The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) ruled, in analyzing REsp 1968695/RS, that the Individual Income Tax (IRPF) does not apply to the transfer of quotas from a closed-end investment fund to heirs. The decision was based on the understanding that, since there is no capital gain in the transfer, IRPF taxation would not be applicable. This transfer occurred at the value of the quotas declared to the tax authorities by the deceased person, without any increase in wealth.
Understanding of the Justices
The STJ justices agreed that the Individual Income Tax should only apply when the holder of the quotas decides to redeem the fund, that is, when there is an intention to sell the quotas. This understanding reinforces the idea that the triggering event for IRPF, in the case of investment funds, is linked to redemption, where actual capital gain may occur.
Legal Context and Law 14.754/2023
The case’s rapporteur, Justice Gurgel de Faria, emphasized that this decision was made in a context prior to the enactment of Law 14.754/2023, which establishes the annual taxation of earnings from closed-end funds at a 15% rate. This law introduced significant changes to the taxation of so-called “super-rich funds,” composed of large investors with assets exceeding R$ 10 million.
Taxpayer’s Arguments
The taxpayers argued that Article 23 of Law 9.532/1997 allows the transfer of assets through succession to be evaluated either at market value or at the value listed in the deceased’s asset declaration. In this case, the heirs opted for the declared value, which, according to the defense, did not generate capital gain, thus excluding the application of IRPF.
Tax Authorities’ Arguments
On the other hand, the National Treasury argued that the transfer of investment fund quotas would constitute an increase in wealth, as provided in Article 43 of the National Tax Code (CTN), justifying taxation. It also argued that the rule allowing heirs to choose between the declared or market value aims to protect more vulnerable heirs and would not apply in this case.
Judgment Conclusion
Justice Gurgel de Faria concluded that, in this particular case, the IRPF triggering event did not occur, as there was no capital gain or increase in wealth. The rapporteur also pointed out that Article 65 of Law 8.981/1995, cited by the National Treasury, refers to fixed-income funds and does not apply to this case. The other justices unanimously supported this view.
Thus, the STJ ruling ensures that heirs of closed-end investment fund quotas are only subject to IRPF when they redeem the quotas and realize actual capital gains.