A criminalização do inadimplemento do ICMS - uma análise da constitucionalidade do art. 2 o , II da lei no 8.137/1990 à luz das decisões dos tribunais superiores
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2023-06
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Rodrigues, Giovanna Batista
Orientador
Lima, Fernando Rister de Sousa
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O presente trabalho de conclusão de curso tem como objetivo a realização de uma
análise da constitucionalidade do art. 2 o , II da Lei n o 8.137/1990 à luz do HC 399.109/SC do
Superior Tribunal de Justiça - STJ e do RHC 163.334/SC do Supremo Tribunal Federal - STF,
verificando suas potenciais dissonâncias com a Constituição Federal de 1988 por meio da
metodologia exploratória qualitativa, notadamente pelo método indutivo, realizado pelo
procedimento de estudo de caso . O resultado da pesquisa comprovou que o art. 2 o , II da Lei n o
8.137/1990 é inconstitucional posto ser a prisão do contribuinte inadimplente de tributo de
caráter civil, e não penal, de modo a conflitar com Pacto de San José da Costa Rica e, por
conseguinte, com a Constituição Federal de 1988. Além disso, a alteração do tipo penal pelo
STF nos autos do recurso interposto infringe o Princípio da Estrita Legalidade do direito
penal. A decisão proferida no HC 399.109/SC pelo STJ atuou de forma mais condizente com
a Constituição Federal quando comparada à decisão que gerou a tese firmada pelo STF no
RHC 163.334/SC, contudo, ante à própria inconstitucionalidade da norma jurídica, a decisão
proferida no referido Habeas Corpus também é inconstitucional, de modo a concluir que não
tão somente as decisões dos Tribunais Superiores seguiram em desconformidade com a
Constituição Federal, mas também, o próprio artigo de lei que criminaliza o inadimplemento
do ICMS declarado e não pago é incongruente com o Diploma Magno de 1988.
The present work of conclusion of course has as proposal the accomplishment of an analysis of the constitutionality of the art. 2nd, II of Law nº 8.137/1990 in the light of HC 399.109/SC and RHC 163.334/SC, verifying their potential dissonances with the Federal Constitution of 1988 through the qualitative exploratory methodology, notably by the inductive method, carried out by the study procedure of case. Indeed, the result of the research proved that art. 2, II of Law 8.137/1990 is unconstitutional since it is the arrest of the taxpayer in default of the civil tax, and not criminal, in order to conflict with the Pact of San José da Costa and, consequently, the Federal Constitution of 1988. In addition, the alteration of the criminal type by the STF in the records of the appeal infringes the Principle of Strict Legality of criminal law. The decision rendered in HC 399.109/SC by the STJ acted in a more consistent manner with the Federal Constitution when compared to the decision that generated the thesis signed by the STF in RHC 163.334/SC, however, given the very unconstitutionality of the legal rule, the decision rendered in referred to Habeas Corpus is also unconstitutional, in order to conclude that not only did the decisions of the Superior Courts follow in disagreement with the Federal Constitution, but also, the very article of law that criminalizes the default of declared and unpaid ICMS is inconsistent with the Constitution of 1988.
The present work of conclusion of course has as proposal the accomplishment of an analysis of the constitutionality of the art. 2nd, II of Law nº 8.137/1990 in the light of HC 399.109/SC and RHC 163.334/SC, verifying their potential dissonances with the Federal Constitution of 1988 through the qualitative exploratory methodology, notably by the inductive method, carried out by the study procedure of case. Indeed, the result of the research proved that art. 2, II of Law 8.137/1990 is unconstitutional since it is the arrest of the taxpayer in default of the civil tax, and not criminal, in order to conflict with the Pact of San José da Costa and, consequently, the Federal Constitution of 1988. In addition, the alteration of the criminal type by the STF in the records of the appeal infringes the Principle of Strict Legality of criminal law. The decision rendered in HC 399.109/SC by the STJ acted in a more consistent manner with the Federal Constitution when compared to the decision that generated the thesis signed by the STF in RHC 163.334/SC, however, given the very unconstitutionality of the legal rule, the decision rendered in referred to Habeas Corpus is also unconstitutional, in order to conclude that not only did the decisions of the Superior Courts follow in disagreement with the Federal Constitution, but also, the very article of law that criminalizes the default of declared and unpaid ICMS is inconsistent with the Constitution of 1988.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
(in)constitucionalidade , Constituição Federal , crimes , ordem tributária , (in)constitutionality , Federal Constitution , tax order