A carregar...
Publicação
Cláusula geral anti-abuso e o crime de fraude fiscal : diferenças, pontos de sobreposição e princípios comuns
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 592.62 KB | Adobe PDF |
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Com a presente dissertação de mestrado realizada no âmbito do Mestrado de Direito Fiscal subordinada ao título “Cláusula Geral Anti-Abuso e o Crime de Fraude Fiscal, Diferenças, pontos de sobreposição e princípios comuns”, propomo-nos trazer para o centro do debate jurídico-fiscal e jurídico-penal a complexa relação entre a liberdade fiscal, o planeamento fiscal e os limites impostos pelo ordenamento jurídico português. Num contexto marcado pela crescente complexidade dos sistemas fiscais e pela dependência cada vez mais acentuada do Estado Social em relação às receitas tributárias, o planeamento fiscal assume um papel central no sistema económico tributário contemporâneo. Esta liberdade de gestão fiscal encontra os seus limites na necessidade de prevenir abusos que possam comprometer o equilíbrio e a sustentabilidade desse mesmo Estado Social. Estes limites manifestam-se, essencialmente, através das figuras da elisão e fraude fiscal, que representam desafios complexos e distintos para a Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira e para os tribunais. A primeira situa-se na fronteira da licitude e caracteriza-se pela utilização de lapsos de memória do legislador 3 lacunas legislativas, insuficiências ou fragilidades do quadro legal 3 que conferem vantagens fiscais indevidas. A segunda, consubstancia um comportamento mais censurável, uma violação dolosa e direta da lei, com consequências jurídico-penais. Ambas as figuras colocam em causa o dever fundamental de pagar impostos, consagrado no artigo 103.º da Constituição da República Portuguesa, mas só a fraude fiscal atinge o patamar da ilicitude penal/fiscal. Neste quadro, a cláusula geral anti-abuso, consagrada no artigo 38.º da Lei Geral Tributária, surge como um instrumento jurídico necessário para combater práticas artificias e abusivas que visam vantagem fiscais indevidas (elisão fiscal). Este mecanismo permite desconsiderar os efeitos fiscais, assegurando o cumprimento do princípio da igualdade, a repartição da carga tributária e a satisfação das necessidades financeiras do Estado Social. Por seu turno, a fraude fiscal, é um crime insidioso que, assim como a corrupção, tem o potencial de corroer as bases do Estado de Direito Democrático, comprometendo a confiança nas instituições e minar a equidade e justiça social. A clareza conceptual e a precisão dogmática na distinção entre elisão e fraude fiscal 3 conceitos nem sempre utilizados uniformemente pela doutrina - são essenciais para garantir que a repressão do abuso não se traduza numa limitação ilegítima da liberdade de planeamento fiscal, mas também para assegurar que a punição da fraude fiscal seja efetiva. Neste sentido, propomo-nos delimitar, analisar e comparar os conceitos de elisão fiscal e fraude fiscal, bem como identificar critérios práticos que permitam distinguir, de forma objetiva e segura, a elisão fiscal 3 enquanto comportamento extra legem 3, da fraude fiscal 3 que se consubstancia numa atuação contra legem 3, contribuindo para uma aplicação adequada da cláusula geral anti-abuso e para uma correta subsunção dos comportamentos ao crime de fraude fiscal.
This master's dissertation, as part of the Master´s Degree in Tax Law focuses on the "General Anti-Abuse Rule and the Crime of Tax Fraud: Differences, Overlapping Areas, and Common Principles", and aims to bring to the forefront of tax and criminal law debate the complex relationship between tax freedom, tax planning, and the limits imposed by the Portuguese legal system. In a context marked by the increasing complexity of tax systems and the growing reliance of the welfare State on tax revenues, tax planning plays assumes a central role in the contemporary economic and fiscal framework. However, this freedom is limited by the need to prevent abuses that could undermine the balance and sustainability of the welfare State. These limits manifest primarily through the concepts of tax avoidance and tax fraud, which pose distinct and complex challenges for the Tax and Customs Authority and the judiciary. The former, situated at the boundary of legality, is characterized by the exploitation of legislative loopholes4insufficiencies or weaknesses in the legal framework4that result in undue tax advantages. The latter, by contrast, constitutes a more reprehensible conduct: a deliberate and direct violation of the law, with criminal consequences. Both forms of conduct undermine the fundamental duty to pay taxes, enshrined in Article 103 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, but only tax fraud reaches the threshold of criminal and tax illegality. In this context, the general anti-abuse rule, established in Article 38 of the General Tax Law, emerges as a necessary legal instrument to combat artificial and abusive practices aimed at obtaining undue tax benefits (tax avoidance). This mechanism allows the disregard such effects, ensuring compliance with the principles of equality, fair distribution of the tax burden, and the financial needs of the Welfare State. Tax fraud is a serious crime and like the corruption crime, has the potential to erode the foundations of the Democratic Rule of Law, undermine trust in public institutions, and threaten social equity and justice. Conceptual clarity, but the distinguishing between tax avoidance and tax fraud are essential4not only to ensure that the suppression of abuse does not illegitimately restrict the freedom to engage in tax planning, but also to guarantee that the punishment of tax fraud is both effective and proportionate. In this sense, this dissertation aims to define, review, and compare the concepts of tax avoidance and tax fraud, as well as to identify practical criteria that allow for an objective and reliable distinction between tax avoidance4as extra legem conduct4 and tax fraud4as conduct contra legem. This contribution seeks to promote the proper application of the general anti-abuse rule and the correct legal classification of conduct constituting the crime of tax fraud.
This master's dissertation, as part of the Master´s Degree in Tax Law focuses on the "General Anti-Abuse Rule and the Crime of Tax Fraud: Differences, Overlapping Areas, and Common Principles", and aims to bring to the forefront of tax and criminal law debate the complex relationship between tax freedom, tax planning, and the limits imposed by the Portuguese legal system. In a context marked by the increasing complexity of tax systems and the growing reliance of the welfare State on tax revenues, tax planning plays assumes a central role in the contemporary economic and fiscal framework. However, this freedom is limited by the need to prevent abuses that could undermine the balance and sustainability of the welfare State. These limits manifest primarily through the concepts of tax avoidance and tax fraud, which pose distinct and complex challenges for the Tax and Customs Authority and the judiciary. The former, situated at the boundary of legality, is characterized by the exploitation of legislative loopholes4insufficiencies or weaknesses in the legal framework4that result in undue tax advantages. The latter, by contrast, constitutes a more reprehensible conduct: a deliberate and direct violation of the law, with criminal consequences. Both forms of conduct undermine the fundamental duty to pay taxes, enshrined in Article 103 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, but only tax fraud reaches the threshold of criminal and tax illegality. In this context, the general anti-abuse rule, established in Article 38 of the General Tax Law, emerges as a necessary legal instrument to combat artificial and abusive practices aimed at obtaining undue tax benefits (tax avoidance). This mechanism allows the disregard such effects, ensuring compliance with the principles of equality, fair distribution of the tax burden, and the financial needs of the Welfare State. Tax fraud is a serious crime and like the corruption crime, has the potential to erode the foundations of the Democratic Rule of Law, undermine trust in public institutions, and threaten social equity and justice. Conceptual clarity, but the distinguishing between tax avoidance and tax fraud are essential4not only to ensure that the suppression of abuse does not illegitimately restrict the freedom to engage in tax planning, but also to guarantee that the punishment of tax fraud is both effective and proportionate. In this sense, this dissertation aims to define, review, and compare the concepts of tax avoidance and tax fraud, as well as to identify practical criteria that allow for an objective and reliable distinction between tax avoidance4as extra legem conduct4 and tax fraud4as conduct contra legem. This contribution seeks to promote the proper application of the general anti-abuse rule and the correct legal classification of conduct constituting the crime of tax fraud.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Contribuinte Autoridade tributária e Aduaneira Liberdade fiscal Autonomia privada Planeamento fiscal Elisão fiscal Evasão fiscal Comportamento lícito Comportamento abusivo Comportamento ilícito Cláusula geral anti-abuso e crime de fraude fiscal Crime Taxpayer Tax and Customs Authority Tax freedom Private autonomy Tax planning Tax avoidance Tax evasion Lawful conduct Abusive conduct General anti-abuse rule Tax fraud Crime
Contexto Educativo
Citação
Editora
Licença CC
Sem licença CC