Categoria: English

  • Federal Senate Approves Bill to End 6×1 Work Schedule

    Federal Senate Approves Bill to End 6×1 Work Schedule

    The Federal Senate (Brazil’s upper house of Congress) approved a bill proposing the end of the 6×1 work schedule, accompanied by a reduction in working hours. The proposal represents a potential structural shift in Brazilian labor relations, calling for close attention from the business sector regarding the upcoming legislative steps.

    The bill on the 6×1 schedule and working hours

    The Senate’s vote is an important milestone, but it does not immediately eliminate the possibility of adopting the schedule where an employee works six consecutive days and rests for one. Because this is a legislative measure, the text still requires complementary legislative processing or presidential enactment before it can take effect and alter existing statutory rules.

    Impacts on the retail and services sectors

    Should the measure be enacted, the change will directly affect shift organization, scheduling, and workforce sizing. Sectors that operate with continuous customer service, such as retail and commercial services, will need to reassess their operational structures to accommodate the new scheduling reality.

    With a potential reduction in weekly hours and the termination of the 6×1 model, companies will face the challenge of reorganizing their labor force, which entails planning new shift dynamics to ensure uninterrupted operations.

    Corporate planning

    At this stage, companies are advised to monitor the bill’s legislative progress and eventual enactment before making immediate contractual modifications. Restructuring schedules will require administrative and operational planning to guarantee business continuity in compliance with the rules, should they be definitively implemented.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • STF Forms Majority on ITBI Tax Immunity for Capital Contributions

    STF Forms Majority on ITBI Tax Immunity for Capital Contributions

    The STF (Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court) has reached a majority in favor of tax immunity regarding the Imposto sobre a Transmissão de Bens Imóveis (ITBI), the municipal real estate transfer tax, in cases of corporate capital contributions. This development from the country’s highest court provides an important signal for companies and investors using real estate to structure their businesses.

    Understanding the concepts

    To grasp the impact of the STF’s position, it is helpful to clarify the key terms involved in this discussion:

    • ITBI: A municipal tax levied whenever the ownership of real estate is transferred between individuals or legal entities.
    • Capital contribution (integralização de capital social): Occurs when a partner or shareholder transfers an owned asset (such as land or a building) to a company to form or increase its corporate capital.
    • Immunity: A constitutional rule that prohibits the collection of a specific tax in defined circumstances, shielding the transaction from taxation.

    The impact on the business environment

    Transferring real estate into a legal entity’s name is a common practice in corporate structuring, succession planning, and attracting foreign direct investment into the Brazilian real estate sector.

    When ITBI is levied on these transfers, transaction costs increase significantly, as the tax is calculated on the value of the property. The fact that the STF has formed a majority favoring immunity points to greater predictability for taxpayers who make this type of asset contribution to corporate entities.

    Outlook

    Defining the scope of ITBI immunity on corporate capital contributions is a core matter for the business environment. Consolidating this interpretation at the Supreme Federal Court tends to standardize how Brazilian municipalities must treat these transactions.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • STJ Sets 15% Withholding Tax Rate for Audiovisual Works

    The Second Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ, Brazil’s highest court for non-constitutional federal matters) has established an important precedent for the media and entertainment sector. The collegiate body ruled that withholding income tax (IRRF) on funds remitted abroad for the commercial exploitation of foreign audiovisual works in Brazil must be calculated at a 15% rate.

    The decision, rendered in Special Appeal (REsp) 1,806,555, unified the interpretation regarding the taxation applicable to these contracts, setting aside the 25% rate previously upheld by the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3). According to the STJ, the same 15% rate also applies when remitted amounts derive from the fixed-price acquisition or importation of such works.

    The Tax Dispute Background

    The case originated from a preventive writ of mandamus filed in 2015 by audiovisual companies, specifically Columbia TriStar Filmes do Brasil and Universal Studios Limited. The companies sought to prevent the levy of a 25% tax on outbound remittances arising from contracts for the exploitation and distribution of works within Brazilian territory.

    The controversy stemmed from differing interpretations regarding the evolution of tax legislation and the application of distinct statutory rules over time. The TRF3 had concluded that two separate taxation categories existed under different statutes:

    • Cinematographic films: The regional appellate court held that the 15% rate established by Law 9,249/1995 applied only to income derived from the exploitation of cinematographic films, a category originally created by Law 3,470/1958.
    • Audiovisual works in general: Conversely, income from the exploitation of broader audiovisual works was deemed subject to a distinct regulatory framework introduced by Law 8,685/1993, which supposedly justified the 25% rate set forth in Article 706 of the former Income Tax Regulation (Decree 3,000/1999).

    Because the companies’ agreements encompassed audiovisual works beyond traditional cinematographic films, the lower court upheld the higher 25% tax rate.

    The STJ’s Rationale and Statutory Evolution

    In analyzing the companies’ appeal, the reporting justice, Justice Marco Aurélio Bellizze, noted that successive legislative amendments enacted without the express revocation of prior provisions made identifying the applicable tax rule complex. To resolve the issue, the justice outlined the legislative timeline:

    • Law 3,470/1958 established a 25% rate on income received by non-resident individuals or legal entities, including revenues from the exploitation of cinematographic films.
    • Decree-Law 1,089/1970 modified the tax calculation base while preserving both the reference to cinematographic films and the 25% rate.
    • Law 8,685/1993 amended the previous decree-law, replacing the phrase “cinematographic films” with “audiovisual works”.

    According to the reporting justice and the STJ’s Second Panel, this 1993 change in terminology merely modernized the statutory definition of the underlying taxable economic activity to reflect technological advancements in the industry. The amendment did not create an autonomous taxable event subject to a separate, higher rate.

    The ruling centered on Law 9,249/1995, which reduced the rate set forth in the 1958 statute to 15% as of January 1996, making express reference to subsequent statutory amendments. Because the statutes addressed the same economic activity, the STJ concluded that the reduced rate also extended to income derived from the exploitation of foreign audiovisual works generally.

    Limits of Regulatory Authority and Legal Certainty

    The reporting justice underscored a core principle of tax law: administrative regulations, as subordinate legal instruments, cannot contradict or exceed rates established by formal statutory law. By providing for a 25% rate in Article 706, Decree 3,000/1999 exceeded the limits of the statutes it was meant to implement, given that Law 9,249/1995 had already lowered the statutory rate to 15%.

    The current Income Tax Regulation (Decree 9,580/2018), which replaced and revoked the 1999 decree, supports the STJ’s interpretation. Current regulation expressly provides for a 15% rate on amounts paid, credited, delivered, employed, or remitted abroad for the commercial exploitation of foreign audiovisual works in Brazil, or for their fixed-price acquisition or importation.

    The unanimous decision by the STJ’s Second Panel consolidates the proper interpretation of the law, ensuring legal certainty and tax predictability for audiovisual companies and foreign investors operating in the Brazilian media and entertainment market.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • STJ sets rules for piercing the corporate veil

    STJ sets rules for piercing the corporate veil

    The Second Section of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ, Brazil’s high court for federal non-constitutional matters) established an important milestone for legal certainty in the Brazilian corporate environment. In a ruling under the repetitive appeals system (Theme 1,210), the court held that, in civil and commercial law relations, piercing the corporate veil requires concrete proof of abuse.

    The mechanism of piercing the corporate veil

    Separate legal personality is the principle that distinguishes a company’s assets from the personal assets of its partners or shareholders. Piercing this veil is an exceptional measure that allows reaching partners’ personal assets to satisfy the corporate entity’s obligations.

    According to the opinion of the reporting Justice, Raul Araújo, applying this mechanism requires robust and specific evidence. The Justice highlighted that the measure is warranted only when the legal entity is used as a shield for illicit acts.

    The application of the Major Theory and the Civil Code

    The STJ ruling reaffirms the application of the so-called Major Theory (Teoria Maior), provided for in Article 50 of the Brazilian Civil Code. The court explained that while the law protects the institution of corporate legal personality, it also provides mechanisms to combat its abuse.

    For veil piercing to be authorized, the courts require proof of one of the following criteria:

    • Diversion of purpose: using the company for purposes distinct from those for which it was incorporated.
    • Commingling of assets: the absence of clear separation between corporate assets and the personal assets of the partners.

    Limits defined by the STJ

    The decision, rendered in REsp 1,873,187, clarifies circumstances that are insufficient to bypass asset protection. The STJ consolidated the view that the mere absence of seizable corporate assets does not authorize the application of the doctrine.

    Furthermore, the irregular shutdown of company operations is also not an isolated justification for targeting partners. The reporting Justice pointed out that such scenarios, on their own, do not constitute the abuse required by statute.

    The exceptional measure is only warranted if it is demonstrated that the irregular dissolution or inactivity had the direct purpose of defrauding the law through diversion of purpose or commingling of assets.

    Certainty for investors and executives

    The establishment of this binding precedent guides courts across Brazil and offers greater predictability for founders, executives, and foreign investors. The decision confirms that partners’ personal assets remain protected, absent concrete evidence of bad faith and abusive misuse of the corporate form.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • Congress Enacts End of 6×1 Work Schedule and Reduces Weekly Hours

    Congress Enacts End of 6×1 Work Schedule and Reduces Weekly Hours

    The National Congress recently enacted a legislative change with significant impact on labor relations in Brazil. The change establishes the end of the so-called 6×1 work schedule and mandates a reduction in the weekly workweek.

    The End of the 6×1 Schedule and the Reduction of the Workweek

    The 6×1 schedule—a model in which an employee works six consecutive days followed by one day of rest—was officially eliminated by the new congressional enactment. Alongside this repeal, a reduction in the maximum allowable weekly hours was also approved.

    For employers, particularly executives and human resources managers, this change requires an immediate review of current contracts and shift planning, as the distribution of working days and weekly hours will need to be aligned with the newly enacted limits.

    Impacts on Retail and Services

    Sectors that traditionally operate with continuous public service, such as retail and services, are among those most affected by the measure. The need to cover all days of the week without using the 6×1 schedule and with a reduced weekly workweek will demand:

    • Shift reorganization: Developing new rotation schedules that adhere to the prohibition against six consecutive working days.
    • Review of operating costs: Assessing the need for new hires to maintain the same level of operation or service.
    • Compliance adjustment: Updating internal policies to ensure strict compliance with the new congressional rules.

    Practical Considerations for Businesses

    Business owners and foreign investors operating in Brazil should begin mapping their workforce to identify which departments operated under the 6×1 schedule. Transitioning to new working hour models will require strategic planning to mitigate labor risks and ensure efficient business continuity.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • LC 224/2025 and the 10% Tax Increase under the Presumed Profit Regime

    LC 224/2025 and the 10% Tax Increase under the Presumed Profit Regime

    The recent enactment of Complementary Law (LC) 224/2025 introduces changes to the Brazilian tax landscape, directly affecting companies adopting the presumed profit regime (Lucro Presumido). The primary change involves an increase in the tax burden for these entities, requiring attention from executives and investors in reviewing operational costs.

    The redefinition of the tax assessment regime

    The new legislation alters how the tax system treats the presumed profit method. The text of LC 224/2025 reclassifies this tax assessment regime as a tax benefit.

    Industry experts note that this measure redefines the legal reality of the model. By structurally treating the presumed profit regime as a tax benefit, the legislature alters the regime’s original concept, laying the groundwork to justify higher taxes required from companies operating under this format.

    A 10% increase under the presumed profit regime

    The direct consequence of this conceptual reclassification is a financial impact on organizations. LC 224/2025 establishes a 10% increase in the tax burden on companies under the presumed profit regime.

    For founders and foreign executives with operations in Brazil, understanding this change is essential. The 10% increase directly affects financial planning, profit margins, and corporate structuring, requiring careful assessment of projected tax costs for upcoming periods.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • US Judge Cites Brazilian Precedent on AI Manipulation

    US Judge Cites Brazilian Precedent on AI Manipulation

    The development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) systems have created legal challenges that cross borders. Recently, a US judge cited a Brazilian case as a reference in a decision penalizing the use of hidden prompts intended to manipulate AI platforms.

    The use of hidden prompts in artificial intelligence

    In technological contexts, a hidden prompt refers to instructions embedded non-transparently into a system to bypass security rules, alter outputs, or improperly steer AI behavior.

    The US court ruling penalizing this practice reflects a strict stance against attempts to defraud or compromise algorithmic integrity. The fact that the reasoning drew upon a Brazilian precedent demonstrates that courts are monitoring legal responses from other jurisdictions facing similar technological issues.

    Cross-border legal dialogue and global governance

    A US judge citing a Brazilian case illustrates the emergence of a global legal framework around artificial intelligence. Because digital technology is not confined by physical borders, legal solutions are increasingly shared and adapted across jurisdictions.

    For companies, developers, and investors in the technology sector, this development underscores the importance of maintaining robust governance and compliance programs. Practices aimed at manipulating AI systems—even covertly—face scrutiny and legal sanctions worldwide.

    Practical considerations for businesses

    Organizations that develop or integrate AI tools into their operations should prioritize transparency and information security. Establishing clear guidelines on the appropriate use of these technologies mitigates legal risks and protects corporate reputation in an increasingly interconnected regulatory landscape.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • The debate over ending the 6×1 work schedule

    The debate over ending the 6×1 work schedule

    The legal news portal Migalhas recently highlighted the debate surrounding the end of the 6×1 work schedule. The topic has raised questions across the corporate sector, particularly regarding potential effective dates and practical changes to day-to-day business operations.

    What is under discussion?

    The 6×1 schedule—a model where an employee works six days in exchange for one day off—is the subject of discussions regarding its potential elimination or amendment. The primary issue raised by the report is understanding when the measure would take effect and what would genuinely change if new rules are implemented in Brazil.

    Attention from the corporate sector

    For executives, human resources leaders, and foreign investors, any alteration to working hours requires close monitoring. Changes to work schedules can directly impact operational planning, hiring strategies, and corporate costs in Brazil.

    Because the topic remains under discussion and brings practical operational questions, organizations should follow the developments closely to plan any potential adjustments safely.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • STJ rules out social security contributions on stock options

    STJ rules out social security contributions on stock options

    The STJ (Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice) has issued a significant ruling for the Brazilian corporate environment. As recently reported, the court decided to eliminate social security contribution charges on the purchase of stock options.

    The context of stock options

    To understand the impact of this measure, it is essential to observe how companies operate in today’s market. Stock options are contractual instruments that grant executives and employees the right to acquire company shares at a predetermined price, usually upon meeting specific conditions or vesting periods.

    This practice is widely adopted by founders, tech companies, and startups as an essential strategy to attract and retain talent. By aligning employees’ interests with corporate growth, stock options serve as a competitive advantage, especially in scenarios involving foreign direct investment in Brazil.

    The STJ decision and tax relief

    The STJ’s determination to exclude social security contributions from these transactions resolves an ongoing concern for corporate and finance departments. Levying social security taxes on stock options added extra costs, creating uncertainty regarding the financial viability of certain incentive plans.

    With this specific contribution set aside, companies gain greater predictability. The ruling indicates that the purchase of options should not carry the same social security tax burden typically levied on traditional payroll.

    Practical impact for managers and investors

    For executives, directors, and foreign investors structuring operations in Brazil, the outlook becomes clearer. Long-term incentive packages can now be structured on a more cost-effective basis.

    • Cost reduction: The removal of the social security contribution reduces the overall cost of implementing stock option plans.
    • Legal certainty: A ruling from a superior court like the STJ provides clearer legal guidance for business structuring and talent retention in the country.
    • Investment attractiveness: Startups and growth-stage companies gain breathing room to compete for top talent without placing excessive pressure on cash flow.

    In summary, the STJ’s stance represents a positive milestone for Brazil’s business ecosystem, facilitating the adoption of global corporate incentive practices.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.

  • Dividend taxation: a priority on the corporate agenda

    Dividend taxation: a priority on the corporate agenda

    The new taxation of dividends is emerging as a priority on companies’ year-end agendas. For founders, executives, and foreign investors, understanding this landscape and preparing the company for the changes is a fundamental step toward maintaining the business’s financial health.

    The impact on liquidity and corporate cash flow

    The distribution of profits to shareholders will undergo significant changes. Adapting to this new reality requires heightened attention from managers, as the way dividends are taxed directly affects the company’s cash flow.

    Preserving liquidity — the organization’s ability to meet its financial obligations and maintain working capital — must be the central objective of management during this transition period. Without proper preparation, profit distributions may cause an unexpected financial impact, jeopardizing day-to-day operations and expansion plans.

    The importance of corporate planning ahead of 2026

    Structuring and reviewing a company’s internal rules constitutes what is known as corporate planning. According to industry assessments, advancing this planning ahead of 2026 serves as an essential tool for protection and compliance.

    Early adaptation brings direct benefits:

    • Penalty prevention: Adjusting corporate documents and practices avoids sanctions resulting from non-compliance with new dividend taxation rules.
    • Investor certainty: Well-organized corporate structures convey predictability, a critical factor in retaining and attracting foreign direct investment in Brazil.
    • Distribution efficiency: Enables managers to align profit distribution policies with the new requirements without disruptions.

    Final considerations

    Reviewing corporate structures and capital flows in advance is a prudent governance measure. Focusing on tax and corporate compliance protects the company’s assets and secures a reliable environment for all shareholders involved.

    This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific matters, consult a qualified lawyer.