This Tuesday (1st), the AGU (Attorney General of the Union) announced that it will trigger the Supreme Court (STF) against the overthrow of the decree that increased the IOF (Tax on Financial Operations). In addition to the organ, two other actions on the tariff process in court.
claiming that “it is not a decision taken in the heat of emotion, but legal measures that establish the attribution of the Chief Executive. Our action has rationality. It could not be sustainable. It is of interest to any government to know the limits of its attribution.”
He also pointed out, several times, that there was no reason other than legal to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to bring the IOF issue to the STF.
Messiah also said that the conclusion of the AGU is that “the decree that alters the IOF rates is constitutional and could not be the object of PDL.”
PL action
Before the overthrow of the increase in IOF in the National Congress,
The PL requested the full suspension of the decrees until the Supreme Court judges the case. The process still needs to be filed with the Court and distributed to a rapporteur minister.
According to the party, the decrees transform the IOF into a “collection mechanism” that violates the Constitution and requires the issuance of law to institute or increase taxes.
The PL also argues that there are no technical criteria that justify the increase in the rate.
PSOL Action
Already the PSOL Party
On June 25th,. All PSOL deputies were opposed to the fall of the decree – in the Senate, the vote was symbolic.
PSOL claims that the decree is a constitutional measure of the chief executive.
“In sustaining the presidential decree without demonstrating any transgression to constitutional and legal limits, the National Congress overtook the contours of Article 49, V, of the Constitution, converting control of control into an improper political-legislative interference mechanism,” says the party action.
The party also said that the “abrupt stop” of the government’s decree compromises the monetary policy and budgetary balance of the Union.
“Failure to grant the precautionary measure will imply serious legal uncertainty and may trigger the proliferation of mass tax disputes,” adds the document.
In today’s announcement, Jorge Messiah exposed that the government action on the Supreme Court is different from PSOL’s action.
“I wanted to highlight something that is very important. PSOL’s action seeks to attack, directly, frontal, an act of the National Congress. Our action is different, it is in favor of the act adopted by the President of the Republic. Our action has logic and rationality.
The party action will be processed under the
Difference between actions
It is noteworthy that the government has filed an ADC (Declaratory Action of Constitutionality) and PSOL with an ADI (direct unconstitutionality action).
The ADC may be proposed by the President of the Republic, the Senate and the Chamber tables and the Attorney General and aims to confirm that a law or federal law is in accordance with the Constitution. The final decision of the action must be followed by all and has binding effect (when it goes to other organs of justice and government).
ADI, on the other hand, is brought to the STF to decide whether a law or norm, federal or state, is against the Constitution. They may be proposed by the President of the Republic, the Presidents of the Senate, the Chamber or Legislative Assemblies, the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB), the Attorney General, political parties or national level unions.
