Cécile Verdeaux teve seu mandato como Diretora Jurídica da Belgalux – Câmara de Comércio e Indústria Belgo-Luxemburguesa-Brasileira no Brasil, renovado para o período 2026–2028.
Para o GTLawyers é motivo de orgulho ter Cécile à frente da instituição, tão importante no fomento de negócios e no estreitamento das relações entre Brasil, Bélgica e Luxemburgo, garantindo excelência jurídica no comércio internacional e no apoio a investidores estrangeiros.
A Belgalux é um pilar fundamental para o networking e o desenvolvimento de parcerias estratégicas, especialmente em um cenário de grandes diálogos entre o Mercosul e a União Europeia.
La signature de l’accord de libre-échange entre l’Union européenne et le Mercosur marque un tournant décisif pour les échanges transatlantiques. Ce traité de nouvelle génération redéfinit le cadre réglementaire pour l’accès au marché brésilien.
La Chambre de Commerce du Brésil en France (CCBF), en collaboration avec le cabinet GTLawyers, vous invite à un webinaire exclusif pour décrypter les enjeux juridiques et opérationnels de ce nouvel environnement d’affaires.
Au programme de cette analyse experte:
- Libéralisation commerciale: analyse du calendrier de suppression progressive des droits de douane.
- Conformité et régulation: appréhender les barrières non-tarifaires et les normes de sécurité des produits.
- Sécurité juridique: quelles garanties pour les investisseurs et les exportateurs français face à la complexité du droit brésilien ?
- Stratégie d’implantation: pourquoi le Brésil devient une destination prioritaire pour les PME.
Intervenants:
Pour éclairer ces thématiques, nous aurons l’honneur de recevoir :
- Daniel Damasio Borges, Professeur associé à la Faculté de droit de l’Université de São Paulo (USP).
- Maxime Frémon, Avocat au Barreau, spécialisé en droit des affaires et conseil stratégique.
📅 Mardi 12 mai
🕗 13h30 (heure française)
📍 Événement en ligne (webinaire)
In recent years, international trade has been marked by significant instability, with political and economic shifts abruptly altering the rules of the commercial landscape. The United States’ protectionist and aggressive tariff policy, together with the impact of geopolitical conflicts on commercial transactions – such as the war in Ukraine and the ongoing conflict in Iran – provide a clear illustration of this dynamic.
This instability naturally affects the ability of business operators engaged in international activities to plan their operations and make their investments with a minimum level of security over a longer time horizon.
It is precisely in this context that the importance of the recent signing, in January 2026, of the Partnership Agreement between Mercosur and the European Union becomes evident.
This importance stems from the creation of a large economic area: more than 700 million people and potential consumers, and the elimination of customs duties on over 90% of intra bloc trade. Moreover, the agreement provides for a stable framework for economic relations, as both tariff and non tariff measures must comply with the rules set out therein. Likewise, in the field of services, the opening of the government procurement sector has been established.
New trade flows are expected to be created, encouraging the development of global value chains within the bloc. In the industrial sector, in which Mercosur countries are more protectionist, many of the high customs barriers will be eliminated, notably in the automotive, machinery and pharmaceutical sectors. Investments in mining, including in minerals that are critical for the energy transition, will be protected against certain interventionist measures, such as specific types of export taxes.
Likewise, opportunities for access to the European market expand, especially for agricultural products produced in the Mercosur region. There will be a clear trend toward increased European participation in Mercosur’s export market. In addition to these opportunities comes the challenge of adopting production methods that are more consistent with European requirements, which are generally more stringent in sanitary and environmental matters. On this point, it is important to note that the agreement does not eliminate these requirements, it merely frames them and obliges them to comply with the agreed provisions.
The Partnership Agreement therefore stands out as a contrasting element in the current context. In a more protectionist world, it reduces and even eliminates many trade barriers. In an unstable world, it provides greater legal certainty by establishing rules that States must observe in their economic regulations. It will now be up to business operators to make the most of this broad path that opens before them, and to lawyers to guide them along the safest routes to follow.
GTLawyers is pleased to invite you to our cocktail reception, in celebration of the relationships we have built together over the years.

It will be an opportunity to share experiences, strengthen our ties, and jointly celebrate the projects that bring us together.
Investing in Brazil: opportunities in the financial market and legal and tax aspects for international investors
The Legal Committee of the France‑Brazil Chamber of Commerce (CCIFB‑SP) will hold an in‑person meeting on May 7, dedicated to French and Brazilian executives and entrepreneurs interested in gaining a deeper understanding of Brazil’s investment environment.
The event will provide a comprehensive overview of:
- How the Brazilian financial market operates
- The main instruments available to foreign investors
- Legal, tax, and regulatory issues that influence decision‑making
- Best practices for structuring investments securely and efficiently
The session will be moderated by Tamy Tanzilli, Founding Partner of GTLawyers and Deputy Leader of the CCIFB Legal Committee, who will share her experience in cross‑border transactions and advising French companies in Brazil.
Confirmed speakers:
- Gunnar Viana, CEO – TRAAD
- Estevão Gross, Partner of the Tax Department – GTLawyers
- Leonardo Cappa, Économiste‑en‑chef – TRAAD
- + two additional market guests
May 7 (Thursday)
9 a.m. to 11 a.m. (welcome coffee and networking at 8:30 a.m.)
CCIFB-SP – Alameda Itu, 852 – 19º andar – Jardins
If you have any questions: secretarianacional@ccfb.com.br
Register via the link: Evento presencial | Comissão Legal: Investir no Brasil – oportunidades no mercado financeiro e aspe…
This week, we held our monthly GTLawyers team meeting — an important moment to reinforce internal alignment, share updates on ongoing projects, and ensure everyone is moving in the same direction.
We also celebrated the team’s birthdays for the month, strengthening our sense of unity and recognizing our people.
Initiatives like this help keep the team connected, enhance collaboration, and directly contribute to the quality of our work. We move forward with focus, organization, and a strong commitment to consistent results.
Vamos em frente!
Last week, we organized an internal donation drive in support of the Salvation Army.
We collected clothes and other essential items, which have now been distributed to people in vulnerable situations.
A big thank you to everyone on the team who took part!
Small actions, when done together, can make a real difference.
Yesterday, the Chamber of Commerce France Brazil hosted a Business Luncheon discussing the key issues expected to shape the business environment in Brazil in the coming years.
GTLawyers was represented by our founding partner, Tamy Tanzilli.
The event featured Gilbert Kassab and brought together member companies to discuss topics such as the 2026 elections, the Mercosur–European Union agreement, and the country’s economic outlook.
The discussion provided a valuable platform for direct exchange between the public and private sectors. For us, being part of these conversations and closely following developments in Brazil remains essential.
Companies operating under the non-cumulative PIS and COFINS regime face a relevant strategic issue, constantly renewed by the uncertainties of Brazil’s tax landscape: how to utilize credits related to these contributions that were not recognized in their original period?
The non-cumulative PIS/COFINS regime, established by Laws No. 10,637/2002 and 10,833/2003, allows companies to recognize credits calculated on the acquisition of various goods and services, such as those used as inputs in production or service provision, which may be offset against PIS/COFINS liabilities for the relevant period. The legislation is clear in providing that credits not utilized in a given month may be carried forward to subsequent periods (Article 3, §4). This provision is explicit and leaves no room for ambiguity — the right to the credit is independent of the moment it is effectively used, provided that the five-year statute of limitations is observed.
Recently, however, the Brazilian Federal Revenue Service (Receita Federal) issued Consultation Ruling No. 8.003/2026, reinforcing prior interpretations according to which the late recognition of PIS/COFINS credits requires the amendment of tax filings, particularly the EFD-Contribuições, for each month in which the PIS/COFINS calculation was affected. This position aligns with prior rulings, notably Cosit No. 355/2017 and Cosit No. 90/2025. Such rulings reflect the prevailing administrative interpretation and serve as guidance for potential tax audits conducted by the Federal Revenue Service.
However, not all recent administrative decisions converge toward the requirement to amend tax filings. The Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (CARF), through Decision No. 3301-014.399 of the 3rd Chamber, issued on February 12, 2025, provided relevant arguments in the opposite direction. In that case, the taxpayer argued that, provided the certainty and liquidity of the credits were demonstrated, as well as their non-utilization in prior periods, the formal amendment of EFD/DCTF filings would not be required. The reporting judge upheld this position based on mathematical reasoning and principles of substantive law: the right to the credit is established by law and is not subordinated to merely procedural or ancillary obligations where the credit is demonstrably valid.
According to this decision, the recognition of late PIS/COFINS credits — provided they are not time-barred, have not been used in prior periods, and comply with proportional allocation rules — would be possible regardless of formal amendment of EFD filings, subject to proper evidence of the credit’s validity.
This understanding, however, is not settled within CARF, whose case law has, in the majority of decisions, required the amendment of ancillary obligations. Under this line of reasoning, the utilization of credits is intrinsically conditioned upon compliance with the relevant ancillary obligations, such as the EFD-Contribuições and DCTF. The rationale is that amendment is essential to preserve the consistency of the accrual accounting regime and the effectiveness of tax oversight, preventing the tax authorities from being confronted with extemporaneous information that has not been properly formalized.
This position emphasizes the accrual accounting principle: credits must be recorded in the period in which they arise, and late recognition without amendment would create accounting and administrative inconsistencies detrimental to tax supervision and legal certainty.
It should also be noted that Constitutional Amendment No. 132/2023 introduced the principles of simplicity and transparency into Brazil’s tax system. In light of this constitutional framework, which must guide both the drafting and application of tax laws, it could be argued that tax authorities should recognize the primacy of these principles over the complex, burdensome, and costly requirement to amend filings as a condition for validating late PIS/COFINS credits.
In any event, under the current scenario, the failure to amend ancillary obligations for the recognition of late PIS/COFINS credits may expose taxpayers to the risk of challenge. In such cases, however, robust legal arguments may be available in defense — particularly where the validity, liquidity, and prior non-utilization of the credits can be demonstrated.
Therefore, companies are advised to carefully assess their situation and seek specialized legal counsel in order to mitigate risks and define the most appropriate strategy for the utilization of late PIS/COFINS credits.
For further information on the subject, we remain at your disposal.
GTLawyers – Tax Team
The growing importance of the Data Protection Officer (DPO) within corporate environments highlights the need to ensure the independence and impartiality of this role . Because the DPO performs advisory, monitoring, and reporting functions — including on sensitive matters that may diverge from the organization’s interests — the proper performance of these duties requires the ability to act freely and without undue restriction.
In this context, identifying potential conflicts of interest involving the DPO is essential. A conflict of interest arises when personal, professional, or institutional interests interfere with a person’s ability to act objectively and impartially. In the case of the DPO, such a conflict may occur when the officer simultaneously holds positions that influence decisions regarding the purposes or means of personal data processing, or when their activities are subordinated to organizational interests that are incompatible with their duty to advise, monitor, and report independently.
Incompatibility of Functions
Guidance issued by the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) indicates that certain roles are incompatible with the function of a DPO. These include executive management positions and roles in human resources, information technology, marketing, or finance, as these functions involve strategic decision-making that may place the company’s commercial interests in opposition to the fundamental right to personal data protection.
For example, a DPO who also works in marketing may hesitate to report security incidents out of concern for potential reputational damage to the company. Situations like this highlight the importance of the principle of independence, which is expressly established under the GDPR and reflected in the guidance of the Brazilian National Data Protection Authority (ANPD).
Although Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (LGPD) does not explicitly establish the principle of independence, Resolution CD/ANPD No. 18/2024 reinforces the requirement that the DPO must perform their duties impartially and without conflicts of interest. Under this resolution, the DPO is responsible for declaring any situation that may give rise to a conflict of interest, while the data controller must prevent and remedy such situations, including by (i) refraining from appointing the professional, (ii) adopting measures to eliminate the risk, or (iii) replacing the DPO if the conflict persists.
Best Practices to Prevent Conflicts of Interest
Adopting best practices is essential to ensure the independence and impartiality of the DPO. Among the key measures recommended by the GDPR and Resolution CD/ANPD No. 18/2024 are: (i) ensuring hierarchical separation between the DPO and the departments responsible for decisions regarding data processing; (ii) establishing direct reporting lines to senior management; and (iii) providing adequate human, technological, and financial resources to enable the DPO to properly perform their duties.
Additional measures include formalizing internal policies that clearly regulate the accumulation of functions and require periodic declarations of absence of conflicts of interest, creating privacy committees, ensuring ongoing training, and establishing secure communication channels with senior management.
Practical Cases and International Sanctions
Conflicts of interest may lead to significant sanctions within the European Union. In Belgium, for instance, a company was fined €50,000 under Article 38(6) of the GDPR after authorities found that the DPO held conflicting roles by simultaneously serving as Director of Audit, Risk, and Compliance. A similar case occurred in Germany, where a company was fined €525,000 because the same individual acted as both DPO and director of two service provider companies within the same corporate group. In February 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) examined Case C-453/21, which addressed whether holding the positions of both chair of the workers’ council and DPO constituted a conflict of interest. The Court concluded that such overlap could undermine the independence of the DPO and left it to national courts to assess the specific circumstances of each case. In Brazil, although no specific precedents have yet been established, a violation resulting from a conflict of interest may lead to the application of the sanctions provided for in Article 52 of the LGPD.
Conclusion
The role of the DPO is strategic for corporate governance and for fostering a culture of privacy, going beyond a mere legal requirement. To perform their duties with independence, integrity, and effectiveness, it is essential to understand the obligations established under the GDPR, the LGPD, and Resolution No. 18/2024. Building robust privacy governance depends not only on legal rules but also on an organizational culture that values transparency and prevents conflicts of interest, while ensuring the technical autonomy of the DPO.
GTLawyers provides specialized support in the implementation and improvement of privacy programs, including ongoing legal assistance to DPOs and DPO as a Service solutions. Its services aim to ensure regulatory compliance, promote best governance practices, and mitigate risks, while preserving the independence and credibility of the DPO as a key pillar of institutional trust.






