Post by firoj2525 on Mar 8, 2024 23:03:31 GMT -5
That there are no charges on the sharing of assets that occurred due to the separation. Click here to enlarge the image The 14th Chamber has already decided that no ISS is levied on the provision of postal services. Another position taken by the collegiate is that the Selic Rate is the index that should be used in monetary corrections involving Public Treasury convictions.Therefore, based on the scenario boopyzed, by majority, the CSRF understood that, in addition to consideration, the payment of the retention bonus would be customary. In Ruling 9202-008.179, the incidence of social security contributions on the retention bonus was decided by means of a casting vote, in the system prior to the change promoted by Law No. 1
Which added article In the judgment of the case mentioned above, the reporting counselor was unsuccessful, but, in her vote, she upheld the taxpayer's appeal as she understood that, in the case boopyzed, there were no elements to characterize the hiring and retention EL Salvador Mobile Number List bonus as remunerative in nature, given given that the onus would be on the inspectorate to prove the consideration nature that could attract the incidence of social security contributions in its payment. However, through the casting vote, the taxpayer's special appeal was dismissed, based on the same grounds as the appealed decision in the sense that the payment would be equivalent to the award, supplementing the installments paid due to the employee's activities, with compensatory nature.
Currently, there is a great expectation of a reversal of administrative jurisprudence, which is why taxpayers are awaiting the publication of a ruling relating to the recent CSRF judgment, which dismissed the special appeal filed by the National Treasury in which the salary nature of the retention bonus is discussed ( Process nº 10314.729353/2014-19). As mentioned, although the ruling has not yet been made available, it is possible to carry out a brief boopysis of the matter under discussion in the CSRF, through the appealed ruling, whose judgment, carried out on 12/09/2017 by the 1st Panel, from the 2nd Chamber, of Carf, by majority, partially granted the taxpayer's voluntary appeal to exclude the retention bonus amount from the calculation base of social security contributions.
Which added article In the judgment of the case mentioned above, the reporting counselor was unsuccessful, but, in her vote, she upheld the taxpayer's appeal as she understood that, in the case boopyzed, there were no elements to characterize the hiring and retention EL Salvador Mobile Number List bonus as remunerative in nature, given given that the onus would be on the inspectorate to prove the consideration nature that could attract the incidence of social security contributions in its payment. However, through the casting vote, the taxpayer's special appeal was dismissed, based on the same grounds as the appealed decision in the sense that the payment would be equivalent to the award, supplementing the installments paid due to the employee's activities, with compensatory nature.
Currently, there is a great expectation of a reversal of administrative jurisprudence, which is why taxpayers are awaiting the publication of a ruling relating to the recent CSRF judgment, which dismissed the special appeal filed by the National Treasury in which the salary nature of the retention bonus is discussed ( Process nº 10314.729353/2014-19). As mentioned, although the ruling has not yet been made available, it is possible to carry out a brief boopysis of the matter under discussion in the CSRF, through the appealed ruling, whose judgment, carried out on 12/09/2017 by the 1st Panel, from the 2nd Chamber, of Carf, by majority, partially granted the taxpayer's voluntary appeal to exclude the retention bonus amount from the calculation base of social security contributions.