Post by firoj8240 on Jan 11, 2024 12:53:45 GMT 8
At the time this article is written, Brazil is going through a political transition that tends to have a decisive impact on legislative debates surrounding tax reform proposals. Although there is unanimous agreement on the need to modify the structure of our tax matrix, which has long been disconnected from the social and economic reality on which it is imposed, there is no minimum consensus regarding the result that is intended to be obtained. An example of such a finding can be seen in the recent 1st Tax Law Conference, promoted by the Federal Justice Council, in which the tax reform commission was unable to achieve the approval of even one statement [1] . The lack of consensus is a consequence, to a large extent, of the complexity of the issue itself, fueled by a true game of antagonistic forces and interests that tend to oppose each other in the most diverse areas: federative, economic and/or social.
After all, debating the conformation of a country's tax matrix is nothing more than understanding how the relationship and distribution of costs and results will occur between the most diverse segments or groups of a given society. There will always be "harmed" and "benefited" by the normative design that shapes the elected tax matrix. Even so, despite being a field of intense dispute, tax reform today is basically based on two projects whose legislative Betting Number Data process is at a more advanced stage: PEC 45 and PEC 110, both seeking to standardize taxation on consumption in around a value added tax. In addition to the various points that deserve a detailed analysis, this article will focus on examining one of the central elements of both proposed models: the structuring of a policy of returning taxes to low-income taxpayers as a way of compensating for the end of exemptions from taxes on the consumption of essential products, such as foods included in the basic food basket .
The importnce of focusing on this aspect of the proposals lies in the fact that the end of exemptions with the corresponding refund of the IBS levied on the consumption of economically vulnerable families is presented as a counterpart to the regressive nature inherent in taxation on consumption. This regressiveness, which we believe, will be greatly increased if the favored tax treatment currently given to certain goods and services consumed is eliminated. It is argued that the refund system, combined with the adoption of uniform rates, would represent a more efficient mechanism for income redistribution, as it would focus on the use of public resources to combat social inequality in low-income families, while tax relief, in addition to being able to be enjoyed without distinction by all consumers — high and low income — could be appropriated by the different stages of the chain of production and circulation of goods and services, so that nothing would guarantee the due transfer of the benefit to end consumers.
After all, debating the conformation of a country's tax matrix is nothing more than understanding how the relationship and distribution of costs and results will occur between the most diverse segments or groups of a given society. There will always be "harmed" and "benefited" by the normative design that shapes the elected tax matrix. Even so, despite being a field of intense dispute, tax reform today is basically based on two projects whose legislative Betting Number Data process is at a more advanced stage: PEC 45 and PEC 110, both seeking to standardize taxation on consumption in around a value added tax. In addition to the various points that deserve a detailed analysis, this article will focus on examining one of the central elements of both proposed models: the structuring of a policy of returning taxes to low-income taxpayers as a way of compensating for the end of exemptions from taxes on the consumption of essential products, such as foods included in the basic food basket .
The importnce of focusing on this aspect of the proposals lies in the fact that the end of exemptions with the corresponding refund of the IBS levied on the consumption of economically vulnerable families is presented as a counterpart to the regressive nature inherent in taxation on consumption. This regressiveness, which we believe, will be greatly increased if the favored tax treatment currently given to certain goods and services consumed is eliminated. It is argued that the refund system, combined with the adoption of uniform rates, would represent a more efficient mechanism for income redistribution, as it would focus on the use of public resources to combat social inequality in low-income families, while tax relief, in addition to being able to be enjoyed without distinction by all consumers — high and low income — could be appropriated by the different stages of the chain of production and circulation of goods and services, so that nothing would guarantee the due transfer of the benefit to end consumers.