Diferimento do ICMS no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro

• Ano de defesa: 2016
• Autor(a) principal: Junior, Jorge Sylvio Marquezi
• Orientador(a): Gonçalves, José Artur Lima
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito
• Departamento: Faculdade de Direito
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: Direito Tributário; ICMS; Diferimento; Não cumulatividade
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Tax Law; Deferral; Non-cumulative
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/7059

This scientific study focuses on the legal institution of deferral and its implications for the application of the constitutional non-cumulative principle, and also on the need for prior approval by CONFAZ of legal provisions on deferral. The main purpose is to demonstrate that by analyzing the linguistic term, deferral, in São Paulo state law, we can observe different legal institutions with different legal natures. That being said, if the Federal Constitution provides for that the non-cumulative principle does not apply only in the cases of exemption and non-imposition of taxes, the deferral provisions can only prevent the use of the credit by the taxpayer, if the mentioned deferral turns out to be an exemption institute or a non-imposition one. For this demonstration, it is necessary to analyze our legal system, the rule of law, and what is done in the light of constitutional principles of citizen consent, legality, property and non-cumulative. On the basis of these assumptions, deferral is being analyzed from the perspective of the tax incidence rule and the rule that provides the right to ICMS tax credit. The demonstration that under the word deferral there are different legal institutions, and that the right to tax credit can only be denied when the institute, despite the given name, is an exemption or a non-imposition, is contrary to the opinion our higher courts, because according to the majority of the court´s decisions all that is needed is that the previous operation is subject to deferral, so that the constitutional non-cumulative principle does not apply. Finally, based on these findings, I will analyze whether the approval by CONFAZ is mandatory or not when the legal term is deferral; Moreover, I will analyze each individual case where the rule employed the term deferral in order to determine the actual institute at stake, aiming at pondering over the compliance with the constitutional principles of legality and anteriority