Rural union obtains legal victory in relation to education salary

Rural producers in the Cambará region no longer need to pay the education salary. And they will have the possibility of requesting legal reimbursement of the amount paid in the last five years. This is because the Cambará Rural Union, in the Norte Pioneiro region, filed a lawsuit to exclude the collection of the education salary tax paid by farmers in the region who employ employees directly in the CPF through the CEI Registration. The process was supported by FAEP and led by BGMA Advogados, a law firm based in Curitiba.

“The Cambará Rural Union and FAEP are always attentive to everything that can bring some benefit and/or reduce costs for the rural producer. The suppression of the education salary, being a tax unduly charged to the producer, constitutes an achievement for the entire rural union system”, highlights Aristeu Kazuyuki Sakamoto, president of the Cambará Rural Union.

At the end of 2021, the Cambará Union filed a lawsuit to exclude the collection of the education salary tax. Six months later, the Court accepted the entity's request. With the filing of appeals, the sentence was again analyzed by the Federal Regional Court (TRF) of the 4th Region, confirming the decision in November 2022. As there was no new appeal from the Federal Union, the process was closed, with the decision can no longer be modified.

“Undoubtedly, the decision corrected a fiscal mistake, as a tax was unduly demanded from the taxpayer. Now rural producers, individually, can also request compensation through the courts”, highlights lawyer Othon Accioly Rodrigues da Costa Neto.

With the market becoming increasingly competitive and the uncertainties surrounding a new government, situations like this help to reduce costs, optimize tax planning and recover values ​​that can be reinvested in the property.

“With this sentence, we complete the first stage. Now, with the rights of rural producers duly recognized, we will begin the second phase, with the filing of individual actions to seek reimbursement and request the exclusion of the education salary charge”, analyzes Costa Neto.

The decision has effect for rural producers with domicile or activity within the territorial base of operation of the Cambara entity. But it opens up the possibility of new affiliations, as compliance with the sentence will be automatically linked to collective action promoted by the union.

The summary of the appeal ruling can be read below:

TAX. UNION ENTITY. CONTRIBUTION TO EDUCATION SALARY. RURAL EMPLOYER INDIVIDUAL. ABUSIVE TAX PLANNING.

1. The union entity acts in the process as a procedural substitute, the effects of the sentence handed down in action through the common procedure are not restricted to members of the union entity at the time of its filing and reach all those substituted within the territorial limit of its action.

2. There is no legal-tax relationship that obliges the plaintiff, as an individual rural employer, to collect the contribution to the education salary levied on the remuneration paid or credited to its employees.

3. It is the Public Treasury's burden, through regularly initiated administrative proceedings, subject to the contradictory and broad defense, to prove the alleged abusive tax planning, in order to deconstitute the presumed legitimate legal relationships of the individual rural employer and their employees.

(TRF4, AC 5009167-79.2021.4.04.7013, SECOND PANEL, Rapporteur EDUARDO VANDRÉ OLIVEIRA LEMA GARCIA, added to the file on 29/11/2022)