress. You have to have an answer. It’s there in the chamber.

Senator Jaime Bagattoli (PL-RO) expressed outrage and questioned the relevance of voting in the face of the Supreme Decisions:

– It’s shameful what is happening here in this Senate! No need to give recess until the 5th, everyone goes home, I agree to stay the rest of my term without having to come here, because there is no need to vote. What is voted here, in this House and the House of Representatives, will be null and void by the Federal Supreme Court.

Conflict

Senate government leader Senator Jaques Wagner (PT-BA) explained that there was a conflict between the powers, and the Supreme was called to resolve the issue.

– This is not about annulling the decision of this National Congress. The government went to the Federal Supreme Court to ask if the attitude of the president was constitutional. Minister Alexandre de Moraes understood that he is constitutional, although he did not fully approve the Decree of the Presidency, because he withdrew the risk drawn. Someone needs to arbitrate and it was the Supreme who positioned themselves.

Senator Esperidião Amin again spoke to recognize the position of the ruling leader, but criticized the stance of the House of Representatives.

“I want to express my deep respect for Senator Jaques Wagner once again, who boldly voted for the proposal of amendment to the Constitution against monocratic decisions. He has moral authority to talk about this subject. It has no moral authority to talk about this subject to the House of Representatives, which has been, in a good time sitting on this PEC. The will of the President of the Republic prevails even when it comes to raising taxes.