The IOF (Tax on Financial Operations) will again focus on the highest rates determined by the Federal Government, which should revive uncertainties in a number of aspects, according to analysts heard by CNN.
With the return of the decree, determined by Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the Supreme Court (STF), on Wednesday (16), the sending of remittances abroad, operations with international cards and with exchange and currency in cash will face harder aliquots.
The movement makes the market more skeptical about possible capital control, recalls Beto Saadia, Nomos’s investment director. By the time the decree was downloaded, the fear had already been signaled by some, which leads the investor to protect themselves by increasing the investment abroad until fearing a potential new increase.
“From the moment you tax the capital exit, the effect is not to enter more capital, it is precisely to get more capital, the opposite effect occurs. When the Brazilian becomes more skeptical in relation to the likely control of capital that Brazil begins to do, implementing the IOF for the exit of money, the Brazilian takes even more money.”
arguing that the government would have extrapolated its competences. In addition,.
Uncertainty highlighted by Guilherme Almeida, a fixed -income head of Suno Research, is for the VGBL investor, who seeks to organize and plan his future to ensure the maintenance of his standard of retirement.
Almeida explains that it follows with “the perspective that [a medida] It is negative for the sector [de seguros e aposentadoria]”, since” the investor is penalized and discouraged, […] Since IOF will bring an additional cost to those who care about their future. “
In addition, the highest IOF again enforces with retroactive effect, ie operations performed since the day of its – that the text provides for taxation will eventually be taxed.
Rodrigo Totino, a tax lawyer and partner of MBT Advogados Associados, resumes that “with the suspension, several financial institutions began to perform operations without applying the new rates, understanding that the decree had lost its effectiveness.”
“Now, with the decision of the Supreme Court restoring the effects of the presidential decree retroactively, a normative vacuum of about two weeks opens, during which numerous generating facts with divergent rates have been practiced. This creates a scenario of relevant legal uncertainty, which will require clear positioning by tax authorities to avoid conflicts between taxpayers and the tax authorities.”
Insecurity, however, is not restricted to the technical field. For Beto Saadia, the resumption of the decree “brings insecurity to the market in particular because it was unsuccessful the attempt to reconcile congress and government.”
In an interview with WWMurillo de Aragão, political scientist and president of the consultancy Arko Advice, notes that the climate between legislature and executive was not pacified with the decision of Moraes. Otherwise, it considers that the future must wait for retaliation on the part of Congress – in the form of obstacles to agenda of the situation.
In addition, Aragão points out that “there is a rancidity within Congress in relation to the judiciary, especially at a time when Brazil faces many challenges”.
