On Monday, August 18th, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) reached a majority vote to acknowledge the existence of general repercussion in a case discussing the incidence of social security contributions on transportation vouchers and meal allowances provided by employers, when such benefits are subject to employee cost-sharing – Theme 1415.
In 2024, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), when ruling on Theme No. 1174 under the Repetitive Appeals system, held that deductions made under cost-sharing arrangements are withholdings that derive from remuneration. Accordingly, they retain a remunerative nature and are thus subject to taxation.
Now, the STF will assess the matter from a constitutional standpoint, under the general repercussion procedure (with binding effect). The main argument raised by taxpayers is that the portion of the benefits paid by the employee either constitutes an indemnity—which does not fall within the definition of "income from labor" as set forth in the Federal Constitution—or is not remuneration in nature, and thus is outside the scope of social security contribution incidence.
Considering that a decision favorable to taxpayers would represent a shift in the prevailing judicial interpretation and an overruling of the legal thesis established by the STJ, the likelihood of the STF modulating the effects of its ruling is significant. For this reason, it is important to assess the strategic value of filing a lawsuit on the matter before the case is adjudicated.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
