The actions of the (Supreme Federal Court) against civil servants have made the inspection of so-called “politically exposed people” a risky activity, says Kléber Cabral, president of Unafisco Nacional (National Association of Tax Auditors of the Federal Revenue of Brazil).
He went, by order of the STF minister, after public criticism of the actions determined by the magistrate due to suspicions of .
In an interview with SheetCabral explains how the tax system works, what information the agency’s employees have access to and what has changed since 2019 — that year, Moraes dismissed two auditors on suspicion of leaking information from ministers’ relatives and, later, had them reinstated because the suspicions were not confirmed. Cabral said he would not comment on the subpoena.
What the auditor can access
Access to the system depends on your position, the area you work in and where you are. Crossings are handled by auditors. [Para os funcionários] In the service area, access is more restricted.
The financial movement to which the Revenue has access is that of E-Financeira. You know how much came in and how much went out [da conta]but you don’t have the statement, you don’t know who paid. If I have the inspection open, I ask the taxpayer to present the bank statements. If he refuses, then the IRS can issue a financial transaction request for the bank to deliver the bank statement. You have to ask the taxpayer first. This is with open supervision.
Warning for politically exposed people
If you are carrying out an inspection and a PPE arises [pessoa politicamente exposta]a warning appears on the screen saying that it is PPE. Then, you need to justify it in order to move forward. For other taxpayers, like you and me, there is no such thing. When justifying, a message goes to the head of the unit, and a message can go to the central bodies, to warn that someone is watching this person. The IRS will not say that this is to protect these people. She says it is to protect the body itself from undue access, from scandals, like the one we are seeing. But the way the IRS chose to work, and the STF is not to blame, this “modus operandi” inhibits the auditor’s work.
Home screen
If he entered [no registro de uma PPE]it may continue or not. That’s what happened to him now with the electronic ankle bracelet. He didn’t go any further, but it was recorded that he entered this first screen, a registration screen. Everything is marked. Login, everything he looks at, how many minutes, if it was printed, if the screen was printed. In addition to a login and password, it has a token, a digital certificate. Of course, if someone in customer service leaves their password open and goes to the bathroom… But the boss would be informed, and the investigation would have already taken place. The IRS has a lot of control. When it comes to PPE, control is redoubled.
Retirement of auditors in 2019
The event of 2019 left an imprint on the auditors’ memory that inspection of politically exposed people, in general, I’m not talking about STF ministers, is something to be avoided. So much so that there were no more. Being a politically exposed person here in Brazil has become a kind of protection. But in other countries, this is not the case. These are people who, due to the position they hold, are potentially more exposed to committing the crime of corruption and money laundering. So the Revenue and Coaf (Financial Activities Control Council) should have greater surveillance over this group.
Supervision suspended
The Revenue ended up creating a kind of mesh [em 2018/2019]. A criterion was established to select authorities. There were 133 inspections. Then the Judiciary group appeared [Na época, auditores teriam acessado dados de parentes dos ministros Dias Toffoli e Gilmar Mendes]. Work was suspended in the Fake News investigation [por decisão de Moraes]. The IRS never took up the matter again. All the work was lost, two auditors were dismissed, accused of leaks, although in the end there was nothing. Afterwards, they were reinstated, but there was this gesture, one gets there.
That’s why I’m saying that, if you ask the IRS if anyone wants to monitor organized crime, half a dozen appear. If you go to inspect PPE, no one will show up. I don’t want to compare STF minister with organized crime. That marked the memory of the auditors and demotivated work in relation to politically exposed people. The experience was very traumatic. What I wanted to convey is that, to this day, people are very afraid of inspecting PPEs.
Punishments
If he [servidor] access without having a functional reason, the penalty is a warning. If it leaks to third parties, it could be dismissal. It may be culpable, but if it leaks intentionally, it constitutes a crime. With all the aggravating factors, it’s been six years, half-open. This investigation that the Revenue made [em 2026] it only remained on the surface, that is, it only showed that he had an attack. And the person has already been imposed the final sentence, with an electronic ankle bracelet, as if they had already been convicted. I am criticizing this lack of proportionality, of reasonableness.
