Brazil: A Turnaround In The Debate Over Service Payments To Treaty Countries

Brazil's Federal Revenue Attorney General's Office (PGFN) has reversed its position on the taxation of service payments to providers in treaty-partner countries, recommending the revocation of Normative Act 01/2000, which classifies such payments as ''other earnings'' that are subject to Brazil's 15 percent withholding tax.

The PGFN previously sided with the Federal Revenue Department (FRD) in its defense of the normative act but now maintains that the payments should fall under the definition of (exempt) business profits as established in the OECD model income tax treaty and in many income tax treaties signed by Brazil.

PGFN Legal Opinion 2363/20131 resulted from a notice sent by the government of Finland that threatened to terminate the Brazil-Finland income tax treaty if Brazil continues to ignore the treaty provisions by imposing a 15 percent withholding tax on technical service fees paid to Finnish companies.

The legal opinion reexamines an issue that has been a point of dispute between the FRD and taxpayers for more than a decade. In particular, Opinion 2363/2013 reviews the FRD's official position, established in Normative Act 01/2000, in relation to the 2012 decision of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) in the COPESUL case.


During the 1990s, some regional offices of the FRD issued contradictory private letter rulings (PLRs) about the application of treaty provisions to remittances of service payments abroad. Some PLRs agree with taxpayers that service payments should be categorized as business profits under some tax treaties, and therefore, should be subject to taxation only in the home country of the service provider, and not in Brazil.

Other PLRs reject that view, holding that the Brazilian withholding tax should apply to all service payments abroad, including those to providers in treatypartner countries.

In January 2000 the FRD's Department of General Coordination of Taxation (COSIT) sought to resolve the issue with a controversial ruling, Normative Act 01/2000, which states that service payments remitted abroad should be governed by the treaty article dealing with ''other earnings,'' which are subject to Brazil's 15 percent withholding tax. Further, COSIT said a 25 percent withholding tax applies to payments abroad for any service agreement under which technical assistance or technical services are provided without the transfer of technology to the Brazilian party, and for which no registration is required with the Brazilian patent office or the Central Bank of Brazil.

Many taxpayers challenged COSIT's position in lawsuits before the federal courts in an attempt to ensure that payments made to service providers in treaty-partner countries are classified as business profits that are not subject to withholding tax in Brazil.


On May 17, 2012, the Second Chamber of the STJ confirmed that service payments remitted to Canada and, before 2006, to Germany, were not subject to Brazilian withholding tax because the payments qualify as business profits under Brazil's income tax treaties with those countries. The ruling in Special Appeal 1161467 was the first decision delivered by a higher court on the issue.

The PGFN, acting at the time as the FRD's counsel in the case, had attempted to disqualify service payments as an element of the provider's business profits based on article 7 of the OECD model tax treaty. The PGFN maintained that service payments received by foreign providers qualify as a mere receipt of cash, which cannot be interpreted as profits because the latter would require the deduction of expenses before the profit could be determined. Because of the lack of an ''expense side,'' the PGFN said, the service payments could not be classified as business profits under Brazil's tax treaties, but rather, should fall under the ''other income'' clause in article 21 of the OECD model treaty.

Citing a precedential Supreme Court ruling that tax treaties are hierarchically equal to ordinary laws approved by Congress, the PGFN also argued that the way to resolve the issue was to apply the principle of lex posterior derogat (legi) priori (that a later law supersedes an earlier, inconclusive law).

The statute establishing the application of the withholding tax on service payments abroad is article 7 of Law 9,779/1999, and the treaty provisions cited in support of the exemption from the withholding tax were incorporated into Brazilian law more than a decade earlier, the PGFN noted. Specifically, the Brazil- Germany tax treaty was introduced into Brazil's legal system by way of Presidential Decree 76,988, of 1976, while the treaty with Canada was introduced in Decree 92,318, of 1986.

The STJ rejected all of the PGFN's arguments. If the PGFN's interpretation prevailed, the Court said, it would be virtually impossible to apply the business profit clause of any treaty in any circumstance because adjustments to (that is, deductions from) the service income take place only at year-end and outside Brazil. One of the hermeneutic principles of interpreting a text requires the rejection of any interpretation that leads to an absurd situation, such as would be the case if the PGFN's argument that the definition of ''business profit'' under Brazil's tax treaties means the actual profit of a business, the STJ held.

Using Brazilian tax legislation as the basis for its rationale, the STJ held that business profit under a tax treaty is equivalent to operational profit under Brazilian tax law. Decree Law 1,598/1977 and Brazil's Income Tax Code define operational profit as the result of a company's corporate activities, whether main or auxiliary, based on the corporate gross income arising from the sale of goods and the provision of services.

For that reason, when referring to business profit, the provisions of Brazil's treaties with Canada and Germany mean ''operational profit,'' which includes income from the sale of goods and the provision of services, the Court held. Therefore, no Brazilian withholding tax should apply because taxation should take place only in the home country of the service provider (Canada or Germany, as the case may be).

Addressing the PGFN's argument that Law 9,779/ 1999 should prevail over the 1976 and 1986 presidential decrees that introduced, respectively, the German and Canadian treaties into Brazilian law, the STJ said a conflict of law in this case should be viewed from a different perspective. It is a matter of lex specialis derogat (legi) generali (that when two or more norms deal with the same subject, the norm that is more specific should prevail) rather than of lex posterior derogat (legi) priori, the STJ said. Because the tax treaties are more specific than Law 9,779/1999, the treaty provisions cannot be revoked or superseded by a later law.

In the COPESUL case, no laws were actually revoked. The provisions of Law 9,779/1999 continue to apply to all situations contemplated therein, except when a treaty provision — whether before or after the enactment of the law — provides for a more specific tax treatment, as in the case of the business profit clause.

PGFN Legal Opinion 2363/2013

In Legal Opinion 2363/2013, the PGFN reversed its position in COPESUL. After the STJ's ruling in that case, the PGFN decided to review the FRD's arguments in support of Normative Act 01/2000 and the rationale of the STJ in ruling against it, along with the reasoning of the lower appellate courts that sided with the taxpayers on the issue.

It concluded that the interpretation given in Normative Act 01/2000 — that service payments cannot be interpreted as business profits under article 7 of the OECD model tax treaty — is incoherent and inconsistent with the purpose of article 7 itself. If the normative act's interpretation prevailed, article 7 would be an empty provision with no practical application in Brazil, the opinion says.

Relying on jurisprudence on international taxation and the commentaries to the OECD model tax treaty, the PGFN argues that the definition of ''business profits'' should be broader than that used in Normative Act 01/2000 so as to include service payments as part of the foreign recipient's operational income.

The legal opinion also agrees with the STJ's ruling that the principle of lex specialis derogat (legi) generali should prevail over lex posterior derogat (legi) priori, the principle originally cited by the PGFN in COPESUL. The opinion maintains that when the business profits clause in a tax treaty applies, there is no actual revocation of the domestic laws on withholding tax, but a mere suspension of its application to treaty countries. The rules on withholding tax continue to apply to all situations (that is, service payments abroad) not expressly covered by a tax treaty.

Legal Opinion 2363/2013 concludes with the recommendation that remittances abroad of fees for technical services that do not involve the transfer of technology should fall under article 7 of the OECD model tax treaty (the business profit clause) and therefore should not be subject to the Brazilian withholding tax. However, the opinion says the withholding tax exemption should not apply if the foreign company carries out its business in Brazil by means of a permanent establishment, as defined under the relevant tax treaty.

Legal Opinion 2363/2013 also refers to tax treaties in cases where technical service fees are treated as royalties.2 In those cases, the service payments should fall under the royalty clause (article 12 of the model tax convention) rather than under the business clause (article 7), meaning that Brazil would be able to levy withholding tax. The opinion also says that treaty shopping should not be accepted.

Final Remarks

Legal Opinion 2363/2013 is an unquestionable step forward for the full application of the business profit clause after more than a decade of debate and court disputes. However, from a purely legal standpoint, the FRD's official position is still that of Normative Act 01/2000. For that reason, taxpayers may still face some resistance from the FRD in obtaining an exemption from Brazilian withholding tax on service payments to some treaty countries, at least until Normative Act 01/ 2000 is expressly revoked by the FRD. Until then, taxpayers may consider alternatives such as filing a request for a ruling or bringing a lawsuit before a federal

Originally published in Tax Notes Int'l, March 10, 2014.


1 Dated Dec. 6, 2013, and approved by the PGFN on Dec. 19, 2013.

2 Some treaties, or treaty protocols, extend the definition of royalties to certain technical services.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions