Through decision in the course of special appeal (Subject Matter 962), the Superior Court of Justice (“STJ”) decided on the person responsible in the case of redirection of tax foreclosure based on the irregular winding-up of the company, even if such winding-up is presumed.
It was understood that the person responsible is the partner or manager of the company who took part in the irregular closing procedure, even if such person had been in charge the business at the time of the failure to collect the taxes.
Such decision was delivered by the 1st Panel of the STJ, and the key discussion was regarding the need, or lack thereof, for the partner or manager to, simultaneously, have taken part in the irregular closing and be in charge of the business when the taxes failed to be paid.
The Reporting Judge was Justice Aussete Magalhães, who issued the winning vote. For the Justice and the majority of the STJ, partners and managers who have withdrawn from the company regularly when the taxes payable were not paid, must not be held accountable, even if such person exercised management powers at the time.
Written by Camila Cabral, Tax Consultant at Drummond Advisors