[Free translation] Current legislation requires taxpayers to offer income from SELIC interest received in the repetition of debt and in the collection of judicial deposits to the Tax on Corporate Income Tax (IRPJ) and Social Contribution on Net Income (CSLL).
However, in a recent trial, TRF 4th Region ruled unconstitutional the provisions of law that authorize the IRPJ and CSLL requirements on SELIC interest, consolidating the understanding within TRF4, in order to offset the incidence of said taxes.
This is because, in essence, the Fourth Region TRF recognized the hybrid nature (monetary and interest adjustment) of the SELIC rate. The purpose of monetary restatement is to preserve purchasing power in the face of inflationary phenomena, not consisting of taxable income subject to IRPJ and CSLL taxes.
And, in relation to default interest, which makes up the SELIC rate, the nature of the indemnity was recognized, and therefore, there can be no incidence of IRPJ and CSLL.
Although the controversy over the taxation of interest is not defined by the STF, given the hybrid nature of the SELIC rate, which does not allow to separate what is interest and what is monetary correction, the practical effect is that no tax will be subject to tax. That represent the Selic rate in the amounts received in the repetition of indébito and in the collection of judicial deposits.
In this way, companies that had amounts reimbursed as a result of a repetition of indébito (taxes returned by judicial decision) and in the collection of judicial deposits, have the opportunity to exclude the IRPJ and CSLL incidence on the Selic rate and recover the Values unduly demanded by the Treasury.
