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

Read the untranslated law here:

Partido Popular Party CDS-PP Parliamentary Group Assembly of the Republic-Palace of Saint Benedict-1249-068 Lisboa-Phone: 21 391 9233-Fax: 21 391 7456 Email: DRAFT law No. 419/X RESTORES the legal framework of the EXPIRY of the GUARANTEES PROVIDED in TAX PROCEEDINGS 1 – explanatory statement following the amendment to the repeal of article 183 of the code of tax proceedings and processes by article 94 of law No. 563/2006 , 29 December (State budget for 2007) disappeared from the law one of the most important stimuli to increase the speed of Justice, tax fairness in the relationship between State and taxpayers, and to foreign investment in Portugal.

As you know one of the fundamental principles of tax law is the necessity of payment of tax or warranty, beginning the implementation of a fiscal nature. Is then very relevant the legal regime applicable to the provision of guarantees. Thus, it is important to take account of the available, then repealed article 183-a. According to this standard guarantees that were provided to suspend the execution in case of administrative claim, judicial review, judicial or caducariam opposition within one year, if they were gracious and the complaint was resolved within that period, counted from the date of your filing , or within 3 years, if judicial review of, or opposition to the execution, and there was no decision at first instance in that period, also the date of your submission.

2 More had the alluded item, the expiry of the guarantee provided, would the taxpayer – within certain limits – compensation of costs incurred with your maintenance.

2-the warranty as a means of suspension of foreclosure has not disappeared. Indeed, as already espressámos if the taxpayer claim or appeal against a decision of the tax administration, or opposes tax foreclosure, must provide warranty, under penalty of the execution continue their terms.

Now, understand the CDS-PP is not possible that the State will continue to benefit from a status of procedural superiority on the taxpayer, when there is litigation, whether before the tax authority's Administrative and tax courts. Currently lose for endless years, administrative and fiscal courts, with issues, how many times are of a complexity as sharp to justify the time that lead to being decided. It is normal for a contrinbuinte-individual or company guy-just look at their tax dispute resolved after more than ten years with all the difficulties that entails in relation to your liquidity and financial position. In addition to the certainty of injustice of Justice slow, it is clear that there is no investor who resist this situation.

It is obvious that the expiry of the guarantee and the obligation of compensation from the taxpayer that had to endure is a spur to greater efficiency of fair taxation. So the CDS-PP intends to restore in effect, through this initiative, this legal regime.

3-wait for the CDS-PP this legislative initiative, in conjunction with other initiatives in the tax area – such as, the establishment and regulation of tax arbitration, the prediction of a deadline for the response from the tax office in case of binding tax information, or the tacit acceptance of the complaints that are graceful unresponsive within a year – come reset some procedural 3 balance between tax authorities and taxpayers at least in the context of litigation associated with the defence of the rights, freedoms and guarantees.

Accordingly, the undersigned Members have the following Bill: sole article 183 article is added to the code of tax proceedings and Procedure, approved by Decree-Law No. 433/99, October 26: "Article 183-1-warranty to lapse the guarantee provided to suspend the execution in case of administrative claim, judicial review, judicial or opposition , expires if the administrative claim is not decided within one year from the date of your submission or on judicial review or in opposition has not been rendered a decision in first instance within three years from the date of your submission. 2-the periods referred to in the preceding paragraph are increased in six months when there is recourse to expert evidence. 3-the scheme of paragraph 1 shall not apply when the delay is the result of reason imputable to the company in question, the applicant or claimant, executed. 4-verification of expiry rests with the Tax Court of first instance where is pending the challenge, appeal or opposition, or, in cases of administrative claim, the organ with competence to decide the complaint and should the decision be made within 30 days after application of the person concerned. 5-not being rendered the decision referred to in the preceding paragraph within the period prescribed therein, shall be deemed to have been tacitly accepted the defendant. 4 6-In case of expiry of the guarantee, the person concerned will be compensated for the charges incurred with your provision, in accordance with the limits laid down in paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 53 of the general tax law ".

Palácio de s. Bento, 24 October 2007.