Post by account_disabled on Mar 13, 2024 9:15:22 GMT
This possibility of an agreement facilitates the practice of procedural acts outside the original jurisdiction of the respective Attorney's Office materializing the principle of efficiency inscribed in article caput of the Constitution and facilitating access to justice. In this case it is not about efficiency from the lens of the process but rather about efficiency as an instrument for rationalizing the actions of public administration entities. This is exactly what article -B of the federative entities in the management of IBS.
Furthermore it is not surprising that the agreement for the practice of any procedural act covers the convention on active for collection via tax enforcement and passive for defense actions legitimacy between the respective state and district public prosecutors' offices. and municipal.
It is time to rethink and admit the creation of an institutional protocol or agreement as the CPC refers to it for the sharing of active legitimacy. The theme which seems strange at first glance has an old and well-established precedent in Brazil.
Although this detail is little noticed Law CG Leads No. authorizes the signing of an agreement between the Attorney General's Office of the National Treasury and Caixa Econômica Federal to define the legitimacy to promote tax enforcement. This is a hypothesis of procedural negotiation replacement in the active pole. Through an agreement PGFN starts to execute FGTS credits. This is a very interesting case of extraordinary active negotiating legitimacy signed in a public law procedural convention in an interinstitutional agreement-type protocol .
According to article of the CPC the legal system may authorize procedural substitution. Law No. provided for the carrying out of the act materialized at the same time in the PGFNCaixa Agreement No. . Now this possibility is constitutionally provided for in article -B ° V and undoubtedly deserves greater detail in the complementary law that will come to regulate various points of the tax reform.
There is no doubt that implementing the changes brought by EC No. will bring enormous challenges. The time now is to identify the potential and ways to reduce federative conflicts in the collection and production of IBS. It cannot be overlooked however that active and passive judicial representation in tax matters will also require the States Federal District and Municipalities to be part of the network that the IBS Management Committee will find as a platform for dialogue and cooperation. The provision of well-defined powers in judicial representation in defense and collection is a necessary requirement of legal certainty not only for the respective Public Treasury but also for taxpayers who need clear rules on who and how to sue.
Furthermore it is not surprising that the agreement for the practice of any procedural act covers the convention on active for collection via tax enforcement and passive for defense actions legitimacy between the respective state and district public prosecutors' offices. and municipal.
It is time to rethink and admit the creation of an institutional protocol or agreement as the CPC refers to it for the sharing of active legitimacy. The theme which seems strange at first glance has an old and well-established precedent in Brazil.
Although this detail is little noticed Law CG Leads No. authorizes the signing of an agreement between the Attorney General's Office of the National Treasury and Caixa Econômica Federal to define the legitimacy to promote tax enforcement. This is a hypothesis of procedural negotiation replacement in the active pole. Through an agreement PGFN starts to execute FGTS credits. This is a very interesting case of extraordinary active negotiating legitimacy signed in a public law procedural convention in an interinstitutional agreement-type protocol .
According to article of the CPC the legal system may authorize procedural substitution. Law No. provided for the carrying out of the act materialized at the same time in the PGFNCaixa Agreement No. . Now this possibility is constitutionally provided for in article -B ° V and undoubtedly deserves greater detail in the complementary law that will come to regulate various points of the tax reform.
There is no doubt that implementing the changes brought by EC No. will bring enormous challenges. The time now is to identify the potential and ways to reduce federative conflicts in the collection and production of IBS. It cannot be overlooked however that active and passive judicial representation in tax matters will also require the States Federal District and Municipalities to be part of the network that the IBS Management Committee will find as a platform for dialogue and cooperation. The provision of well-defined powers in judicial representation in defense and collection is a necessary requirement of legal certainty not only for the respective Public Treasury but also for taxpayers who need clear rules on who and how to sue.