Post by xyz3500 on Feb 22, 2024 6:22:21 GMT
The advantage obtained by employees with the exercise of Stock Option Plans does not constitute remuneration, but eventual gain. Therefore, these values must be excluded from the calculation basis of the social security contribution for which the company is responsible and contributions due to third parties. In view of the understanding, the 1st Panel of the Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region maintained the extinction of a tax execution filed by the National Treasury against an internet access provider in Curitiba. The tax debt had been calculated based on the gains arising from a Stock Option Plan established by the company for the benefit of its employees.
The rapporteur of the case in the court, federal judge called Alexandre Rossato da Silva Ávila, said that the advantages received by employees, at the time of exercising the Stock Purchase Option, cannot be attributed the usual salary or remuneration nature for the purpose of incidence of the employer social security contribution. For Rossato, this is not a monetary amount usually paid by the employer, but an eventual gain that may be received, completely unrelated to the salary, intended to Israel Mobile Number List reward employees. "The very volatile nature of the shares is what confers the legal identity of eventual gain, represented by the difference between the amount paid by the employee and the market value on the date of the option, a gain that is excluded, by the law itself, from the contribution salary and , therefore, not part of the remuneration", he explained in the vote.
In addition to the reduction in the number of employees during the period of crisis at both the headquarters and the branch, the documentary evidence contemporaneous with the facts demonstrates the existence of tax foreclosures of significant amounts, the assumption of a loan of an equally high value in agreement with BRDE for the payment of debt of more than twelve million reais and approximately forty labor claims", he explained. Gebran highlighted the testimony of the person in charge of the financial sector, which corroborated the defense's thesis, showing that, faced with difficulties, the company prioritized paying employees, electricity and suppliers, to avoid closing its doors. "The situation highlighted, therefore, demonstrates that it is credible that there were abnormal conditions supported by the business company and that deprived it of the possibility of honoring all debts, requiring recognition of the exclusion of culpability and the unenforceability of different conduct.
The rapporteur of the case in the court, federal judge called Alexandre Rossato da Silva Ávila, said that the advantages received by employees, at the time of exercising the Stock Purchase Option, cannot be attributed the usual salary or remuneration nature for the purpose of incidence of the employer social security contribution. For Rossato, this is not a monetary amount usually paid by the employer, but an eventual gain that may be received, completely unrelated to the salary, intended to Israel Mobile Number List reward employees. "The very volatile nature of the shares is what confers the legal identity of eventual gain, represented by the difference between the amount paid by the employee and the market value on the date of the option, a gain that is excluded, by the law itself, from the contribution salary and , therefore, not part of the remuneration", he explained in the vote.
In addition to the reduction in the number of employees during the period of crisis at both the headquarters and the branch, the documentary evidence contemporaneous with the facts demonstrates the existence of tax foreclosures of significant amounts, the assumption of a loan of an equally high value in agreement with BRDE for the payment of debt of more than twelve million reais and approximately forty labor claims", he explained. Gebran highlighted the testimony of the person in charge of the financial sector, which corroborated the defense's thesis, showing that, faced with difficulties, the company prioritized paying employees, electricity and suppliers, to avoid closing its doors. "The situation highlighted, therefore, demonstrates that it is credible that there were abnormal conditions supported by the business company and that deprived it of the possibility of honoring all debts, requiring recognition of the exclusion of culpability and the unenforceability of different conduct.