A carregar...
Publicação
A relevância da prova em processo tributário na realização da justiça tributária em Portugal
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 324.32 KB | Adobe PDF |
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A presente dissertação aborda a questão da realização da justiça tributária por meio da prova em processo tributário em Portugal. Segundo a atual Constituição da República Portuguesa, o valor ético-jurídico de justiça deve ser tomado como princípio e valor permanente em todos os planos da ordem tributária. No plano legislativo, estabelecendo no nº 1 do artigo 103º, que a tributação “visa (…) a repartição justa dos rendimentos e da riqueza”; no plano administrativo, consagrando, no artigo 266º, à administração pública o dever de atuar “com respeito pelos princípios da igualdade, da proporcionalidade, da justiça e da imparcialidade”; e, no plano judiciário, definido, no artigo 205º, que os tribunais são os órgãos de soberania com competência para administrar a justiça em nome do povo”. Ainda na mesma ordem de valores, a própria Lei Geral Tributária confirma, no seu artigo 9º, que “a todos é garantido o acesso à justiça tributária para a tutela plena e efetiva de todos os seus direitos ou interesses legalmente protegidos”. Assim, podemos inequivocamente admitir que a justiça é um valor intrínseco da ordem tributária. Contudo, uma vez que ela não assume qualidade e força de direito subjetivo, não habilita “o contribuinte a invocar a injustiça como fundamento para a anulação dos atos tributários que tenham por efeito uma tributação injusta”. Surpreendentemente, “a ordem tributária contemporânea admite, em certos termos, a defesa do contribuinte contra injustiças de que possa ser objecto. Na generalidade, através da defesa geral contra as leis injustas, em plano legislativo e de vigilância da constitucionalidade; em casos especiais, de defesa contra as situações de injustiça grave ou notória nas situações de determinação da matéria coletável; e ainda nos casos de resolução pericial das questões de fixação de matéria coletável por avaliação indirecta”. A determinação da matéria coletável nem sempre é uma operação fácil e segura, observando-se, amiúde, erros de identificação, de qualificação ou de valoração. Para suprir tais eventualidades, a ordem tributária consagrou vários regimes de reposição da verdadeira realidade de direito: a reclamação, o recurso hierárquico, a revisão do acto tributário, e a impugnação. Ora, é através do acesso do contribuinte aos tribunais tributários que têm por objeto, segundo o artigo 255º da Constituição, a “administração da justiça”, mormente através do exercício do direito de impugnação dos atos tributários que se garante a tutela de dos direitos e interesses legalmente protegidos. “Sendo os factos tributários que, na generalidade dos tributos, constituem o objecto real dos tipos de incidência, e a base de aplicação da lei através dos actos tributários, designadamente os procedimentos de liquidação, estabelece logo o artigo 100º do Código de Procedimento e de Processo Tributário, uma norma específica quanto à eventual dúvida sobre os factos tributários: “sempre que da prova produzida resulte a fundada dúvida sobre a existência e quantificação do facto tributário, deverá o acto tributário ser anulado”. De onde resulta que, nos processos de impugnação, a apreciação e juízo de direito sobre a aplicação da lei e a correspondente ilegalidade, depende da prévia apreciação, prova e declaração da existência e qualificação dos factos tributários, e tais como foram tomados no acto impugnado ou como o são pela impugnante. Deste modo, parece-nos que, através da mão do conspícuo juiz tributário - munida de razoabilidade, cognoscibilidade e convicção sobre a lei, a verdade dos factos e o que é justo – poder-se-á firmar justiça.
This dissertation addresses the issue of the realization of tax justice through the evidence in tax process in Portugal. According to the current Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the ethical-legal value of justice must be taken as a principle and permanent value in all tax order plans. In the legislative plan, establishing artcicle 103 that taxation “is aimed at (…) fair distribution of income and wealth”; administratively, devoting, in article 266, to the public administration the duty to act “with respect for the principles of equality, proporcionality, justice and impartiatily”; and, at the judicial level, defined in article 205, that courts are the organs of sovereignty with jurisdition to administer justice on behalf of the people. “Still in the same order of values, the General Tax Law itself confirms, in article 9, that “everyone is guaranteed access to tax justice for full and affective protection of all their legally protected rights or interests”. Thus, we can unequivocally admit that justice is an intrinsic value of the tax order. However, since it does not assume quality and force of subjective law, it does not enable “the taxpayer to invoke injustice as a basis for the annulment of tax acts which have unfair taxation”. Surprisingly, “the contemporary tax order admits, in certain terms, the defense of the taxpayer against injustices that can be objected to. In general, through the general defense against unfair laws, in legislative and constitutionality surveillance; in special cases, of defense against situations of serious or notorious injustice in situations of determination of the colletible matter; and also in the cases of expert resolution of the issues of fixation of colletible matter by indirect evaluation”. The determination of the colletible matter is not always an easy and safe operation, often observing identification, qualification or valuation errors. To address such eventualities, the tax order enshrined several regimes for the reposition of the true reality of law: the complaint, the hierarchical appeal, the revision of the tax act, and the challenge. It is through taxpayer access to tax courts that are intended, according to article 255 of the Constitution, to “the administration of justice”, especially through the exercice of the right to challenge the tax acts that the protection of legally protected rights and interests. “Since tax facts are generally the subject of the types of incidence, and the basis for law enforcement through tax acts, in particular settlement procedures, it estabilishes article 100 of the Code of Procedure and Tax Procedure, a specific rule as to the possible doubt about tax facts: “Where the evidence produced results in the well-founded doubt about the existence and quantification of the tax fact, the tax act should be annulled”. From where it is apparent that, in the challenge proceedings, the assessment and judgement of law on the application of the law and the corresponding ilegality depends on the prior assessment, proof and declaration of the existence and qualification of tax facts and as they were taken contested act or as they are by the contesting. Thus, it seems to us that through the hand of the conspicuous tax judge – provided with reasonableness, knowability and conviction about the law, the truth of the facts and what is fair – justice can be estabilished.
This dissertation addresses the issue of the realization of tax justice through the evidence in tax process in Portugal. According to the current Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the ethical-legal value of justice must be taken as a principle and permanent value in all tax order plans. In the legislative plan, establishing artcicle 103 that taxation “is aimed at (…) fair distribution of income and wealth”; administratively, devoting, in article 266, to the public administration the duty to act “with respect for the principles of equality, proporcionality, justice and impartiatily”; and, at the judicial level, defined in article 205, that courts are the organs of sovereignty with jurisdition to administer justice on behalf of the people. “Still in the same order of values, the General Tax Law itself confirms, in article 9, that “everyone is guaranteed access to tax justice for full and affective protection of all their legally protected rights or interests”. Thus, we can unequivocally admit that justice is an intrinsic value of the tax order. However, since it does not assume quality and force of subjective law, it does not enable “the taxpayer to invoke injustice as a basis for the annulment of tax acts which have unfair taxation”. Surprisingly, “the contemporary tax order admits, in certain terms, the defense of the taxpayer against injustices that can be objected to. In general, through the general defense against unfair laws, in legislative and constitutionality surveillance; in special cases, of defense against situations of serious or notorious injustice in situations of determination of the colletible matter; and also in the cases of expert resolution of the issues of fixation of colletible matter by indirect evaluation”. The determination of the colletible matter is not always an easy and safe operation, often observing identification, qualification or valuation errors. To address such eventualities, the tax order enshrined several regimes for the reposition of the true reality of law: the complaint, the hierarchical appeal, the revision of the tax act, and the challenge. It is through taxpayer access to tax courts that are intended, according to article 255 of the Constitution, to “the administration of justice”, especially through the exercice of the right to challenge the tax acts that the protection of legally protected rights and interests. “Since tax facts are generally the subject of the types of incidence, and the basis for law enforcement through tax acts, in particular settlement procedures, it estabilishes article 100 of the Code of Procedure and Tax Procedure, a specific rule as to the possible doubt about tax facts: “Where the evidence produced results in the well-founded doubt about the existence and quantification of the tax fact, the tax act should be annulled”. From where it is apparent that, in the challenge proceedings, the assessment and judgement of law on the application of the law and the corresponding ilegality depends on the prior assessment, proof and declaration of the existence and qualification of tax facts and as they were taken contested act or as they are by the contesting. Thus, it seems to us that through the hand of the conspicuous tax judge – provided with reasonableness, knowability and conviction about the law, the truth of the facts and what is fair – justice can be estabilished.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Direito fiscal Justiça fiscal Prova Rendimento Capacidade contributiva Segurança jurídica Direito tributário Sistema fiscal Matéria coletável Portugal Teses de mestrado - 2020