The so-called ‘split payment,’ the apportioned payment of the tax (CBS and IBS) in the financial settlement of the transaction, has been the subject of many different approaches, with some even loving or hating it without knowing the exact reasons for these feelings.
Firstly, the ‘split payment’ is not a novelty in the world, not a Brazilian invention; we have examples in Europe, Asia, and Latin America, especially in Chile, which actually served as inspiration for the widely used Brazilian Electronic Invoice.
The model being structured in Brazil starts on the principle that from a billing, a duplicate and a tax remittance form (which is separate) will be generated. Therefore, when paying for the good or service, the tax amount will already be collected by the acquirer, no longer in a situation where the supplier pays the tax. On the contrary, those buying the product or service will pay the tax.
The proposal for collecting the new taxes (CBS and IBS) is for universal application (in financial transactions that are almost the entirety) and parallel to other payment methods, except for transactions involving cash or check. This system, according to the bill, is one of the pillars ensuring that there will always be resources in the cash register of the Federal Revenue (CBS) and the Management Committee (IBS), so that the non-cumulativity of taxes can effectively be implemented in Brazil.
However, if this system is implemented, companies will have a pre-calculation, meaning the system will already calculate the due tax. This model already works in Rio Grande do Sul for small businesses. In this format, a significant reduction in ancillary obligations is expected, but companies will still need to have a system to monitor this entire process so that, upon receiving a statement from the tax authorities, they can assess any discrepancies.
The functionalities included in PLP 68/24 presuppose a highly technological system capable of enabling, among other things, real-time consultations between financial institutions, the IBS Management Committee, and the Federal Revenue Service.
As reported by tax authorities, the split payment, if implemented, can be an effective tool to combat fake invoices, carousel fraud, fraudulent schemes, tax evasion, etc.
In contrast, the taxpayer will ensure their reimbursement, as both the federal tax authorities and the tax authorities of the other subnational entities cannot claim a ‘lack of resources’ for reimbursements, as the tax will already be segregated at the time of payment of the invoice via any financial arrangement.
One of the points that are also being debated and criticized by taxpayers is that, in addition to the split payment, there is a rule that the taxpayer will only be entitled to credit when the tax on the transaction is effectively paid.
Other doubts being raised by taxpayers relate to the way in which they control their credits since in this format, the tax authority will identify the amounts subject to credit. From this perspective, what is sought through regulation is the adoption of a statement system, with debits and credits available for the taxpayer’s monitoring. The whole idea is towards simplification and transparency, aiming for the taxpayer to have only one obligation: to buy and sell with a receipt.
The fact is that there is no need to fear this new collection system as it will still undergo significant adjustments and discussions, along with various stakeholders who will be at the center of this system, especially financial institutions, which undoubtedly must actively participate in the creation and development of this new and complex system so as not to burden the taxpayer in any way.
