The 3rd Panel of the Superior Chamber of the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (Carf) was unanimous in recognizing that expenses with translation, advisory and consultancy contracts with other companies and video production generate PIS and Cofins credits under the non-cumulative regime.
The counselors, however, denied the use of credits on file management, documents and document digitization; recruitment, training and allocation of interns; hiring of temporary workers; hotel services; law; internet and massage.
The case reached Carf after the tax authorities issued infraction reports alleging the improper use of credits, relating to the period between the beginning of 2011 and the end of 2012.
The Federal Revenue Service's Judgment Office (DRJ) requested an investigation to verify the contracts related to the expenses, but maintained the entries. In the lower group, credits were admitted for expenses with advertising and marketing and consultancy in relation to the contracts with the company VAA. The taxpayer then appealed requesting the admission of other credits.
In the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court, defense attorney Renato Silveira stated that Natura Inovação e Tecnologia is a company that develops new technologies, products and services and has a service provision contract with Natura Cosméticos.
The defense attorney argued that the analysis of the feasibility of taking out a loan must take into account the taxpayer's corporate purpose and the scope of the service provision contract. According to the attorney, the services provided to Natura Cosméticos included everything from medical advice to market research, which led to the need to hire other legal entities.
The rapporteur, Luiz Eduardo de Oliveira Soares, understood that translation expenses were essential to the taxpayer's research and development activity, since it was necessary to translate studies and articles that had not been published in Portuguese. However, the rapporteur ruled out the possibility of taking credit for translation into libras during a celebration party.
Likewise, he understood that advisory and consulting contracts with other legal entities and expenses with video production were essential, as they were related to the company's core business. However, he understood that the other items applied to the support business. The judge's vote was fully supported by the other councilors.
The process is number 19311.720352/2014-11.