The crisis of IOF (Financial Operations Tax) It reflects the existence of deeper discontent between the powers in Brasilia. The IOF’s judicialization fight revolves around decisions made by the Lula government and the National Congress.
Responsible for analyzing who is right, the STF (Federal Supreme Court) Nor has it escaped the crisis for an accumulation of parliamentarians’ dissatisfaction before the court, for example.
This Thursday (3), the former mayor in budget decisions.
A recurring critique of leaders is that the judiciary does not have the legitimacy of the polls to define the priority in public spending.
Even so, in the face of the escalation of the IOF crisis, Lira said it was “a moment for everyone to take a step back.”
“When I think everyone needs to step back is that, taking a step back, both legislative, judiciary and executive have to sit at the table and resolve situations without having to reach this level of tension.”
Nor did it go unnoticed by the parliamentarians on Thursday the agreement to compensate to the victims of INSS fraud, which received initial approval by the Supreme.
Government spending on the return of values will not need to enter the tax ceiling calculation.
Center and opposition deputies heard by CNN They evaluate that the Supreme Court flexes the budget and invades Congress’ prerogatives by authorizing expenses outside the tax rules approved by parliamentarians.
In the budgetary sphere, the indication and execution of amendments are still constant source of tension between the powers. Parliamentarians want faster release; The government wants more control; and the supreme, more transparency.
O Action rapporteur that calls for the end of the obligation of these expenses, even said that it collects disaffected by decisions contrary to payments.
“I ended up turning, for these whims of fate, a kind of brake judge. And it’s a boring role. There are a lot of people who hate me, including, but there are a lot of people who like it. […] By the time the imposing amendments were born, we had these difficulties of governability with various presidents of the Republic, from different parties. This shows that there is a need to review the model. ”
Dean of the Supreme Court, Minister Gilmar Mendes acknowledged that the current political scenario would be only a “symptom” of the institutional crisis.
“Perhaps this crisis is a coordination crisis and a dialogue crisis that is deeper than the IOF crisis. Perhaps the IOF is just a symptom to revelation of a somewhat greater mazela and, therefore, requires reflection on all sides, requires care on all sides.”
Trying to solve the issue of increasing IOF, in Portugal.
Moraes studies requests in the Supreme and signaled that he will invite the legislature’s presidents to discuss alternatives.
The economic team has seen the possibility of advancing negotiations by recent declarations of members of the three powers.
On another front, parliamentarians articulate to end what they consider an exaggerated judicialization. Before the government resorted to the Supreme, PSOL had already questioned the overthrow of IOF’s discharge at the Court.
Now Senate President David Alcolumbre (Brazil-AP Union), wants to limit parties’ parties actions against decisions of the congressional validated in plenary.
He intends to present a project that prevents such actions by acronyms with little or no representation in Parliament.
