Summary
Full Decision
ARBITRAL DECISION
I. Report
1. A..., taxpayer no. ..., resident at Rua ..., no. ..., ...-..., hereby, pursuant to the provisions of articles 2, no. 1, paragraph a), and 10, no. 1, paragraph a), of the Legal Regime of Tax Arbitration (RJAT), approved by Decree-Law no. 10/2011, of 20/01, submits a request for constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal, in which the Tax and Customs Authority (AT) is named as Respondent.
2. The request for arbitral pronouncement, submitted on 07-02-2019, seeks the declaration of illegality, and consequent annulment, of the assessment acts for Unique Vehicle Circulation Tax (IUC) relating to the periods of 2018 and 2019, in the amount of € 2,913.35 and € 2,839.62, respectively, totaling the sum of € 5,752.97, concerning a recreational vessel, for private use, of which the Claimant is the owner, registered in the International Register of Ships (RINM-MAR), of the Madeira Free Zone. In addition to the annulment of the questioned assessments, the Claimant further requests that the right to compensatory interest, calculated in accordance with legal terms, be declared.
3. The request for constitution of the arbitral tribunal was accepted by the President of CAAD and automatically notified to the Tax and Customs Authority (AT).
4. The Respondent did not proceed to appoint an arbitrator.
5. Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph a) of no. 2 of article 6 and paragraph b) of no. 1 of article 11 of Decree-Law no. 10/2011, of 20/01, as amended by article 228 of Law no. 66-B/2012, of 31/12, the Deontological Council designated the undersigned as arbitrator of the single arbitral tribunal, who communicated acceptance of the appointment within the applicable period, having duly notified the parties.
6. Duly notified of this designation, the parties did not express any intention to challenge the appointment of the arbitrator, in accordance with the combined provisions of article 11, no. 1, paragraphs a) and b) of the RJAT and articles 6 and 7 of the Deontological Code.
7. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph c) of no. 1 of article 11 of the RJAT, as amended by article 228 of Law no. 66-B/2012, of 31/12, the single arbitral tribunal was constituted on 23-04-2019.
8. In response to what was requested, the Tax and Customs Authority (AT) pronounced itself in the sense of the present request for arbitral pronouncement being without merit, expressing the view that the contested acts should remain in the legal order and, accordingly, the tribunal should pronounce itself on the acquittal of the respondent entity.
9. Having regard to the knowledge derived from the procedural documents submitted by the Parties, which is deemed sufficient for the decision, the Tribunal decided to dispense with the meeting referred to in article 18 of the RJAT.
10. Thus, by order of 30-05-2019, subject to due notification, it was decided, unless the Parties object, to dispense with the said meeting, and a period of 20 days was granted for submission of written arguments.
11. Only the Claimant submitted written arguments, reaffirming the position already previously expressed in the petition duly submitted.
II. Case Management
12. The Arbitral Tribunal is regularly constituted and is materially competent, pursuant to paragraph a) of no. 1 of article 2 of Decree-Law no. 10/2011, of 20/01.
13. The Parties enjoy legal personality and capacity, are legitimate, and are legally represented (cf. article 4 and no. 2 of article 10 of Decree-Law no. 10/2011 and article 1 of Ordinance no. 112/2011, of 22/03).
14. The proceedings do not suffer from defects that would invalidate them, and no issues have been raised that would prevent consideration of the merits of the case.
III. Facts
15. Based on the documentary evidence that constitutes this proceedings, the following factual elements are highlighted which, not being contested by the Parties, are considered entirely proven:
15.1. The Claimant is the owner of a recreational vessel named "..." with hull IT-..., registered on 22-10-2014, under no. ..., fls. ..., of Book ..., at the Commercial Registry Office of the Madeira Free Zone – Registry no. R-... (Doc. 1).
15.2. The vessel in question received its first registration on 01-10-2009, and has an engine power of 1,044.00 kW (See administrative proceedings).
15.3. Following a consultation made by the International Register of Ships of Madeira (MAR), the Regional Directorate of Tax Affairs of the Autonomous Region of Madeira issued a non-binding opinion to the effect that, pursuant to the provisions of article 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, and article 24, no. 2, of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, MAR "benefits from the tax regime provided for the Madeira free zone, which provides that companies established in the Madeira Free Zone enjoy exemption from local taxes and because IUC levied on category F vehicles is revenue of the municipalities, then recreational vessels registered in MAR benefit from IUC exemption." (Doc. 3)
15.4. Based on the aforementioned opinion, the International Register of Ships of Madeira (MAR), on 05-11-2014, through its Technical Commission, issued a declaration certifying, "for the proper purposes, that the Recreational Vessel named "...", registered in MAR under no. R-..., Call Sign CRA..., is exempt from payment of the Unique Vehicle Circulation Tax, by virtue of being an automatic fiscal benefit for recreational vessels registered in this Register established in specific legislation (article 1 D.L. 192/2003, of 22/08, in conjunction with no. 2 of article 24 of D.L. 96/89, of 28/03, and paragraph a) of article 7 of D.L. 165/86, of 26/06)" (Doc. 4)
15.5. Assuming he could benefit from the said exemption, the Claimant, from the period of 2014 onwards, inclusive, did not make payment of the IUC relating to the vessel in question.
15.6. Meanwhile, in response to a consultation made by the Finance Directorate of Porto, an opinion issued by the Directorate of Services for Municipal Tax on Onerous Transmission of Real Property, Stamp Tax, Unique Vehicle Circulation Tax and Special Contributions (DSIMT) was approved by order of the Director-General of the Tax and Customs Authority, of 19-10-2015, which, in conclusive terms, is to the effect that "... III. The fiscal regime of the Madeira Free Zone does not contemplate any fiscal benefit in respect of IUC. The IUC Code provides fiscal benefits for other categories of vehicles related to the Madeira Free Zone, without including Category F. IV. The vessels ... and ... are therefore subject to IUC pursuant to paragraph f) of no. 1 of article 2 of the IUC Code, with no rule suspending or preventing taxation." – Information no. 1482/2015, of 14.7.2015, Proc. 1183/2015, integrated in the administrative proceedings.
15.7. Based on this understanding, the AT promoted official assessments of IUC relating to the vessel identified above and to the tax periods of 2014 and subsequent.
15.8. Included in the said assessments are those relating to the periods of 2018 and 2019, the declaration of illegality and consequent annulment of which constitute the subject of the present proceedings:
- 2018..., issued on 08-01-2019, in the amount of 2,913.55;
- 2019..., issued on 08-01-2019, in the amount of 2,839.62.
15.9. On 08-01-2019, the Claimant made payment of the amounts in question.
16. The facts proven are based on the documents attached to the proceedings, with no facts of relevance to the decision that should be considered as not proven.
IV. Matters of Law
17. At issue, therefore, is the assessment of the legality of the IUC assessments relating to the periods of 2018 and 2019 and to a recreational vessel for private use, covered by the incidence of this tax, within the scope of Category F referred to in article 2, no. 1, of the IUC Code.
18. Indeed, this provision defines the objective incidence of the said tax according to various categories of vehicles, including therein "Recreational vessels for private use with engine power equal to or greater than 20 kW, registered since 1986".
19. In accordance with no. 4 of the same article, added by Law no. 3-B/2010, of 28/04: "4 - In the case of vehicles in categories F and G, private use is understood as the use of a vessel or an aircraft by its owner or by a natural or legal person who uses it, by means of rental or otherwise, for non-commercial purposes, specifically for purposes that are not the transport of persons, goods, or the provision of services, for a fee or in the interest of public authorities.
20. As emerges from the documentary evidence that constitutes the present proceedings, in particular from the administrative proceedings and documents attached to the petition, the vehicle to which the contested tax relates is covered by the objective incidence of the IUC, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph f) of no. 1 and no. 4 of article 2 of the IUC Code.
21. With regard to subjective incidence, article 3, no. 1, of the aforementioned Code provides, in the wording in force on the date of enforceability of the contested tax: "1 - The passive subjects of the tax are the owners of the vehicles, meaning as such the natural or legal persons, of public or private law, in whose names they are registered."
22. From the above, it follows that the issue to be decided, as far as the illegality of the contested assessments is concerned, is based exclusively on determining whether the vessel in question, by virtue of being registered in the RINM-MAR in the name of the Claimant, benefits from the exemption granted to companies established in the Madeira Free Zone, as the Claimant claims, or, as the AT contends, such benefit does not contemplate the situation presented.
Position of the Claimant
23. The Claimant raises his request for declaration of illegality of the assessments he contests, arguing in essence that:
a) The recreational vessel of which he is the owner is covered by the incidence of the IUC, but, in accordance with the provision of article 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, in conjunction with article 24, no. 2, of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, there exists a regime of legal equalization of both commercial and recreational vessels between ships registered in the International Register of Ships of Madeira (RINM-MAR) and companies established in the Madeira Free Zone, whereby "the fiscal benefits that are granted to companies are attributed to ships registered in RINM-MAR."
b) To recreational vessels registered in RINM-MAR, considered vessels flying the Portuguese flag, the regime of the Madeira Free Zone applies, pursuant to Decree-Law no. 192/2003, of 22/08, in accordance with article 6, no. 1 of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, by cross-reference to article 1 of that statute.
c) Therefore, in conclusion, the Claimant understands that since IUC is a local tax, for which the port of registration is relevant, recreational vessels registered in RINM-MAR benefit from exemption from this tax, regardless of the place of residence in national territory or abroad of the respective owners.
24. Reinforcing the reasoning set out in the petition, the Claimant, in the arguments section, came to clarify that: "It is, therefore, the application of a special regime that was intended to stop the process of ships leaving the main register for flags of convenience, as follows from the statement of reasons that we have been transcribing from DL 96/89, of 28 March, and in relation to which the legislator also took into account the relocation of national shipowners.
Applying this regime, although devised for merchant shipping, the truth is that pursuant to article 1 of DL 192/2003, of 22 August, it extends, without any legal limitation, to recreational vessels, as is the present case.
Thus, it should be understood that IUC falls within article 7 paragraph d) of DL 165/86, of 26 June."
Position of the Respondent
25. Arguing for the dismissal of the request for declaration of legality and annulment of the questioned IUC assessments, the Respondent alleges, in summary, that:
a) The vessel is covered by the incidence of the IUC, by virtue of the incidence rule contained in paragraph f) of no. 1 of article 2 of the IUC Code.
b) The fiscal regime provided for the Madeira Free Zone encompasses the provisions of the Tax Benefits Statute, approved by DL 215/89 of 01/07 and the provisions of DL no. 165/86 of 26/06, with different scopes of application.
c) Pursuant to DL no. 165/86 of 26/06, in particular article 7, companies established in the Madeira Free Zone are exempt from local taxes and charges (paragraph d) of article 7), an exemption that extends to recreational vessels, by way of articles 8 and 26 of DL 96/89 of 28/03, by equalization of ships registered in MAR to companies established for tax purposes.
d) However, pursuant to article 3, no. 1 of the IUC Code, the passive subjects of the tax are the owners of registered vehicles as such, and although no. 1 of article 2 of Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29/06, determines that IUC is administered by the current Tax and Customs Authority, no. 1 of article 3 of the same Law, the revenue from IUC relating, among others, to category F vehicles, is the property of the municipality of residence of the passive subject.
e) Thus, the property rights referred to in article 3, no. 1 of Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29/06, is only the property of the revenue, and therefore IUC is a tax of state nature, with the State constituting the active subject of the tax legal relationship.
f) In the interpretation of paragraph d) of article 7 of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, the reference to "local taxes and charges" refers to charges created within the framework of the General Regime of Local Authority Charges and taxes created within the framework of the tax competencies of municipalities, provided for in article 15 of the Financial Regime of Local Authorities and Intermunicipal Entities.
g) Therefore, IUC does not fall within the concept of "local taxes and charges" contained in paragraph d) of article 7 of Decree-Law no. 165/86 of 26/06.
26. The Respondent thus concludes that "the vessel identified above is subject to IUC, pursuant to paragraph f) of no. 1 of article 2 of the IUC Code, inasmuch as no rule exists that suspends or prevents taxation."
Applicable Legislation
27. As follows from the above-mentioned positions, the issues raised in the scope of the present proceedings relate exclusively to the meaning and scope of the system of tax incentives granted to the Madeira Free Zone contained in article 7, paragraph d), of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, applicable to ships registered in RINM-MAR, by virtue of the provisions of articles 8 and 24 of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03.
28. With relevance for the analysis of the scope and extent of the tax incentives contained in the legislation referred to, it is important to also determine the concept of "local taxes" and, in particular, to know whether IUC corresponds to such classification.
Scope and Extent of the Tax Incentive
29. In accordance with the provisions of article 7, paragraph d), of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, companies established in the Madeira Free Zone enjoy exemption from local taxes and charges.
30. With regard to RINM-MAR, article 8, no. 1, of Decree-Law no. 96/90, of 28/03, as amended by Decree-Law no. 393/93, of 23/11, provides that: "1 - Corporations and their forms of representation, as well as individual establishments of limited liability that pursue the activities of the maritime transport industry or recreational shipping in the Autonomous Region of Madeira shall be part of the activity developed within the institutional framework of the free zone and as such shall integrate that zone for all purposes, provided that they request it and are duly licensed." In accordance with article 24 of the same statute, "1- The fiscal regime applicable to the entities referred to in article 8 is that provided for in the legislation relating to the Madeira free zone. 2 - The regime referred to in the preceding number also applies to ships registered in MAR."
31. Through Decree-Law no. 192/2003, of 22/08, the registration of recreational vessels in the International Register of Ships of Madeira was specifically regulated, with the respective regulation providing, in its article 1, that "The acts of registration and other acts relating to recreational vessels in the International Register of Ships of Madeira, abbreviated as MAR, are subject to the regime established in Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28 March, as amended by Decree-Laws no. 393/93, of 23 November, 5/97, of 9 January, 331/99, of 20 August, and 248/2002, of 8 November, and in this regulation."
Concept of Local Taxes
32. It being true that, as the Respondent alleges, "no rule exists that suspends or prevents taxation" of the IUC to which recreational vessels meeting the requirements of the respective incidence rule are subject, the question arises as to whether this tax constitutes a "local tax" capable of falling within the scope of the exemption provided for in article 7, no. 1, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, as the Claimant argues in the reasoning supporting the request for arbitral pronouncement.
33. This matter has already been addressed in previous arbitral decisions, notably in proceedings 665/2017-T, which this Tribunal fully adopts without reservation:
5.3. In accordance with article 2, no. 1 of Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29 June: "[t]he competence relating to the administration of the tax on vehicles, abbreviated as ISV, and the unique vehicle circulation tax, abbreviated as IUC, falls to the General Directorate of Customs and Special Consumption Duties and the General Directorate of Taxes, respectively."
5.4. Furthermore, in accordance with article 3, no. 1 of the aforementioned Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29 June, "[t]he revenue generated by IUC relating to vehicles in categories A, E, F and G is the property of the municipality of residence of the passive subject or equivalent, as well as 70% of the component relating to engine displacement relating to vehicles in category B, unless such revenue is relating to vehicles subject to long-term rental or operational leasing, in which case it shall be allocated to the municipality of residence of the respective user".
5.5. It is important to highlight, in this respect, that the ownership of IUC revenue belongs to the municipality of residence of the passive subject and not to the municipality or region where the vessel is registered.
5.6. In this sense, also, article 14, paragraph c) of Law no. 73/2013, of 3 September 2013, which establishes the Financial Regime of Local Authorities and Intermunicipal Entities, under the heading "municipal revenues", provides that "the following constitute revenues of the municipalities: c) The share of the product of the unique vehicle circulation tax that corresponds to municipalities, in accordance with article 3 of Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29 June".
5.7. In any case, in accordance with article 24, no. 1 of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28 March, "[t]he fiscal regime applicable to the entities referred to in article 8 is that provided for in the legislation relating to the Madeira free zone", adding no. 2 of the same article that the "regime referred to in the preceding number also applies to ships registered in MAR".
5.8. In accordance with article 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26 June: "[c]ompanies established in the Madeira free zone enjoy the following fiscal benefits: Exemption from local taxes and charges;"
5.9. Now, without prejudice to the fact that article 3, no. 1, paragraph b) of the LGT distinguishes between taxes that are "state, regional and local", the aforementioned statute does not present a distinctive criterion that allows identification of each of the three.
5.10. In this way, doctrine has been developing these concepts without, however, being unanimous as to the criterion that allows distinction, in particular, between a state tax and a local tax.
5.11. The criteria most frequently pointed out by doctrine are the criterion of administration of the tax and the criterion of ownership of the revenue.
5.12. In this sense, Suzana Tavares da Silva refers that "this distinction is rooted in the active ownership of the tax legal relationship and through it it is intended to highlight that not all tax revenue is intended for 'the general coffers of the State'. Indeed, alongside state taxes, those for which ownership of the tax credit belongs to the State, stand out, downstream of the State, regional and municipal taxes, and upstream of this, European and international taxes.
Doctrine is not unanimous as to the cut to be given to this classification. Some authors emphasize that the fact that the operations of assessment, calculation and collection of taxes are carried out by the services of the Tax Administration (eg article 113 of CIMI), notwithstanding the municipal ownership of the respective revenue (eg article 1 of CIMI), is not sufficient to speak of a municipal tax, which can only happen when the municipalities choose to promote the respective calculation and collection in accordance with article 13/2 of the Local Finance Law (Casalta Nabais: 2012, pp. 78). Other authors, meanwhile, focus only on the active subject of the tax relationship, regardless of who carries out its management, thus tending to classify the tax as municipal, provided that the law establishes an entity other than the State as the active subject of the respective tax relationship." (Susana Tavares da Silva, Direito Fiscal – Teoria Geral, Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 2013, p. 43).
5.13. Note that Portuguese legislation also seems to present some fluctuation as to the criteria used.
5.14. See, for example, that while Regional Legislative Decree no. 27/2008/M, of 3 July, which "approves the adaptation of national tax legislation to the Autonomous Region of Madeira" only qualifies as "Local taxes" the Municipal Property Tax and the Municipal Tax on Onerous Transmission of Real Property (see Section II of the aforementioned Regional Legislative Decree), the State Budget includes IUC in the chapter of local taxes (see the State Budget for 2019, approved by Law no. 71/2018, of 31 December).
34. The meaning of "local taxes" is therefore not univocal. However, with relevance to the situation under analysis, more than attending to the definition in the abstract sense of the expression, it is important to have in mind that, in the specific case of IUC, the revenue generated by this tax is allocated to the municipality of residence of the passive subject and not to that where the vessel is registered.
35. As is emphasized in the arbitral decision previously referred to, which in this segment is also followed:
"5.16. It will not be so much a question of determining whether IUC can be traced back to any concept of local tax (i.e., knowing whether it is a local tax in the abstract), since, in the opinion of this Tribunal, the exemption referred to above has its territorial scope of application limited to cases where there is ownership of the revenue, meaning it does not apply to all taxes that may be traced back to the concept of local taxes in the abstract.
5.17. In other words, the exemption was not established for local taxes in the abstract, but rather requires a connection to a particular revenue of which one is the owner.
5.18. In the specific case, however, the owner of the revenue is the municipality of residence of the passive subject, i.e., the municipality of ..., and not the municipality or region where the vessel is registered, and therefore the Claimant cannot benefit from the exemption.
5.19. As Nuno Sá Gomes writes, giving as an example the fiscal benefits granted to the Free Zones of Madeira and Santa Maria Island, "in harmony with the territorial scope of application of the taxes in which they fall, fiscal benefits have, in parallel, national, continental, regional or local scope." (Nuno Sá Gomes, Teoria Geral dos Benefícios Fiscais, Cadernos de Ciência e Técnica Fiscal, 165, Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Fiscais, 1991, p. 140).
5.20. Indeed, having regard to the integration of article 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26 June, in the national tax legal system, this is the interpretation that seems most consistent to us."
36. Also on the meaning and scope of the exemption provided for in article 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06, the decision which is followed in entire agreement highlights the markedly territorial character of the provision in the following terms:
5.22. Indeed, it follows, from the outset, from the preamble to the statute that "the Government proposed and obtained from the Assembly of the Republic legislative authorization to revise the fiscal benefits to be granted to companies that establish themselves in the free zones already created, which is now done, in conjunction with other benefits whose attribution aims at the same purposes.
In the design of the incentive scheme now established, account was already taken of the economic backwardness of aid for the establishment of companies defined in terms compatible with the provision of no. 3 of article 92 of the Treaty of Rome and aimed at regional development and improving the conditions of competition for companies that establish themselves in the Madeira free zone (...)" (underlines and bold text ours),
5.23. It also follows from the operative part of the aforementioned legal statute, from which it follows immediately from article 1 that "for the promotion and attraction of investments in the Madeira Free Zone, fiscal and financial benefits of regional scope may be granted, (...)" (bold text and underlines ours).
5.24. Similarly, in accordance with article 2, "[t]he incentives to be granted to promote and attract investments in the Madeira free zone shall be defined by the Regional Government, taking into account, in particular, its contribution to the economic and social development of the Region and the resources available to the Regional Government for this purpose". (bold text and underlines ours).
37. The exemption to which the aforementioned rule refers applies, in its precise terms, to companies established in the Madeira Free Zone, with article 24, no. 1, of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, establishing that the fiscal regime applicable to entities that pursue the activity of the maritime transport industry or recreational shipping in the Autonomous Region of Madeira is that provided for in the legislation relating to the Madeira Free Zone. The same article further adds, in its no. 2, that "The regime referred to in the preceding number also applies to ships registered in MAR."
38. The fiscal exemptions contained in the provisions that have been referred to presuppose, from the outset, that their respective beneficiaries are companies, individual or collective, and that they conduct an economic activity, with article 8, no. 1, of the aforementioned statute, as amended by Decree-Law no. 393/93, of 23/11, establishing that "(..). the activities of the maritime transport industry or recreational shipping in the Autonomous Region of Madeira shall be part of the activity developed within the institutional framework of the free zone and as such shall integrate that zone for all purposes, provided that they request it and are duly licensed."
39. In addition to the business aspect highlighted, it constitutes a legal requirement for access to fiscal incentives, in accordance with article 11 of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, that companies which do not have their registered office in the Autonomous Region of Madeira must "... locally have a branch, office, agency or any other form of representation, equipped with all the powers necessary to, before the authorities of the State or the Autonomous Region of Madeira and before third parties, ensure full representation, with choice of domicile for this purpose." This requirement, reaffirmed in article 17, nos. 2, paragraph b) and 3, of the same statute, is also applicable to natural persons.
40. From the legislation referred to, it may thus be extracted that the fiscal incentives granted to companies established in the Madeira Free Zone and vessels registered therein are intended for persons, natural or legal, who conduct economic activities.
41. Indeed, as set out in the preamble to Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, the creation of the International Register of Ships of Madeira was intended to "function as an element of dynamization of the national merchant marine and as a factor in stemming the transfer of Portuguese ships to flags of convenience, will also be an important factor in the economic dynamization of the Autonomous Region of Madeira and of the Country, both by creating employment in this sector, in which the Portuguese have historically shown special aptitudes, and by allowing the growth of activities directly and indirectly related to MAR, both in the economic field and in education and research."
42. The fact that recreational vessels not devoted to commercial purposes may be registered in RINM-MAR does not imply that, for this reason alone, they may benefit from the regime of fiscal incentives provided for in articles 7, paragraph d) of Decree-Law no. 165/86, of 26/06 and 24 of Decree-Law no. 96/89, of 28/03, accessible to companies that, within the framework of the Madeira Free Zone, conduct economic activities.
43. Recreational vessels registered in MAR that are devoted to business activities – commercial purposes – are not included within the scope of incidence of the IUC. For their part, recreational vessels for private use, in the sense of article 2, no. 4, of the IUC Code, may benefit from the exemptions provided for in article 1 of the Regulation approved by Decree-Law no. 192/2003, of 22/08, relating to "acts of registration and other acts" relating to them, but are not included within its scope any taxes that may be due, whether state, regional or local, in particular IUC, by absence of express legal provision.
44. In these terms, it is concluded that, in the situation at hand, the legal requirements for the exemption invoked by the Claimant do not exist, and therefore the request for declaration of illegality of the contested assessments must necessarily be dismissed, which assessments must remain in the legal order as they are not affected by illegality.
45. The request for declaration of illegality of the contested acts being judged without merit, consideration of the request is prejudiced in respect to the recognition of the right to compensatory interest.
VI. Decision
Pursuant to the terms and for the reasons stated above, the arbitral tribunal decides:
- The request for arbitral pronouncement is judged to be entirely without merit, and the contested IUC assessments are maintained.
- The Claimant is condemned to pay the costs.
Value of the proceedings - In accordance with the provisions of article 315, no. 2, of the CPC and 97-A, no. 1, paragraph a), of the CPPT and 3, no. 2, of the Regulation of Costs in Tax Arbitration Proceedings, the value of the proceedings is fixed at € 5,792.97.
Costs - In accordance with article 22, no. 4, of the RJAT, the amount of costs is fixed at € 612.00, in accordance with Table I attached to the Regulation of Costs in Tax Arbitration Proceedings.
Lisbon, 13 July 2019,
The Arbitrator,
Álvaro Caneira
Frequently Asked Questions
Automatically Created