Submitted by Paulo Emílio Derenusson (paulo.derenusson2013@gvmail.br) on 2015-09-17T19:44:39Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Quem paga o tributo.Repercussão econômica e restituição do indébito tributário.Uma conexão possível.Paulo Emílio Derenusson.pdf: 720055 bytes, checksum: 2f621d771c8c3434a02208301bb49933 (MD5) / Rejected by Renata de Souza Nascimento (renata.souza@fgv.br), reason: Prezado Paulo, boa tarde Conforme normas da ABNT para que possamos aceitar seu trabalho junto à biblioteca, é necessário retirar a acentuação do nome GETULIO (na CAPA). Após alterações realize uma nova submissão. Att on 2015-09-17T21:19:53Z (GMT) / Submitted by Paulo Emílio Derenusson (paulo.derenusson2013@gvmail.br) on 2015-09-22T08:47:07Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Quem paga o tributo.Repercussão econômica e restituição do indébito tributário.Uma conexão possível.Paulo Emílio Derenusson.pdf: 720329 bytes, checksum: 769ee673ae05ae5e197fcf156e1a82ec (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Renata de Souza Nascimento (renata.souza@fgv.br) on 2015-09-22T10:37:45Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Quem paga o tributo.Repercussão econômica e restituição do indébito tributário.Uma conexão possível.Paulo Emílio Derenusson.pdf: 720329 bytes, checksum: 769ee673ae05ae5e197fcf156e1a82ec (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-22T13:45:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Quem paga o tributo.Repercussão econômica e restituição do indébito tributário.Uma conexão possível.Paulo Emílio Derenusson.pdf: 720329 bytes, checksum: 769ee673ae05ae5e197fcf156e1a82ec (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-08-18 / A repetição do indébito visa a restituir ao estado anterior aquele que sofreu redução patrimonial de forma indevida, representando uma norma de equidade. Os pedidos de restituição de tributos indevidamente pagos foram objeto de tratamento desigual pela jurisprudência, que influenciou a edição do Código Tributário Nacional ao eleger regramento próprio para os tributos indevidamente pagos, condicionando a legitimidade do contribuinte à prova de que não transferiu o respectivo ônus financeiro ou está autorizado por aquele que recebeu a translação do tributo a pleitear a restituição. A adoção desse racional econômico é motivo de grande controvérsia tanto na doutrina quanto na jurisprudência, em que se pergunta se, ao conectar a legitimidade para pleitear a restituição ao racional econômico da não transferência, a medida de igualdade sofreu uma sensível redução. Com vistas a confirmar essa hipótese, o presente trabalho busca identificar nas raízes históricas da edição do Código Tributário Nacional e na jurisprudência administrativa e judicial da época uma fonte de influência a esse desenho normativo. Passo seguinte, em um diálogo entre o Direito e a Economia, vamos demonstrar como o tributo repercute economicamente, buscando investigar como o contribuinte pode transferir seu encargo a terceiros, quem são estes, sob quais condições isso pode ocorrer e, se pela natureza dos tributos, cabe ou não a translação. Superada essa etapa, com apoio na jurisprudência dos Tribunais Superiores, identificaremos os principais avanços e desafios da jurisprudência sobre a repercussão econômica do tributo e os pedidos de restituição. Após essa investigação, busca-se concluir se a conexão entre a repercussão econômica e a repetição do indébito tributário foi um vetor de equidade ou se esse ponto de intersecção merece ser abolido. / The repetition of overpayment aims to restore the previous state that suffered asset reduction improperly, representing a rule of equity. Applications for refund of unduly paid taxes were subject to unequal treatment in the case law, which influenced the edition of the National Tax Code to elect rule own to unduly paid taxes, affecting the legitimacy of the contributors to the evidence that did not transfer their financial burden or is authorized by the one who received the translation of the tribute to claim the refund. The adoption of this rational economic motive is highly controversial both in doctrine and case law, where it is asked that by linking the legitimacy to claim the refund to the economic rationale of not transfer, the measure of equality suffered a significant reduction. In order to confirm this hypothesis, this study seeks to identify the historical roots of the issue of the tax code and the administrative and judicial jurisprudence of time a source of influence to this normative design. Next step we will demonstrate how the tax affects economically, in a dialogue between law and economics in order to investigate how the taxpayer can transfer their charge to third parties, who are these, what conditions this can occur and, by the nature of taxes, it the translation or not. Overcome this stage, with support in the case law of the Superior Courts will identify the main advances and challenges of case law on the economic impact of the tax and the refund applications. After this research, we seek to complete the connection between the economic impact and the repetition of the tax overpayment was a vector of equity or if the intersection point deserves to be abolished.

La subrogation est un mode privilégié de transmission des créances en assurance maritime. Elle met en présence les principaux acteurs du commerce maritime : l'assuré, l'assureur et le tiers responsable. La subrogation de l'assureur maritime a toujours bénéficié d'une faveur particulière se traduisant par la souplesse des textes juridiques aussi bien pour la subrogation légale qui s'exerce de plein droit par le seul fait de la loi, que pour la subrogation conventionnelle qui procède de la volonté des parties. Cependant, face aux exigences procédurales des juridictions, le contentieux de la subrogation tend davantage vers un durcissement. Dès lors, la question se pose de savoir s'il existe d'autres alternatives pour l'assureur maritime ? Le recours à l'arbitrage constitue une bonne solution au regard de la souplesse des sentences rendues en la matière. Aussi, la jurisprudence judiciaire fait état d'une grande évolution qui porterait les assureurs vers des moyens de droit commun, entre autres, la cession de créance, la répétition de l'indû et l'action "de in rem verso" pour pallier l'incertitude du contentieux de la subrogation. Sur le plan du droit international privé, il n'y a pas de règle spécifique à la subrogation de l'assureur maritime. Mais, les Règlements Rome I et Rome II édictent des mécanismes de conflits de lois applicables aux relations contractuelles et extra contractuelles. Ils désignent la loi qui régit la subrogation / Subrogation is a privileged mode of transmission of claims in marine insurance. It brings together key players in the maritime trade: the insured, the insurer and the third party responsible. Subrogation of the underwriter has always enjoyed a special favor resulting flexibility of legal texts both for subrogation exerted automatically by the fact of the law, for contractual subrogation which proceeds the will of the parties. However, faced with the procedural requirements of the courts, litigation of subrogation tends more toward a cure. Therefore, the question arises of whether if there are other alternatives to the underwriter? The arbitration is a good solution in terms of the flexibility of awards made in the matter. Also, judicial jurisprudence reported a great change that would insurers to ordinary means, among other things, the assignment, the repetition of the undue and action "de in rem verso" to overcome the uncertainty of litigation of subrogation. In terms of private international law, there is no specific rule of subrogation of the marine insurer. However, the Regulations Rome I and Rome II enact conflict mechanisms applicable to contractual and extra-contractual. They designate the law that governs subrogation

La réserve générale interdite de partage entre les membres est un avoir obligatoire, impartageable tout au long de l’existence de la coopérative et sujet à la «dévolution désintéressée en cas de liquidation ou de dissolution». Cette réserve fonctionne comme un levier de soutien au développement de la coopérative et du mouvement coopératif dans son ensemble. Le principe de l’impartageabilité de la réserve est l’interdiction faite à toutes les coopératives du Québec de partager la réserve générale entre tous les membres et l’interdiction de la diminuer, notamment par l’attribution d’une ristourne tout au long de l’existence de la coopérative. En effet, l’impartageabilité de la réserve se fonde sur l’idée que la coopérative n’a pas pour but l’accumulation des capitaux afin de les répartir entre les membres, mais il s’agit de la création d’un capital collectif qui bénéficie à tous les adhérents présents et futurs. Si le concept de l’impartageabilité de la réserve interdit donc le partage de la réserve tout au long de l’existence de la coopérative, cette même interdiction prend le nom de la dévolution désintéressée de l’actif net au moment de la disparition de la coopérative. Cette dévolution désintéressée signifie l’interdiction faite à toutes les coopératives non financières de partager le solde de l’actif lors de la disparition (dissolution ou liquidation) de la coopérative à l’exception des coopératives agricoles qui peuvent décider dans ce cas, de distribuer le solde de l’actif aux membres sans qu’on sache les raisons de cette exception. Par ailleurs, l’impartageabilité de la réserve est considérée comme un simple inconvénient juridique pour les membres et a connu quelques réécritures dans les législations sur les coopératives sans qu’on connaisse vraiment les raisons de ces modifications. L’objectif de notre thèse est d’engager une discussion critique autour du questionnement central suivant : au regard du cadre juridique actuel sur les coopératives, le principe de l’impartageabilité de la réserve doit être maintenu comme tel dans la Loi sur les coopératives, ou être tout simplement supprimé, comme dans la société par actions, où il est inexistant sans que cette suppression ne porte atteinte à la notion juridique de la coopérative? Plus précisément, quel est ce cadre juridique et quels sont les motifs qui peuvent plaider en faveur du maintien ou de la suppression du principe de l’impartageabilité de la réserve? Pour répondre à cette question, cette thèse se divise en deux parties. La première partie explore le cadre juridique des coopératives non financières au Québec en comparaison avec certains concepts juridiques issus d’autres législations. Elle étudie les fondements juridiques sous-jacents à l’impartageabilité de la réserve en droit québécois des coopératives non financières. La deuxième partie réalise une discussion critique autour de l’histoire du principe de l’impartageabilité de la réserve (ch. 3), des différents arguments juridiques disponibles (ch. 4) et d’hypothèses articulées autour des effets concrets disponibles (ch. 5). Elle explore ces dimensions au soutien du maintien ou non de l’impartageabilité de la réserve de la législation actuelle sur les coopératives non financières. Bien que la recherche effectuée conduise à une réponse nuancée, l'ensemble des résultats milite plutôt en faveur du maintien du principe de l'impartageabilité de la réserve. Au préalable, l’observation des fondements juridiques des concepts sous-jacents à l’impartageabilité de la réserve en droit québécois des coopératives non financières a permis de comprendre les concepts sous-jacents à ce principe avant de répondre à la question autour de son maintien ou de sa suppression de la législation actuelle sur les coopératives. La discussion réalisée a permis de souligner l’importance d’une réalité de base assez évidente : ce principe permet de préserver la réserve, utile au développement de la coopérative et du mouvement coopératif dans son ensemble. De plus, ce principe de l’impartageabilité de la réserve s’inscrit dans le cadre de la vocation sociale de la coopérative, qui n’a pas pour but la maximisation du profit pécuniaire. L’impartageabilité de la réserve s’inscrit également dans le cadre de la cohérence du droit québécois des coopératives avec la notion de coopérative telle que définie par le mouvement coopératif québécois et l’ACI tout en répondant aux finalités historiques d’équité entre les générations et de solidarité. Enfin, même si la discussion des arguments tirés des illustrations de données comptables et de quelques entretiens réalisés avec certains membres actifs du mouvement coopératif ne permet pas de mener à toute conclusion ferme, il ressort que l’impartageabilité de la réserve ne freinerait pas la tendance à la hausse des investissements et du chiffre d’affaires des coopératives non financières. Cette interdiction constituerait même un mécanisme d’autofinancement de la coopérative et un symbole de solidarité. / Forbidden general reserve sharing among members is mandatory to have, indivisible throughout the existence of the cooperative and subject to the "disinterested distribution upon liquidation or dissolution". The reserve functions as a support lever for the development of the cooperative and the cooperative movement as a whole. The principle of nondivisibility of the reserve is the prohibition to all cooperatives in Quebec to share the general reserve of all members and the prohibition of the decline, including the allocation of any rebate along the existence of the cooperative. Indeed, the nondivisibility of the reserve is based on the idea that the cooperative is not to the accumulation of capital in order to distribute them among members, but it is the creation of a collective capital that benefits all current and future members. If the concept of nondivisibility reserve therefore prohibits the sharing of reserve throughout the existence of the cooperative, the same prohibition takes the name of the disinterested distribution of net assets at the time of the disappearance of the cooperative. This disinterested distribution is in turn the ban on all non-financial cooperatives to share the remaining assets in the disappearance (dissolution or liquidation) of the cooperative except agricultural cooperatives that can decide in this case, distribute the remaining assets to members without knowing the reasons for the exception. Moreover, the nondivisibility of the reserve is considered a mere legal disadvantage for members and has had some rewrites in co-operative legislation without knowing either the reasons for these changes. The aim of our thesis is to engage a critical discussion around the following central question: given the current legal framework on cooperatives, the principle of nondivisibility the reserve must be maintained as such in the Cooperatives Act, or simply be deleted, as in the corporation, where it is nonexistent without this deletion does not affect the legal concept of the cooperative? Specifically, what is the legal framework and what are the motives which may plead in favor of maintaining or deletion of the principle of nondivisibility reserve? To answer this question, this thesis is divided into two parts. The first part explores the legal framework for non-financial cooperatives in Québec compared with certain legal concepts from other legislation. It examines the legal basis underlying the nondivisibility the Quebec law reserves of non-financial cooperatives. The second part makes a critical discussion around the history of the principle of nondivisibility Reserve (ch. 3), different legal arguments available (ch. 4) and assumptions based around concrete effects available (ch. 5). She exploire these dimensions to support maintaining or not the nondivisibility Reserve current legislation on non-financial cooperatives. Although the research lead to a nuanced response, the overall results rather militates in favor of maintaining the principle of nondivisibility reserve. Previously, the observation of the legal foundations of the underlying concepts in nondivisibility the Quebec law reserves of non-financial cooperatives helped to understand the concepts underlying this principle before answering the question about its maintenance or suppression of current legislation on cooperatives. The discussion made it possible to highlight the importance of a fairly obvious basic reality: this principle allows to preserve the reserve, useful for the development of the cooperative and the cooperative movement as a whole. Moreover, this principle of nondivisibility of the reserve part of the social mission of the cooperative, which is not intended maximizing monetary profit. The nondivisibility Reserve also part of the consistency of Quebec law cooperatives with the concept of cooperatives as defined by the Quebec cooperative movement and the ICA while addressing the historical purposes of fairness between generations and solidarity. Finally, while discussing the arguments of accounting data and illustrations of some interviews with some active members of the cooperative movement does not lead to any firm conclusion, it appears that the nondivisibility the reserve does not dampen the trend rising investment and sales of non-financial cooperatives. This prohibition even be a self-financing mechanism of the cooperative and a symbol of solidarity.