On Tuesday (31), PGFN/MF Ordinance No. 2,044/2024 was published , regulating the offer and acceptance of guarantee insurance by the PGFN, both for debts registered and for those pending registration in the Union’s Active Debt or the FGTS, which in this case removes the need to file a lawsuit to propose the advance offer of guarantee, which can be presented through the REGULARIZE portal:
“Art. 1 Guarantee insurance, within the scope of the Attorney General’s Office of the National Treasury, aims to guarantee the payment of debts registered and debts about to be registered as an active debt of the Union or of the Severance Indemnity Fund – FGTS, in tax enforcement or in administrative negotiation, in the form and under the conditions established in this Ordinance.
§ Paragraph 1 This Ordinance applies to cases of advance offer of tax enforcement guarantee insurance for the guarantee of:
- I – debts registered as an active debt of the Federal Government and the FGTS; and
- II – debts not registered as active debts of the Federal Government and the FGTS when there is an intention of judicial discussion by the policyholder of the guarantee insurance, after the administrative litigation has been closed by final judgment, or by waiver of discussions in the administrative sphere under the terms of art. 38, sole paragraph, of Law No. 6.830, of September 22, 1980, subject to the provisions of art. 3, § 2.”
We would point out that the conditions for accepting guarantee insurance are set out in Article 3 of the ordinance, which may vary depending on when the guarantee is offered.
In addition, the ordinance removed the need to add 30% to the guaranteed amount, in the form of articles 835, paragraph 2, and 848, p.u., of CPC-15, and allowed the acceptance of guarantee insurance for less than the total amount of the debt. However, in this case the guarantee will not suspend the enforceability of the tax debt, so it will not enable the issuance of a tax clearance certificate (CPD-EN) and will not suspend the determination of expropriatory acts (seizure, etc.).
Conclusion
Finally, we would like to point out that the ordinance will apply to insurance guarantees and pending policy renewal applications, which could benefit taxpayers in some cases.
