Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
Federal Court in Anápolis Applies Understanding of STF and Confirms That Retirement of Resident Abroad Is Exempt from Income Tax
The decision of the Supreme Federal Court, established in Topic 1,174, redefined how Income Tax applies to retirements paid to Brazilians residing abroad. This change, therefore, directly guided the ruling of a case examined in 2025 by the Special Civil and Criminal Court Adjunct to the 2nd Federal Court of Anápolis (GO). In this context, the controversy involved the income tax on the benefit of a woman living outside the country who received one minimum wage, an amount that is already within the exemption range. The plaintiff sought in court the declaration of non-exigibility of the tax and the refund of amounts withheld since April 2020, which led the responsible judge to fully apply the thesis defined by the Supreme Court.
How the Debate on Income Tax Exemption Originated
The understanding of the STF, consolidated when the Court analyzed Topic 1,174, declared the 25% rate applied to retirements and pensions of residents abroad unconstitutional. This definition, therefore, eliminated the legal basis that supported the charge. Connecting the case to the precedent, the woman filed a lawsuit against the Union seeking recognition of the exemption and the return of the withheld amounts. The Union, in turn, partially acknowledged the request due to the STF thesis but argued that the refund should follow the five-year prescription, in addition to adjustment by the Selic rate, according to its argument in the process.
What the Plaintiff Requested and What the Union Contested
The plaintiff presented statements proving the receipt of one minimum wage, emphasizing that she would already be exempt from paying income tax even before the STF decision. Thus, she requested the suspension of withholding and the refund of amounts paid since 2020. Although the Union acknowledged the unconstitutionality of the rate, it pointed out that any potential refund should comply with legal limits and updating criteria. Furthermore, it argued that part of the amounts would be subject to prescription.
-
The new Civil Code could revolutionize marriages in Brazil with “express divorce” and changes that could exclude spouses from inheritance.
-
Banco do Brasil sues famous influencer for million-dollar debt and intensifies debate on delinquency, risks of seizure, and direct impact on Gkay’s credibility.
-
The Senate approves a bill that criminalizes misogyny, hatred, or aversion towards women, and includes the crime in the Racism Law with a penalty of up to 5 years.
-
Chamber Approves Bill That Allows Pepper Spray for Women Over 16 and Imposes Strict Rules for Purchase, Possession, and Use as Self-Defense
Decision of Judge Sócrates Leão Vieira
Judge Sócrates Leão Vieira, when ruling on the case, fully applied the understanding of the Supreme Court. Thus, he concluded that the tax requirement was unconstitutional and, therefore, ordered that the withholding be ceased immediately. Additionally, he recognized that, since the plaintiff receives one minimum wage, the exemption range itself made any annual tax assessment unnecessary. Therefore, the judge considered all acts of the Union unfounded, declaring the non-exigibility of the charge and determining the full refund of the amounts withheld. The decision emphasized that the case exactly fit what had been decided by the STF in Topic 1,174.
What the Sentence Represents for Retirees Living Abroad
The sentence reinforces, based on the STF precedent, that:
• The 25% rate is unconstitutional when applied to retirees residing abroad.
• Those receiving one minimum wage remain automatically exempt, with no need for annual adjustment.
• Amounts improperly withheld must be refunded, when proven in the records, as occurred in the analyzed case.
The process, registered under number 1001790-30.2025.4.01.3502, involved the participation of attorney Jefferson Maleski, who represented the retiree and led the request until its final decision.
Relevance and Practical Impact of the Decision
The decision represents a direct outcome of the thesis established by the STF and reinforces the need for coherence between tax legislation and constitutional jurisprudence. Furthermore, it ensures that Brazilian retirees residing abroad are not subjected to charges incompatible with the current interpretation of the Supreme Court. In this way, the case demonstrates how the uniform application of Topic 1,174 guarantees transparency, predictability, and security for taxpayers receiving benefits while living abroad, especially those who, like the plaintiff, have income limited to minimum wage.
-
-
2 pessoas reagiram a isso.