{"id":4563,"date":"2026-03-16T10:38:16","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T13:38:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/stj-rules-the-treasury-may-not-refuse-surety-bonds-or-bank-guarantees-in-tax-enforcement-proceedings\/"},"modified":"2026-03-16T10:54:28","modified_gmt":"2026-03-16T13:54:28","slug":"stj-rules-the-treasury-may-not-refuse-surety-bonds-or-bank-guarantees-in-tax-enforcement-proceedings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/stj-rules-the-treasury-may-not-refuse-surety-bonds-or-bank-guarantees-in-tax-enforcement-proceedings\/","title":{"rendered":"STJ rules: the Treasury may not refuse surety bonds or bank guarantees in tax enforcement proceedings"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"551\" src=\"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-fazenda-nao-pode-recusar-seguro-garantia-1024x551.jpg\" alt=\"STJ rules: the Treasury may not refuse surety bonds or bank guarantees in tax enforcement proceedings\" class=\"wp-image-4560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-fazenda-nao-pode-recusar-seguro-garantia-1024x551.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-fazenda-nao-pode-recusar-seguro-garantia-300x162.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-fazenda-nao-pode-recusar-seguro-garantia-768x413.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-fazenda-nao-pode-recusar-seguro-garantia.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The Superior Court of Justice (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.stj.jus.br\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">STJ<\/a>) has consolidated a fundamental precedent for companies facing tax enforcement proceedings. By means of Repetitive Theme No. 1,385, the First Panel ruled that the Public Treasury may not refuse the provision of a bank guarantee or surety bond on the grounds that cash ranks first in the statutory order of priority for attachment. <\/h5>\n\n<p><strong>What changes for taxpayers?<\/strong><strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n<p>In the past, it was common for public authorities to reject contractual guarantees and demand the immediate deposit of cash amounts, which often undermined companies\u2019 cash flow and overall financial health.<\/p>\n\n<p>With the new precedent, it is established that:<\/p>\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Right to choose<\/strong>: The defendant has the right to select the type of security that is least burdensome to it.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Legal certainty<\/strong>: Guarantees and surety bonds are deemed suitable and reliable instruments, securing the claim without freezing the company\u2019s working capital.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Mandatory application<\/strong>: As a repetitive appeal precedent, the decision is binding on judges and courts nationwide, expediting the acceptance of these forms of security.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n<p><strong>Strategic advantages<\/strong><strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n<p>The use of surety bonds or bank guarantees allows the company to <strong>fully exercise its right of defense<\/strong> and obtain a Positive Certificate with the Effects of a Negative Certificate (CPEN), without the need for the immediate disbursement of the full amount of the tax debt.<\/p>\n\n<p>A decis\u00e3o permite que as empresas discutam d\u00e9bitos fiscais sem sacrificar sua liquidez imediata.<\/p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/practice-areas-tax\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Tax Law | CPDMA Team<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has consolidated a fundamental precedent for companies facing tax enforcement proceedings. By means of Repetitive Theme No. 1,385, the First Panel ruled that the Public Treasury may not refuse the provision of a bank guarantee or surety bond on the grounds that cash ranks first in the statutory order [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4562,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4563","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4563"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4563\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4568,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4563\/revisions\/4568"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4562"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}