Government should retreat at the draweed risk, but keep IOF on VGBL, says Bittencourt of the wing
The federal government must maintain the content of the June decrees on IOF elevation for investments and financial operations-such as the VGBL-during the conciliation hearing convened by the Supreme Court (STF) for the afternoon of Tuesday (15). On the other hand, it should retreat in the drawing of the drawn risk. This is what evaluates Jeferson Bittencourt, Wing Macroeconomics Head and former National Treasury Secretary.
“The intention of the executive would be to maintain all the content of the decrees presented in June, those who had a lower ambition around R $ 12 billion for revenue in 2025. But would be willing to negotiate taxation on new bases, not the increases of aliquots of what was already taxed, but taxation on the new base that would be the risk of risk,” he said at an online event today.
The risk risk is operation whereby a buying company asks a bank to anticipate the payment of its suppliers. When the agreed deadline arrives, the company pays the bank with interest. According to the decree, there would be a daily charge of 0.0082% and a fixed rate to 0.38% for conventional credit operations between legal entities.
- Read more: IOF Increased Risk Operations Drawn worries companies
The hearing convened by the Supreme Court aims to mediate two actions: one of the Liberal Party, which disputes the constitutionality of the presidential decrees that increased the IOF, and another declaratory action of constitutionality of the Union Attorney General (AGU), which attempts to restore the effects of the presidential decree that increased tax rates.
The economist said that his perception is that the executive is stronger for this reconciliation than he entered a few weeks ago because the speech that Congress is not contributing to the country’s tax justice is helping to recover President Lula’s popularity and taking ill for parliamentarians.
VGBL
Regarding the VGBL, the idea was the creation of a new tax on annual contributions over R $ 600 thousand in plans. Although initially considering reviewing this measure, the government demonstrates the intention of maintaining it, according to Bittencourt, claiming that there is recurring use of this strategy by large families as a form of tax planning.
According to the economist, however, the IOF has a regulatory function and should not be used as a tool to correct income tax failures or equity.
“If there is a regulatory problem in VGBL, it should not make a difference if the contribution is $ 100,000 in the year, $ 500,000 or $ 600,000. This is not a problem of product regulation. It is a problem of income taxation or property transfers. But the government seems to be willing to give up this tax,” he said.
