text:
#ICMS: Nas saídas destinadas a empresas de construção civil « Consultoria Fiscal-Tributária
 1,866,485 Facebook
 WordPress.com « # Sefaz SP: Implanta o Sistema Eletrônico de Gerenciamento do Crédito Acumulado
 #Simples Nacional: Divulgados os sublimites de receita bruta para 2011 »
 A Constituição Federal de 1988 trouxe várias inovações para o ICMS em relação ao antigo ICM. Dentre elas, o constituinte dividiu também a receita do imposto entre o Estado produtor e o Estado no qual se encontra o contribuinte consumidor. Surgiu assim a figura conhecida no meio tributário como diferencial de alíquota. Desta forma o contribuinte que recebe mercadoria de outra unidade da federação destinada a seu uso e consumo ou ao seu ativo permanente fica obrigado a recolher ao seu Estado o imposto relativo a diferença encontrada entre a alíquota interna e interestadual. Com isso os constituintes estenderam também a divisão tributária entre as unidades da federação para as operações destinadas a uso e consumo e ativo permanente e não só para as operações destinadas a comercialização ou industrialização como já era no antigo ICM. O texto esculpido no artigo 155, parágrafo 2o, inciso VII da Constituição Federal não deixa dúvida. Nas operações e prestações que destinem bens e serviços a consumidor final localizado em outro Estado, adotar-se-á alíquota interestadual, quando o destinatário for contribuinte do imposto. Neste caso o inciso VIII do mesmo parágrafo da Constituição Federal determina que caberá ao Estado da localização do destinatário o imposto correspondente à diferença entre a alíquota interna e a interestadual. A partir da entrada em vigor do novo ICMS surgiu a dúvida sobre o efetivo alcance das disposições constitucionais para as operações que destinem mercadorias para as empresas de construção civil. De fato, por movimentarem muitas mercadorias e bens de seu ativo permanente para seus canteiros de obras, essas empresas são obrigadas a se inscreverem como contribuintes do ICMS em suas unidades da federação e cumprirem as suas obrigações acessórias como se de fato fossem contribuintes do imposto. Entretanto essas operações estão fora do campo de incidência de ICMS, visto que a atividade de construção civil é tributada como serviço pelo ISSQN, que está sob a competência dos municípios brasileiros. Pairou no ar a dúvida para seus fornecedores de outras unidades da federação, sobre qual alíquota do ICMS aplicar nas remessas de mercadorias para serem empregadas pelas empresas de construção civil em suas atividades. E, se a empresa de construção civil por ser inscrita como contribuinte do ICMS, sujeitar-se-ia ao pagamento da diferença de alíquota para seu Estado nas aquisições interestaduais. O Convênio ICMS 66/89, bem como a Lei Complementar 87/96 não trataram dessa regulamentação, permanecendo o conflito sobre a efetiva distribuição do ICMS para a Unidade da Federação remetente e a unidade na qual está jurisdicionada a empresa de construção civil. 1) O Convênio ICMS 137/2002 Os Estados e o Distrito Federal tentaram disciplinar esse tema, mas não obtiveram sucesso. Não houve acordo e o convênio ICMS 137/2002 que trata da matéria não obteve a sonhada unanimidade. Várias unidades da Federação, inclusive São Paulo, não foram signatárias do convênio, não aceitando assim a regulamentação tentada pelo Conselho Nacional de Política Fazendária. Esse convênio, que continua em vigor, estabelece que as empresas de construção civil devem obter junto ao fisco de sua unidade da federação documento que comprove sua efetiva situação de contribuinte do ICMS. Remetendo esse documento ao seu fornecedor, localizado em outra unidade da federação, ele destacará o ICMS calculado pela alíquota interestadual. Desta forma a empresa de construção civil ficará obrigada a recolher a diferença de alíquota para seu Estado. 2) O Artigo 56 A do Regulamento do ICMS em São Paulo O Estado de São Paulo não aceita a disposição do Convênio ICMS 137/2002, reage e insere por meio do Decreto Estadual no 47.278/2002 o artigo 56 A no atual Regulamento do ICMS aprovado pelo Decreto Estadual 45.490/2000. O item 2 do parágrafo 1o do artigo 56 A do RICMS/SP determina que o documento relativo à inscrição no cadastro de contribuintes do ICMS não faz prova da condição de contribuinte para as empresas de construção civil. Por este motivo o "caput" deste artigo estabelece que nas remessas de mercadorias para empresas de construção civil localizada em outra unidade da federação deve ser aplicada a alíquota interna. Mas havia uma exceção.Se a empresa de construção civil jurisdicionada em outra unidade da federação comprovasse que efetuou operação sujeita ao ICMS nos últimos doze meses, na forma prevista no parágrafo 3o do mesmo artigo 56 A do RICMS/SP, o Estado de São Paulo admitia a aplicação da alíquota interestadual. Naquela oportunidade São Paulo contrariou o CONFAZ e exigiu para que as operações interestaduais destinadas a empresa de construção civil saíssem sob a alíquota interestadual fosse comprovado que a construtora tinha promovido fato gerador do ICMS nos últimos doze meses. E mais, São Paulo não aceitava que importação de mercadoria do exterior servisse para comprovar a efetiva situação de contribuinte do ICMS. Em 18.04.2008, por meio do Decreto Estadual 52.921, o Estado de São Paulo revogou o parágrafo 3o do artigo 56 A do RICMS/SP. A partir desta data, o fisco paulista não reconhece nenhuma exceção que permita a remessa de mercadoria para empresas de construção civil localizada em outra Unidade da Federação sob a tributação de alíquota interestadual. A regra geral contida no artigo 56 A do RICMS/SP obriga o pagamento do ICMS pela alíquota interna para São Paulo nas remessas de mercadorias para empresas de construção civil localizada em outra unidade da federação. Neste caso a recíproca é verdadeira. Como São Paulo exige alíquota interna de seus contribuintes nas remessas interestaduais destinadas a empresas de construção civil, deixa de exigir o diferencial de alíquota nos recebimentos de mercadorias remetidas pelos fornecedores localizados em outra unidade da federação para as empresas de construção civil jurisdicionadas em São Paulo.
 3) A decisão do STJ ratifica a posição paulista A decisão em comento, amparada na REsp 1.135.489⁄AL, Rel. Ministro Luiz Fux, julgado em 09.12.2009, DJe 01.02.2010) sob o rito do artigo 543 C, do CPC, define que as empresas de construção civil são prestadoras de serviços tributados pelo ISSQN. Portanto, não cabe a exigência de ICMS relativo a diferença de alíquota, nas aquisições de mercadorias utilizadas como insumos nas obras de construção civil que realizam. OTribunal reconhece, portanto, que as empresas de construção civil, quando adquirem bens necessários ao desenvolvimento de sua atividade-fim, não são contribuintes do ICMS. Citando doutrina publicada na RDT 69, página 253, o Tribunal sinaliza que todas as aquisições interestaduais de mercadorias destinadas a atividade fim da empresa de construção civil (máquinas, equipamentos, materiais, peças, etc) também estão fora da obrigação do recolhimento do ICMS.
 4) Conclusão Embora o Convênio ICMS 137/2002 ainda esteja em vigor, as decisões do STJ vem delineando que a atual posição paulista prevalecerá. De fato, as remessas interestaduais de mercadorias destinadas à empresas de construção civil devem ser tributadas pela alíquota interna do Estado remetente, não cabendo, portanto, qualquer parcela de ICMS para o Estado destinatário, no qual se encontra a construtora ou a obra. 5) Precaução Final O Artigo 56 A do RICMS/SP e a decisão do Superior Tribunal de Justiça passam longe da hipótese da empresa de construção civil ser contribuinte do ICMS. Como essas empresas, de forma geral, são prestadoras de serviços tributados pelo ISSQN, presume-se que não promovem fato que geram o imposto estadual. Entretanto, essa hipótese existe e o remetente em outra unidade da federação deve tomar cuidados adicionais no ato da concretização do negócio, caso o adquirente, empresa de construção civil, alegue que:
 a) a mercadoria adquirida será objeto de revenda. b) a mercadoria adquirida será objeto de industrialização fora do local da obra. Nestes dois casos a empresa de construção civil se torna contribuinte de fato do ICMS, obrigando-a ao recolhimento do imposto estadual nas saídas das mercadorias. Justamente por este motivo é que a decisão do STJ não se aplica à essas duas hipóteses. Vale lembrar que o STJ decidiu pela improcedência da cobrança do diferencial de alíquota na entrada da mercadoria no Estado destinatário, o qual jurisdiciona a empresa de construção civil. Nessa precaução final revelamos a preocupação de que é possível a empresa de construção civil promover saída da mercadoria tributada pelo ICMS, fato que lhe dá o direito de exigir do fornecedor a tributação da remessa da mercadoria pela alíquota interestadual.
 José Antonio Pachecco - Auditor Fiscal da Receita Federal. Ex Agente Fiscal de Rendas do Estado de São Paulo.
 This entry was posted on 2 de janeiro de 2011 at 12:53 pm and is filed under ICMS/IPI, Procedimentos.
 Etiquetado: icms, Saídas destinadas a empresas Construção Civil. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
 « # Sefaz SP: Implanta o Sistema Eletrônico de Gerenciamento do Crédito Acumulado


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21999D0323(01)
 Decision No 1/1999 of the Association Council between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part, of 25 January 1999 amending Protocol 4 to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part
 Official Journal L 077 , 23/03/1999 P. 0034 - 0040
 DECISION No 1/1999 OF THE ASSOCIATION COUNCIL between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part of 25 January 1999 amending Protocol 4 to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part (1999/216/EC) THE ASSOCIATION COUNCIL,Having regard to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part (1), signed in Brussels on 16 December 1991, and in particular Article 38 of Protocol 4 (2) thereof,Whereas the definition of the term 'originating products` in Protocol 4 needs to be amended to ensure the proper operation of the extended system of cumulation which permits the use of materials originating in the European Community, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovenia, the European Economic Area (hereinafter referred to as the EEA), Iceland, Norway and Switzerland;Whereas it would seem advisable to maintain in operation until 31 December 2000 the system of flat rate charges provided for in Article 15 of Protocol 4 in connection with the prohibition of drawback and exemption from customs duty;Whereas, in view of the particular arrangements on industrial products obtaining between the Community and Turkey, it would also be appropriate to extend the cumulation system to such products originating in Turkey;Whereas to facilitate trade and simplify administrative tasks it is desirable to amend the wording of Articles 3, 4 and 12 of Protocol 4;Whereas, to take account of changes in processing techniques and shortages of certain raw materials, some corrections must be made to the list of working and processing requirements which non-originating materials have to fulfil to qualify for originating status,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1 Protocol 4 concerning the definition of the concept of 'originating products` and methods of administrative cooperation is hereby amended as follows:1. Article 1(i) shall be replaced by:'(i) "added value" shall be taken to be the ex-works price minus the customs value of each of the materials incorporated which originate in the other countries referred to in Articles 3 and 4 or, where the customs value is not known or cannot be ascertained, the first price verifiably paid for the products in the Community or Poland.`2. Articles 3 and 4 shall be replaced by the following:'Article 3Cumulation in the European Community1. Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 2(1), products shall be considered as originating in the Community if such products are obtained there, incorporating materials originating in the Community, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Slovenia, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland (including Liechtenstein (*)) or Turkey (**) in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol on rules of origin annexed to the Agreements between the Community and each of these countries, provided that the working or processing carried out in the Community goes beyond that referred to in Article 7 of this Protocol. It shall not be necessary that such materials have undergone sufficient working or processing.2. Where the working or processing carried out in the Community does not go beyond the operations referred to in Article 7, the product obtained shall be considered as originating in the Community only where the value added there is greater than the value of the materials used originating in any one of the other countries referred to in paragraph 1. If this is not so, the product obtained shall be considered as originating in the country which accounts for the highest value of originating materials used in the manufacture in the Community.3. Products, originating in one of the countries referred to in paragraph 1, which do not undergo any working or processing in the Community, retain their origin if exported into one of these countries.4. The cumulation provided for in this Article may only be applied to materials and products which have acquired originating status by an application of rules of origin identical to those given in this Protocol.The Community shall provide Poland, through the Commission of the European Communities, with details of the Agreements and their corresponding rules of origin, which are applied with the other countries referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission of the European Communities shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Communities (C series) the date on which the cumulation, provided for in this Article may be applied by those countries listed in paragraph 1 which have fulfilled the necessary requirements.Article 4Cumulation in Poland1. Without prejudice to the provision of Article 2(2), products shall be considered as originating in Poland if such products are obtained there, incorporating materials originating in the Community, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Slovenia, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland (including Liechtenstein (*)) or Turkey (**) in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol on rules of origin annexed to the Agreements between Poland and each of these countries, provided that the working or processing carried out in Poland goes beyond that referred to in Article 7 of this Protocol. It shall not be necessary that such materials have undergone sufficient working or processing.2. Where the working or processing carried out in Poland does not go beyond the operations referred to in Article 7, the product obtained shall be considered as originating in Poland only where the value added there is greater than the value of the materials used originating in any one of the other countries referred to in paragraph 1. If this is not so, the product obtained shall be considered as originating in the country which accounts for the highest value of originating materials used in the manufacture in Poland.3. Products, originating in one of the countries referred to in paragraph 1, which do not undergo any working or processing in Poland, retain their origin if exported into one of these countries.4. The cumulation provided for in this Article may only be applied to materials and products which have acquired originating status by an application of rules of origin identical to those given in this Protocol.Poland shall provide the Community, through the Commission of the European Communities, with details of the Agreements and their corresponding rules of origin, which are applied with the other countries referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission of the European Communities shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Communities (C series) the date on which the cumulation, provided for in this Article, may be applied by those countries listed in paragraph 1 which have fulfilled the necessary requirements.(*) The Principality of Liechtenstein has a customs union with Switzerland, and is a Contracting Party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area.(**) Cumulation as provided for in this Article does not apply to materials originating in Turkey which are mentioned in the list at Annex V to this Protocol.`3. Article 12 shall be replaced by the following:'Article 12Principle of territoriality1. Except as provided for in Article 2(1)(c), Articles 3 and 4 and paragraph 3 of this Article, the conditions for acquiring originating status set out in Title II must continue to be fulfilled at all times in the Community or Poland.2. Except as provided for in Articles 3 and 4, where originating goods exported from the Community or Poland to another country return, they must be considered as non-originating, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the customs authorities that:(a) the returning goods are the same as those that were exportedand(b) they have not undergone any operation beyond that necessary to preserve them in good condition while in that country or while being exported.3. The acquisition of originating status in accordance with the conditions set out in Title II shall not be affected by working or processing done outside the Community or Poland on materials exported from the Community or Poland and subsequently reimported there, provided:(a) the said materials are wholly obtained in the Community or Poland or have undergone working or processing beyond the insufficient operations listed in Article 7 prior to being exportedand(b) it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the customs authorities that:(i) the reimported goods have been obtained by working or processing the exported materialsand(ii) the total added value acquired outside the Community or Poland by applying the provisions of this Article does not exceed 10 % of the ex-works price of the end product for which originating status is claimed.4. For the purposes of paragraph 3, the conditions for acquiring originating status set out in Title II shall not apply to working or processing done outside the Community or Poland. But where, in the list in Annex II, a rule setting a maximum value for all the non-originating materials incorporated is applied in determining the originating status of the end product, the total value of the non-originating materials incorporated in the territory of the party concerned, taken together with the total added value acquired outside the Community or Poland by applying the provisions of this Article, shall not exceed the stated percentage.5. For the purposes of applying the provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4, "total added value" shall be taken to mean all costs arising outside the Community or Poland, including the value of the materials incorporated there.6. The provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 shall not apply to products which do not fulfil the conditions set out in the list in Annex II or which can be considered sufficiently worked or processed only if the general values fixed in Article 6(2) are applied.7. The provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 shall not apply to products coming under chapters 50 to 63 of the Harmonised System.8. Any working or processing of the kind covered by the provisions of this Article and done outside the Community or Poland shall be done under the outward processing arrangements, or similar arrangements.`4. In Articles 13, 14, 15, 17, 21, 27, 30 and 32, the phrase 'referred to in Article 4` shall be replaced by 'referred to in Articles 3 and 4`.5. In the last paragraph of Article 15(6), the date '31 December 1998` shall be replaced by '31 December 2000`.6. In Article 26(1), the terms 'C2/CP3` shall be replaced by 'CN22/CN23`.7. In Annex I, note 5.2:(a) between the indents:'- artificial man-made filaments`and'- synthetic man-made staple fibres of polypropylene`the following shall be inserted:'- current conducting filaments`;(b) the fifth example ('A carpet with tufts . . . are met.`) shall be deleted.8. Annex II shall be amended as follows:(a) the following shall be inserted between the entries for HS heading Nos 2202 and 2208:>TABLE>(b) the entry for chapter 57 shall be replaced by:>TABLE>(c) the entry for HS heading No 7006 shall be replaced by:>TABLE>(d) the rule for HS heading No 7601 shall be replaced by:>TABLE>9. the following Annex shall be added:'ANNEX V>TABLE>Article 2 This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.It shall apply as from 1 January 1999.Done at Brussels, 25 January 1999.For the Association CouncilThe PresidentB. GEREMEK(1) OJ L 348, 31. 12. 1993, p. 2.(2) Protocol 4 was replaced by Association Council Decision No 1/97 (OJ L 221, 11. 8. 1997, p. 1).