The Federal Court of Amazonas has ruled that deposits linked to disputes over federal tax credits should continue to be adjusted using the Selic rate. This decision, in this specific case, rejected the application of one of the changes introduced this year by Law 14.973/2024, which replaced the Selic rate with the IPCA as the index for updating judicial and administrative deposits.
The decision was issued by Judge Marília Gurgel Rocha de Paiva, of the 9th Federal Civil Court of the Judicial Section of Amazonas, who granted a writ of mandamus filed by a data processing component industry. The controversy revolves around Article 37, item II, of Law 14.973/2024 and Article 8, item II, of MF Ordinance 1.430/2025, which regulated the matter. The regulations have been in effect since January 1, 2026.
According to Rocha de Paiva, replacing the Selic rate with the IPCA breaks the parity between the updating of federal tax credits, which continue to be corrected by the Selic rate, and the remuneration of judicial deposits used to guarantee these same credits. Paiva stated that the judicial deposit has the nature of a guarantee of the tax credit and, therefore, must follow the same updating criterion applied to the debt in question.
“The guarantee must follow the logic of updating the debt itself that it aims to secure. Otherwise, a distortion is created: the tax credit continues to evolve according to one index, while the guarantee that replaces or suspends it begins to be replenished by another, at a lower level, with potential harm to the taxpayer and undue advantage to the Public Treasury,” he said.
The decision points out that allowing the Federal Government to collect its credits using the Selic rate, but returning deposits only adjusted for inflation (IPCA), creates an "imbalance incompatible with the constitutional principles governing taxation, due process, and administrative action."
According to Marcelo Annunziata, a partner in the tax area of Demarest Advogados, which represents the company, the main aspect of the decision is the non-application of a law that came into effect this year. For the lawyer, the practical difference is significant, since the Selic rate currently far exceeds the IPCA (Brazilian inflation index).
“The impact of this decision is enormous. When a taxpayer wins a lawsuit, they receive the amount with interest, and the Selic rate is in line with the rate normally practiced by the market. With the IPCA adjustment, the difference in what will be received is very large: today the IPCA is around 51%, while the Selic rate is 14.5%,” he adds.
The decision was made in case number 1007187-69.2026.4.01.3200. The Union can still appeal, and the decision can be reviewed by the Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region (TRF1).
Action in the Supreme Court
Law 14.973/2024 is also being challenged by the National Confederation of Services (CNS), the National Confederation of Transport (CNT), and the National Confederation of Health (CNSaúde) before the Supreme Federal Court (STF) through ADI 7905. The case will be analyzed by the justices from August 7th to 18th in the virtual plenary session.
The entities argue that the asymmetrical treatment between the tax authorities and the taxpayer regarding the monetary updating of amounts deposited in court or administratively constitutes a "violation of the constitutional principle of equality." Furthermore, they cite as precedents ADIs 1933, 4357, and 4425, and RE 870947 to support the claim that the Supreme Federal Court has already recognized the importance of parity between the applicable indices in tax relations.
The case is under the jurisdiction of Minister Cristiano Zanin.
Source: JOTA