A carregar...
Publicação
Da ilegalização da contribuição sobre o serviço rodoviário : a quem pertence a titularidade do direito ao reembolso?
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 798.74 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Esta dissertação tem como pressuposto a análise da decisão arbitral n.º 564/2020-T que originou o reenvio prejudicial para o TJUE e que culminou na prolação de centenas de decisões divergentes, a nível da legitimidade processual do repercutido. A Contribuição sobre o Serviço Rodoviário, aprovada pela Lei n.º 55/2007, veio a ser declarada ilegal pelo TJUE, por não se encontrarem verificados os pressupostos legais constantes da Diretiva que regula os Impostos Especiais de Consumo, a atual Diretiva n.º 2020/262, mormente pela exigência de harmonização dos IEC a nível europeu, exceto raras exceções, i.e., em caso de um motivo específico. Após a análise da origem, sentido, e natureza jurídica da CSR, olhar-se-á para a jurisprudência europeia incidente sobre uma matéria que tem obtido grande relevância junto dos académicos e dos próprios tribunais europeus, decorrente essencialmente da criatividade dos próprios legisladores na elaboração de impostos sujeitos à harmonização europeia, originando discussões, especialmente, a nível de enriquecimento ilícito por parte dos Estados que os cobram indevidamente. Não se pode dizer que a matéria é líquida a nível deste tema. Em primeiro lugar, a doutrina estabelecida pelo TJUE ao longo das décadas tem pendido para o lado do Sujeito Passivo de imposto, diabolizando, em bom rigor, a prova a efetuar pelas autoridades fiscais dos diferentes Estados-membros. Este estudo procurará, na medida do espaço conferido, através de uma ponderação de diferentes interesses, princípios e regras jurídicas, o sentido da inclinação do TJUE. Em segundo lugar, a nível nacional, a amplitude do tema, quando visto concreta e casuisticamente, i.e., pelo tipo de Contribuição criada, pela afronta à Diretiva 2020/262, pela própria lei geral nacional, tem repercussões à luz da legitimidade processual, particularmente do consumidor, uma vez que a lei portuguesa confere, sem sombra de dúvidas, legitimidade ativa ao sujeito passivo do imposto. Cabe, assim, descortinar, à luz de tudo o que foi analisado e ponderado, se a lei portuguesa confere ou não legitimidade processual ao potencial repercutido daquele imposto pelos respetivos sujeitos passivos e a forma como essa problemática casa com o enriquecimento sem causa, copiosamente pronunciado pelo TJUE.
This dissertation is based on the analysis of the arbitral decision no. 564/2020-T, which led to the preliminary referral to the CJEU and resulted in the issuance of hundreds of divergent decisions regarding the procedural legitimacy of the repercuted. The Contribution for Road Services, approved by Law no. 55/2007, was declared illegal by the CJEU, as the legal requirements outlined in the Directive regulating Excise Duties were not met, particularly the requirement for the harmonization of Excise Duties at the European level, except in rare exceptions, i.e., in cases of a specific reason. After analyzing the origin, meaning, and legal nature of the CSR, special attention will be given to the European case law on a subject that has gained significant relevance among academics and European courts, primarily due to the creativity of lawmakers in creating taxes subject to European harmonization, leading to debates, especially regarding unjust enrichment by States that collect these taxes improperly. It cannot be said that the matter is settled on this issue. In the first place, the doctrine established by the CJEU over the decades has leaned towards the side of the taxable person, demonizing, strictly speaking, the proof to be carried out by the tax authorities of the different member states. This study will seek, to the extent that space allows, through a weighing up of different interests, principles and legal rules, the direction of the CJEU's inclination. Secondly, at national level, the breadth of the issue, when viewed concretely and on a case-by-case basis, i.e. by the type of Contribution created, by the affront to Directive 2020/262, by the national general law itself, has repercussions in the light of legal standing, particularly of the consumer, since Portuguese law undoubtedly confers legal standing on the taxable person. Thus, it is essential to uncover, in light of all that has been analyzed and considered, whether Portuguese law grants procedural legitimacy to the potential repercuted of that tax by the respective taxpayers and how this issue aligns with unjust enrichment, as extensively discussed by the CJEU.
This dissertation is based on the analysis of the arbitral decision no. 564/2020-T, which led to the preliminary referral to the CJEU and resulted in the issuance of hundreds of divergent decisions regarding the procedural legitimacy of the repercuted. The Contribution for Road Services, approved by Law no. 55/2007, was declared illegal by the CJEU, as the legal requirements outlined in the Directive regulating Excise Duties were not met, particularly the requirement for the harmonization of Excise Duties at the European level, except in rare exceptions, i.e., in cases of a specific reason. After analyzing the origin, meaning, and legal nature of the CSR, special attention will be given to the European case law on a subject that has gained significant relevance among academics and European courts, primarily due to the creativity of lawmakers in creating taxes subject to European harmonization, leading to debates, especially regarding unjust enrichment by States that collect these taxes improperly. It cannot be said that the matter is settled on this issue. In the first place, the doctrine established by the CJEU over the decades has leaned towards the side of the taxable person, demonizing, strictly speaking, the proof to be carried out by the tax authorities of the different member states. This study will seek, to the extent that space allows, through a weighing up of different interests, principles and legal rules, the direction of the CJEU's inclination. Secondly, at national level, the breadth of the issue, when viewed concretely and on a case-by-case basis, i.e. by the type of Contribution created, by the affront to Directive 2020/262, by the national general law itself, has repercussions in the light of legal standing, particularly of the consumer, since Portuguese law undoubtedly confers legal standing on the taxable person. Thus, it is essential to uncover, in light of all that has been analyzed and considered, whether Portuguese law grants procedural legitimacy to the potential repercuted of that tax by the respective taxpayers and how this issue aligns with unjust enrichment, as extensively discussed by the CJEU.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Contribuição sobre o serviço rodoviário CSR Impostos especiais de consumo IEC TJUE Repercussão fiscal Enriquecimento sem causa Legitimidade processual Ónus da prova Road service contribution CSR Excise duties ‘Passing on’ defense CJEU Unjust enrichment Procedural legitimacy Burden of proof
Contexto Educativo
Citação
Editora
Licença CC
Sem licença CC