Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already an integral part of key sectors such as healthcare, transportation, finance, and services. Given its transformative potential — but also the risks associated with unchecked use — Brazil is moving forward with a robust regulatory proposal: Bill No. 2338/2023, currently under review in the Chamber of Deputies.
The bill’s core aim is to establish clear rules and fundamental principles for the development and use of AI in the country. It is guided by values such as human dignity, privacy, equality, and transparency, encouraging responsible and ethical innovation. It also seeks to ensure essential user rights, including the explainability of automated decisions, the possibility of contesting them, and continuous human oversight in sensitive processes.
A central feature of the bill is the risk-based classification of AI systems. Two main categories are proposed:
- Excessive risk, which includes uses that are outright prohibited — such as systems that exploit individual vulnerabilities, manipulate behavior subliminally, or enforce unfair social scoring mechanisms, particularly in governmental contexts.
- High risk, covering applications with direct impact on fundamental rights in areas such as health, justice, security, credit, employment, education, critical infrastructure, autonomous vehicles, and biometric identification. For these, the bill mandates stringent governance measures, including public algorithmic impact assessments, safety testing, and human oversight mechanisms.
Another key pillar of the proposal is governance and accountability. All AI systems, regardless of risk level, must have clear technical documentation, identifiable responsible parties, understandable decision explanations, and strategies to prevent algorithmic discrimination. In high-risk cases, civil liability will be strict — meaning companies can be held liable without proof of fault — with reversal of the burden of proof in favor of the affected party.
As for penalties, the bill establishes fines of up to R$ 50 million or 2% of the infringing group’s revenue, in addition to other sanctions such as warnings, suspension, or permanent bans on system use.
The proposal also provides for the creation of the National AI Regulation and Governance System (SIA), coordinated by Brazil’s National Data Protection Authority (ANPD), and involving regulators, experts, and civil society representatives. This body will be responsible for overseeing implementation, periodically reviewing the rules, and harmonizing their application across industries.
As of July 2025, Bill 2338/2023 is under review by a special committee in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies. Already approved by the Senate, it remains a legislative priority, with ongoing public discussions. Its final approval could represent a turning point in the regulation of artificial intelligence in Brazil.
For companies developing or using AI technologies, this bill represents a strategic milestone: it offers greater legal certainty, aligns Brazil with global regulatory trends (especially the EU’s AI Act), and lays the foundation for a safe and responsible digital transformation.
At GT Lawyers, we are closely monitoring the developments of PL 2338/2023 and are ready to support your company with regulatory compliance, AI governance best practices, and legal risk mitigation strategies.
We are pleased to announce that GTLawyers has received double recognition in the Análise Regional – Advocacia 2025 publication, which highlights the most admired law firms and professionals across Brazil.
On one hand, the firm was named among the most admired law firms in the region, a recognition we are proud of and which reflects the consistent, collaborative, and committed work we carry out alongside our clients and partners.
On the other hand, six of our partners were individually recognized for their dedication and professional excellence: Tamy Tanzilli, Andrés Berridi, Anne-Catherine Brunschwig, Estevão Gross, Carolina Moresco and Diogo Tabosa .
We are sincerely grateful to our clients, colleagues, and partners for their continued trust.
Provisional Measure No. 1.303, published on June 11, 2025, is part of the government’s announced fiscal adjustment plan. It brings significant changes to the taxation of financial investments and virtual assets, as well as other amendments to Brazilian tax legislation. These measures aim to redesign the capital taxation structure, with an impact on various segments of the financial and investment markets.
The provisional measure introduces various provisions that may be considered a full reform of financial market and capital market taxation. Key measures include:
- Securities currently exempt from Income Tax (LCI, LCA, CRI, CRA, CPR, LIG, LCD, incentivized debentures): Starting January 1, 2026, such securities will be subject to a 5% income tax rate for individuals on new issuances or renegotiations. Losses from these securities may not be offset in the Annual Adjustment Declaration (DAA). terão alíquota de IR de 5% para pessoas físicas a partir de 1º de janeiro de 2026, para novas emissões ou renegociações. As perdas com esses títulos não poderão ser compensadas na Declaração de Ajuste Anual (DAA);
- Fixed Income Investments (CDBs, Treasury Bonds, Debentures): Replacement of the progressive tax bracket (22.5% for up to 180 days; 15% for over 720 days) with a single rate of 17.5%, regardless of the investment period.
- Fixed Income Funds, Mixed Funds, ETFs: The regressive rates will be replaced by a flat 17.5% rate, maintaining the taxation under the so-called “come-cotas” system.
- Stocks and Equity Funds: Replacement of the 15% tax rate for regular operations and 20% for day trades with a unified rate of 17.5%. Additionally, the tax rate for Interest on Equity (JCP) will increase from 15% to 20%.
- Cryptocurrencies and Digital Assets: Replacement of the progressive table (15%-22.5%) on gains above BRL 35,000/month with a flat 17.5% rate for all operations, with allowance for loss offsetting.
- Real Estate Funds (FIIs) and Fiagros: End of the exemption on dividends under certain conditions (exchange trading, number of investors), which will now be taxed at 5%. The 20% rate on capital gains will also be replaced with a flat 17.5% rate.
- Infrastructure Funds (FI-Infra): Termination of exemptions on dividends and capital gains, to be taxed like FIIs and Fiagros.
Provisional Measure No. 1.303/2025 unifies and simplifies income tax rates on investments, raises taxation on incomes previously exempted, creates a more transparent system, but eliminates advantages that favored certain assets solely due to favorable tax treatment.
If the MP is converted into law, its practical effects will start in 2026 and only apply to assets issued or negotiated after that date, respecting acquired rights for existing stock.
Additionally, the MP aligns CSLL (Social Contribution on Net Profit) rates for the financial sector. According to Article 62 of the MP, which modifies Law No. 7.689/1988, payment institutions (including many fintechs) that previously benefited from a reduced 9% rate will now be taxed at 15%.
An important point is that the MP broadens the circumstances under which a tax offset declaration will be deemed invalid, barring the use of:
- (i) credits based on non-existent collection documents;
- (ii) PIS/Cofins credits unrelated to economic activity.
Moreover, the MP increases taxation on Interest on Equity (JCP). Article 63 of the MP, which amends Law No. 9.249/1995, establishes that JCP will be subject to withholding tax (IRRF) at a 20% rate. The rate will apply upon payment or credit to the recipient.
Finally, the MP establishes an 18% contribution on Gross Gaming Revenue (GGR) (i.e., net revenue of betting operators, after deducting prizes paid to winners and income tax). This contribution will be collected monthly, with 6% allocated to social security, particularly healthcare initiatives.
We remain available for any additional clarifications.
Published in the Federal Official Gazette on September 22, 2022, Law 14,451/2022 replaces the wording of articles 1,061 and 1,076 of the Civil Code on topics related to the Resolution of Partners in Limited Liability Companies. Although the publication has already taken place, the Law takes effect 30 days after publication.
The Law was enacted with the purpose of giving more dynamism to decision-making within the scope of limited liability companies, reducing the quorums of approval of the partners provided for in the Civil Code for the deliberation and approval of certain matters, as highlighted below:
- Appointment of non-partner administrator: The wording of art. 1061 of the Civil Code, as amended, establishes that the approval of two-thirds of the partners while the capital stock is not paid in and a simple majority after the payment is made . In the current context, the unanimous approval of the partners is required, respectively, while the capital has not been paid in yet and of two thirds of partners after the capital is duly paid in.
- Amendment of articles of association, incorporation, merger or dissolution of the company or termination of its shutdown status: These matters, provided for in art. 1,076 of the Civil Code, depend, in the current scenario, on approval by ¾ (three quarters) of the partners. After Law 14.551/2022, the resolution of such matters will depend on approval by a simple majority of the partners.
The changes resulting from Law 14.451/2022 make the resolutions in the scope of limited liability companies more flexible, thus, improving the legal routine of the companies.
Therefore, as of October 22, 2022, companies that wish to make their approval quorums more flexible will be able to change their respective corporate documents
Thiago Timko Buschinelli
Isabella Lourenço Medina
On July 18th, 2022, Decree No. 11,129/2022 came into force, replacing the Decree No. 8,420/2015 which was regulating the Brazilian Anticorruption Law (Law No. 12,846/2013), which disposes about the administrative and civil liability of legal entities for the practice of corruption acts against the public administration, national or foreign.
Within the several amendments included in the new Decree, we mention below some relevant points for the business community:
The first one, refers to the Integrity Programs establishing that in addition to the implementation, the program must be monitored to ensure a strong and effective governance and ensure the maintenance of a culture of integrity. Therefore, it is not enough to implement the Program, but the company must also effectively manage and monitor it.
Secondly, the Decree emphasizes the importance of prevention as a pillar of governance, which is also reflected in several provisions, such as (i) the need to allocate resources to structure the program and a pre-approved budget from top management; and, (ii) the requirement of due diligence before hiring suppliers, service contractors, intermediary agents, brokers, consultants; sales representatives, and others; as well as, prior to entering into sponsorships and donations.
Third, the Decree provides for the sharing of legal entity data, granting more powers to governmental agencies in the preliminary investigation phase, enabling them to request tax and classified information to the legal entity, even before the beginning of the Administrative Liability Process ("PAR"), in order to investigate the alleged damaging act committed.
A fourth point to highlight is the increased weight given by the legislator to the implementation and maintenance of an integrity program within companies, as a factor that may allow for a reduction of the fine imposed in case of a violation. Under the new regulations, a company that has an effective program in place prior to the violation will be eligible for a reduction of the fine of up to 5% (five percent) of its total amount.
It is important to remember that for the calculation of the fine, the consolidation of the total gross revenues of all the companies in the economic group is taken into consideration.
In conclusion, although the implementation of an Integrity Program is not yet mandatory, through this new regulation, the Brazilian legislator creates mechanisms that can benefit companies that previously have taken this initiative, and it also increase the pressure on the companies to adopt anti-corruption prevention mechanisms.
Suellen Vargas Lopes
Anne-Catherine Brunschwig
Toda a atividade empresarial realizada por intermédio de uma pessoa jurídica requer algum tipo de financiamento de suas atividades. Em diversas situações, esse financiamento (ou capitalização) da sociedade empresarial tem origem em seus próprios sócios, que disponibilizam seus próprios recursos a ela por meio de operações privadas, entre as quais se destacam o mútuo e o aporte de capital (capital social).
O mútuo, como dispõe a legislação vigente, comporta a pactuação de uma remuneração em favor dos credores, de forma que estes podem ter o capital emprestado à sociedade remunerado por meio da cobrança de juros. O capital social, por sua vez, porquanto represente recursos dos sócios em poder da sociedade, não oferecia qualquer tipo de remuneração a estes que não os próprios dividendos, condicionados à lucratividade da atividade empresarial e, consequentemente, de recebimento incerto.
Em 1995, na esteira da desindexação da economia brasileira e fim da correção monetária do balanço, e buscando tornar mais atrativa a alocação de recursos dos sócios na atividade das sociedades empresariais, a Lei nº 9.249 criou a figura dos juros sobre o capital próprio (“JCP”), “permitindo a dedução dos juros pagos aos acionistas, até o limite da variação da Taxa de Juros de Longo prazo – TJLP”[1].
Consoante a legislação citada, os JCP são calculados sobre as contas de patrimônio líquido (exclusivamente capital social, reservas de capital, reservas de lucros, ações em tesouraria e prejuízos acumulados), sendo que sua dedutibilidade, para fins de apuração do lucro real, fica limitada ao maior[2] dos seguintes limites: 50% do dos lucros (antes da dedução dos juros) ou 50% do somatório dos lucros acumulados e reservas de lucros.
Nesse contexto, a Lei nº 9.249 não estabeleceu, de forma explícita, o período específico para o pagamento dos JCP sócios ou acionistas das sociedades empresariais, podendo se concluir que, tendo natureza de uma despesa financeira, a deliberação do seu pagamento poderia ocorrer em períodos subseqüentes aos quais seu cálculo se baseia (pagamento retroativo).
Ocorre que a Receita Federal tem, continuamente, feito oposição a esse entendimento, concluindo que a falta de deliberação de pagamento dos JCP em exercícios anteriores acarretaria a perda do direito de deduzir esses valores na apuração do lucro real. Nessa linha, a Instrução Normativa nº 1700/2017 dispõe, em seu artigo 75, § 4º, que “a dedução dos juros sobre o capital próprio só poderá ser efetuada no ano-calendário a que se referem os limites de que tratam o caput e o inciso I do § 2”.
No mesmo sentido, ao analisar o assunto, a Solução de Consulta Cosit nº 329/2014 assim decidiu:
“ASSUNTO: IMPOSTO SOBRE A RENDA DE PESSOA JURÍDICA – IRPJ. JUROS REMUNERATÓRIOS DO CAPITAL PRÓPRIO. DEDUTIBILIDADE. LIMITE TEMPORAL. REGIME DE COMPETÊNCIA. PATRIMÔNIO LÍQUIDO. EXERCÍCIOS ANTERIORES. IMPOSSIBILIDADE.
Para efeito de apuração do lucro real, é vedada a dedução de juros, a título de remuneração do capital próprio, que tome como base de referência contas do patrimônio líquido relativas a exercícios anteriores ao do seu efetivo reconhecimento como despesa, por desatender ao regime de competência.”
O principal argumento utilizado pelas autoridades da Receita Federal para concluir pela indedutibilidade dos JCP retroativos diz respeito à inobservância do regime de competência: por ser uma despesa, os JCP só poderiam ser deduzidos quando da sua deliberação, e com base apenas nos elementos de cálculo próprios do período de reconhecimento da despesa. Daí que, segundo a Receita Federal, os JCP só são passíveis de dedução como despesa se incidentes sobre o patrimônio líquido do mesmo exercício no qual se fará a dedução, não podendo conter, em seu cálculo, elementos verificados em períodos já encerrados e, logo, estranhos ao período de sua dedução.
Alega, ainda, que, ao contrário dos dividendos, o pagamento dos JCP representa uma faculdade conferida à sociedade que, não sendo exercida até o encerramento do período, estaria preclusa para tal período (limite temporal do direito de deliberar o pagamento dos JCP), não podendo mais se cogitar no pagamento dos juros sobre as contas patrimoniais desse período.
Pelo lado dos contribuintes, argumenta-se, em primeiro lugar, que a limitação temporal não encontra previsão na Lei nº 9.249, razão pela qual não poderia restringir a dedução dos JCP. Mais do que isso, que as condições legais para a dedução dos JCP são o respeito à base de cálculo, a existência de lucros ou reservas de lucros em ao menos 2 vezes o montante dos JCP e a retenção do IRF, pelo que não faria o menor sentido a empresa observar tais requisitos e ser impedida da dedução dos juros por faze-lo em exercício posterior aos elementos da base de cálculo.
Além disso, argumentam os contribuintes que: (i) a correta interpretação do regime competência, para fins de dedução dos JCP, não envolve o seu período de cálculo, mas se refere ao período em que ocorre a deliberação pelo seu pagamento e; (ii) a ausência de manifestação social acerca do pagamento dos JCP em determinado período não implica na sua renúncia, dado que não há autorização legal que conduza a extinção desse direito, sendo vedado ao intérprete concluir que a omissão conduz a extinção do direito.
Vale lembrar que, no distante ano de 2009, a Primeira Turma do Superior Tribunal de Justiça (“STJ”), ao julgar o Recurso Especial nº 1.086.752/PR, concluiu que a legislação permite que a dedução dos JCP ocorra em ano-calendário futuro, quando efetivamente ocorrer a realização do pagamento, não limitando esse direito ao exercício-financeiro em que realizado o lucro da empresa. Essa decisão, embora importante, não foi julgada sob o rito de recurso repetitivo e não pode ser considerada consolidada no âmbito judicial.
Apesar dessa decisão, julgamentos posteriores do CARF mantiveram o entendimento da Receita Federal acerca de indedutibilidade dos JCP de exercícios anteriores, baseando-se na premissa de que não havendo deliberação societária quanto ao pagamento de JCP no respectivo ano-calendário, estaria caracterizada uma suposta renúncia à faculdade de pagar (e deduzir) os JCP, o que impossibilitaria reconhecimento da despesa em exercícios posteriores.
De todo modo, recentemente, no dia 3 de setembro de 2021, a 1ª Turma da Câmara Superior de Recursos Fiscais julgou o primeiro caso em que decidiu pela dedutibilidade dos JCP de exercício anterior. Com efeito, no julgamento do processo administrativo nº 16327.001202/2009-72 (Acórdão 9101-005.757), prevaleceu o voto favorável aos contribuintes em razão do empate nos votos.
Nesse caso, o voto vencedor concluiu que a legislação fiscal impôs apenas requisitos contábeis, societários e quantitativos à dedução dos JCP, sem impor qualquer tipo de limitação temporal quanto aos períodos sobre os quais se pode deliberar pelo pagamento e creditamento dos JCP.
O mesmo resultado foi adotado em 13 de julho de 2022, no julgamento do processo 10980.724267/2016-29, também pela 1ª Turma da Câmara Superior de Recursos Fiscais e também com resultado de empate em favor do contribuinte.
Com isso, o cenário atual da CSRF, em boa parte devido ao fim do voto de qualidade, é bastante favorável à aceitação da dedução retroativa dos JCP, sem limitação temporal quanto ao período de deliberação envolvendo o pagamento desses valores. No entanto, alguns aspectos relacionados a essa dedutibilidade retroativa possivelmente ainda venham a ser debatidos, como a aplicação de prazo decadencial de 5 anos e a situação de empresas que estavam no lucro presumido (ou com prejuízos fiscais) no exercício em relação ao qual os JCP foram calculados.
Como conclusão, entendemos que, de um modo geral, a discussão envolvendo o pagamento de JCP retroativo possui boas chances de êxito nas esferas administrativa e judicial, constituindo importante oportunidade tributária para os contribuintes.
We remain available for any additional clarifications.
Estevão Gross – GT Lawyers
[1] Exposição de motivos – PL 913/1995.
[2] Instrução Normativa 1700, art 75, § 2.
Staphyt, Contract Research Organization in Agribusiness, has just finalized its second acquisition in Brazil with the purchase of Leisor Legalização de Empresas Ltda., the biggest regulatory services company in Brazil. According to Luiz Antonio Jose, Business Director of Staphyt for Brazil “Leisor is the largest acquisition ever for Staphyt in the whole world and that will put us in a leading position in Latin America”.
Leisor was founded by Elaine Silva 20 years ago after spending many years working in the regulatory area for different companies. Since the beginning, Leisor has focused on bringing to the market a team of experts committed to their clients’ expectations but always customizing each strategy according to different scenarios. During the whole process, Leisor values openness, transparency and agility which provides their clients with complete trust in their services. Furthermore, Leisor is the only regulatory services company in Brazil with ISO 9001, ISO14001 and ISO45001 accreditations, which reinforces the commitment of the company to high quality standards in their services and EHS (environment, health and safety) responsibility.
Leisor has a very strong team of 26 employees working for clients not only in Brazil but also in other countries. Leisor portfolio includes a large array of services as:
- Registration of pesticides, biopesticides, fertilizers among other products;
- Technical assistance in regulatory strategic planning;
- In-house/on site training;
- Third-party registration holder, patent protection assessment, audit;
- Record Evaluation (dossier / process), contract support and negotiation with third parties with a focus on registration and stewardship with the focus on product safety awareness program, involving registration, sales, suppliers and end users.
“Together with the company Plurie Soluções Regulatórias we acquired a few months ago, we share the same vision, values and mission as Leisor in Brazil. This is why we are absolutely confident that the integration of Leisor will take Staphyt’s regulatory services in Latam to the next level”, said Luiz., disse Luiz.
*Text submitted by Staphyt on May 23, 2022
