Advanced Search

The Fifteenth Amendment To The Code Of Tax Proceedings And Processes, Replacing The Legal Framework Of The Expiry Of The Guarantees Provided In Tax Proceedings

Original Language Title: Procede à 15.ª alteração ao Código de Procedimento e de Processo Tributário, repondo o regime jurídico da caducidade das garantias prestadas em processo tributário

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.

People's Party CDS-PP

Parliamentary Group

Assembly of the Republic-Palace of S. Bento-1249-068 Lisbon-Phone: 21391 9233-Fax: 21391 7456 Email: gp_pp@pp.




Exhibition of reasons

1-Following the amendment to the repeal of Article 183º-A of the Code of

Procedure and of the Tributary Process by Article 94º of Law No. 563-A/2006 of 29 of

December (State Budget for 2007) disappeared from the legal order one of the

more important stimuli to the increase in the speed of tax justice, to equity in the

relationship between state and the taxpayer, and foreign investment in Portugal.

How one knows one of the fundamental principles of Tax Law is that of the need for

payment of the tax or guarantee provision, under penalty of commencement of the execution of

tax nature. It is, then, very relevant to the legal regime applicable to the provision of

guarantees. In this way, it matters to cater to what disposing of the, then, repealed Article 183º-

A. In accordance with this standard the guarantees that were provided to suspend the

execution in case of gracious claim, judicial challenge, judicial remedy or

opposition would lapse within one year, if it dealt with gracious grievance and the

same was not decided on that deadline, counted from the date of its interposition, or on the deadline

of 3 years, should it treat itself to judicial challenge, or opposition to execution, and not

there was a decision in 1ª instance at that time, equally counted from the date of its



More disposing of the rent article which, occurring the expiry of the guarantee provided, would be

the taxpayer-within certain limits-indemnified the costs borne with his / her


2-A The provision of guarantee as a form of suspension of tax implementation not

disappeared. Effectively, as we have already espressated, if the taxpayer complains or

challenge a decision by the Tax Administration, or if it is opposed to the tax implementation,

has to provide warranty, under penalty of the execution to continue its terms.

Ora, understands the CDS-PP that it is not possible for the state to continue to benefit from a

status of procedural superiority over the taxpayer, when there is litigation, be

before the Tax Administration, be it before the Administrative and Fiscal Courts.

They currently lose infinity years, in the administrative and tax courts, with

issues that, how many times, are not of such a sharp complexity that

justify the time they lead to be decided. It is normal for a contrinbuinte-

individual subject or company-just look at your past resolved tax litities

more than ten years with all the difficulties that this entails in relation to its liquidity and

financial situation. In addition to the certainty of the injustice of the slow justice, it is clear that not

there is an investor who resists this situation.

It is obvious that the expiry of the guarantees and the obligation to compensate the taxpayer

that has had to endure is, effectively, a stimulus to greater efficiency of justice

tax. That is why the CDS-PP intends to take effect, through the present initiative, that

legal regime.

3-Wait for the CDS-PP that the present legislative initiative, in conjunction with others

initiatives in the tax area-such as being, the institution and regulation of arbitration

fiscal, the forecast of an express deadline for the response of the Tax Administration in case

of binding tax information, or the tacit dewound of the graceful claims that

be unanswered within a one-year deadline-come back some procedural balance


between Tax Administration and taxpayers, at least, in the framework of litigation

associated with the defence of the rights, freedoms and guarantees of the latter.

In these terms, the undersigned Deputies present the following draft law:

Single Article

The Article 183º-A is added to the Code of Procedure and Tributary Process, approved

by Decree-Law No. 433/99 of October 26:

" Article 183.

Expiry of the guarantee

1-A The guarantee provided to suspend the execution in case of gracious complaint,

judicial challenge, judicial remedy or opposition, lapses if the gracious claim

it is not decided within one year of the date of its interposition or if in the

judicial challenge or in the opposition has not been handed down decision in 1ª instance in the

period of three years from the date of its submission.

2-The time limits referred to in the preceding paragraph are increased in six months when

there is recourse to expert proof.

3-The regime of paragraph 1 does not apply when the delay results from an attributable reason to the

claimant, contant, recurring or executed.

4-A The expiry check is up to the tax court of 1 th instance where it is

pending the challenge, appeal, or opposition, or, in the situations of complaint

gracious, to the organ with competence to decide the complaint, owing the decision to be

prowound within 30 days after application by the person concerned.

5-Not being handed down the decision referred to in the preceding paragraph at the time specified therein,

considers himself to be tacitly deinjured the respondent.


6-In the event of expiry of the guarantee, the person concerned shall be indemnified for the charges

supported with their provision, in the terms and with the limits provided for in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the

article 53 of the general tax law " .

Palace of S. Bento, October 24, 2007.

The Deputies,