The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has solidified its stance regarding the application of the Social Security Contribution on Gross Revenue (CPRB) within its own calculation base. The decision—issued by the STJ’s 1st Panel in the ruling of Special Appeal (REsp) 1999905—reinforces the interpretation previously adopted by the 2nd Panel, thereby settling the matter within the Court.
The CPRB was established in 2011 to ease the payroll burden on labor-intensive sectors, allowing companies in these segments to replace the standard 20% employer contribution on payroll with rates ranging from 1% to 4.5% applied on gross revenue. This issue is particularly significant given its financial implications for both taxpayers and public funds.
Basis for the Decision
In its ruling, the ministers followed the vote of the rapporteur, Minister Gurgel de Faria, who emphasized that the CPRB’s calculation base should include all taxes levied on the commercial transaction—even the CPRB itself. This interpretation aligns with the jurisprudence established by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) in Theme 1,048, which upheld the constitutionality of including ICMS in the CPRB calculation base.
Taxpayers had argued that the CPRB should not be part of its own calculation base, citing the STF precedent known as the “tese do século” (Theme 69), which excluded ICMS from the calculation base for PIS and COFINS. However, the rapporteur dismissed this analogy, asserting that the relevant jurisprudence is the one consolidated in the STF’s ruling on Theme 1,048 and later adopted by the STJ in Theme 994 (Inclusion of ICMS in the CPRB calculation base).
Impacts and Next Steps
With the STJ’s unified interpretation, companies subject to the CPRB must now include the contribution within its own calculation base, a move that could have significant financial repercussions. Additionally, there is an ongoing debate at the STF over excluding PIS and COFINS from the CPRB calculation base (Theme 1,186), with an estimated impact of R$1.3 billion, though no ruling date has been set.
The STJ’s decision reinforces the tendency among higher courts to adopt a restrictive view on excluding taxes from the CPRB calculation base, thereby preventing the expansion of fiscal benefits without explicit legal authorization, in light of the potential economic impact on the public budget.