CARF: The Sisyphus myth and the return of the reformulated casting vote

Abstract

Aiming to contribute to the reflection on issues related to tax litigation and improve the debate about this subject, this article explores general aspects of Provisional Measure (MP) No. 1.160/2023 as established in the tax package, as well as the changes undergone by the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (CARF), regarding the return of the casting vote. The method is deductive, and the considerations are based on specific literature, bibliographic research and the national legislative framework. The formulation of the problem comprises the following question: does the return of the pro-State casting vote in CARF reduce losses of the Public Treasury, restoring the collection of revenues of the public coffers, according to the explanatory memorandum of MP 1.160/2023? The article addresses the hypothesis that MP 1.160/2023 generates reflections on the assessment by the Judiciary of complex tax matters and disputes involving large amounts of money, since, when the taxpayer is defeated in CARF, he can appeal to the Judiciary, thus postponing the collection of taxes and giving way for a future prospection of collection. It is concluded that the government, in order to increase revenues and reduce the deficit of public accounts, has adopted this MP as a response to the growing demand related to decisions on controversial issues involving both the Tax Law and the public administration, without regard to the negative consequences, such as increased insecurity and litigation.