A text-only copy of RFB NI 2,228 can preserve every paragraph and still lose the expressions that drive the calculation, because the original publication placed six formulas in images. This page reconstructs that baseline in selectable text and connects it to the current close. Article 64 produces Net GloBE Income; Article 63 uses it in the ETR denominator; Article 68 uses it to calculate Excess Profits; Article 67 converts the ETR shortfall into a percentage; and Article 69 produces the jurisdictional CSLL Surtax. Articles 17(3) and 72(II) are separate branches. The 2026 RSGIF update changes an input, not that architecture.
1. What this page solves during a group close
The operating problem is not finding a 15% headline. It is proving how a group moved from consolidated accounts to a Brazilian jurisdictional amount, which elections and safe harbours were considered, how the amount was allocated, and which return or payment used each output.
- Scope: identify the group, fiscal years and EUR 750 million test.
- Calculation: preserve each formula, sign, input and dependency.
- Version: record the six original provisions and the later RSGIF rules.
- Cash: reconcile entity allocation, DCTFWeb, DARF and payment.
- Reporting: keep the Brazilian detailed filing and the OECD GIR separate.
The Brazil Pillar Two overview explains the regime. This page owns the narrower calculation and close intent, while the Portuguese six-formula guide remains the paired local-language operational reference.
2. Who is in scope — and when the Brazilian rule started
Article 4 of Law 15,079/2024 applies the general threshold where annual consolidated revenue is EUR 750 million or more in at least two of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the tested fiscal year. Exactly EUR 750 million is inside the threshold. The group perimeter and special rules must still be checked; Brazilian entity revenue alone does not answer the scope question.
Article 43(II) gives the relevant statutory effect from 1 January 2025, reconciled operationally to fiscal years beginning on or after that date. Before calculating an ETR, the file should identify the Ultimate Parent Entity, consolidated statements, fiscal-year calendar, constituent-entity perimeter and revenue history.
| Gate | Evidence | Failure prevented |
|---|---|---|
| Multinational group | Ownership and consolidation perimeter | Applying the rule to a purely domestic group |
| EUR 750m test | Four-year revenue schedule | Using only current-year or Brazilian revenue |
| Fiscal year | Group calendar and start date | Applying the wrong version or deadline |
| Brazilian population | Entity and PE bridge | Omitting or duplicating a constituent entity |
3. The six image formulas, now in selectable text
The count follows the mathematical expressions published as images in the original RFB NI 2,228/2024 DOU text and preserved official facsimile. Four sit in the main chain; two are special branches.
| Provision | Selectable mathematical content | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Article 17(3) | Allocated Asset Gain in relevant year × (Net Asset Gain of the specific Constituent Entity in Election Year ÷ Net Asset Gain of all specific Constituent Entities in Election Year) | Asset-gain recalculation branch under its election |
| Article 64 | Net GloBE Income = max(0, GloBE Income of all Constituent Entities − GloBE Loss of all Constituent Entities) | Main-chain jurisdictional income |
| Article 67 | CSLL Surtax Percentage = max(0, 15% − Effective Tax Rate) | Main-chain shortfall percentage |
| Article 68 | Excess Profits = max(0, Net GloBE Income − Substance-based Income Exclusion) | Main-chain base after SBIE |
| Article 69 | Jurisdictional CSLL Surtax = max(0, (CSLL Surtax Percentage × Excess Profits) + Additional Adjustment) | Main-chain jurisdictional amount |
| Article 72(II) | (GloBE Income or Loss × 15%) − Adjusted Covered Taxes | Entity-allocation branch in the stated case |
Why Article 63 is essential but not formula number seven
Article 63 writes the ETR ratio in prose: the sum of Adjusted Covered Taxes of Constituent Entities in the jurisdiction divided by jurisdictional Net GloBE Income. It requires Net GloBE Income, does not calculate an ETR where the jurisdiction has a Net GloBE Loss, and rounds the percentage at the fourth decimal place: a fifth decimal below five leaves it unchanged; five or more increases the fourth decimal by one.
The dependency chain
Article 64 feeds both the Article 63 denominator and Article 68. Article 63 feeds Article 67. Articles 67 and 68 feed Article 69. Article 17(3) and Article 72(II) do not become routine extra steps merely because they are in the six-count; each applies in its own factual branch. RSGIF is not a seventh formula.
4. A reproducible BRL example: why 6% becomes BRL 4.8 million
Assume one Brazilian jurisdiction with BRL 100 million of Net GloBE Income, BRL 9 million of Adjusted Covered Taxes and BRL 20 million of SBIE. Assume zero additional adjustment, no RSGIF addition in the BRL 9 million, and no safe-harbour or other fact-specific change.
| Step | Calculation | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Article 63 ETR | BRL 9m ÷ BRL 100m | 9% |
| Article 67 percentage | 15% − 9% | 6% |
| Article 68 Excess Profits | BRL 100m − BRL 20m | BRL 80 million |
| Article 69 CSLL Surtax | 6% × BRL 80m + zero adjustment | BRL 4.8 million |
The amount is not BRL 6 million because Article 68 removes the BRL 20 million SBIE before the percentage is applied. The example is reproducible precisely because its assumptions are explicit. A live model must replace each assumption with an evidenced input and must not set the Article 69 adjustment to zero by habit.
5. Inputs, outputs and the minimum audit trail
A close file should let a reviewer start at a reported or paid amount and trace backward to the source record, entity, period, currency, legal classification and controlled transformation. The reverse path should also work: every source population should reach one output or an explained exclusion.
| Controlled item | Typical owner/source | Legal use | Control question |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constituent-entity GloBE income/loss | Consolidation and entity accounts | Article 64 | Does the entity-to-jurisdiction bridge reconcile? |
| Adjusted Covered Taxes | Tax provision and ledger | Articles 63 and 72(II) | Are current/deferred items classified, timed and reconciled? |
| SBIE | Payroll and fixed-asset register | Article 68 | Are eligibility, location and period documented? |
| Additional adjustment | Controlled tax calculation | Article 69 | Why is it positive, negative or zero? |
| RSGIF election and IFQ | Tax, Legal and incentive ledger | Articles 143-A–K | Does the incentive qualify and how much was used? |
| Substance Limit | Payroll, fixed assets and election register | Article 143-L | Which method applies and are all IFQs aggregated? |
The controlled pack should contain the scope memo, versioned sources, numerator and denominator reconciliations, SBIE support, elections, safe-harbour tests, RSGIF qualification and limit, formula outputs, entity allocation, DCTFWeb/DARF evidence and a mapped — not assumed — bridge to GIR data.
6. Payment, DCTFWeb and the GIR are different tracks
Article 33 of Law 15,079/2024 requires payment by the last business day of the seventh month following the end of the fiscal year. For a fiscal year ended 31 December 2025, that date was 31 July 2026.
The RFB guidance of 8 July 2026 places the assessment in DCTFWeb for the sixth subsequent month. For that December year-end, the assessment period is June 2026 and the DCTFWeb/payment due date is 31 July 2026. The same guidance says the detailed Brazilian information obligation for the first year would be required not before 30 June 2027. That is an announced floor, not a final filing deadline.
The September 2026 OECD GIR is separate from domestic tax declaration and payment and its revised version applies to fiscal years commencing on or after 31 December 2025. GIR is not filed through the Brazilian ECF, and it is not the still-to-be-finalised detailed domestic obligation.
7. How RFB NI 2,342 changes the ETR input — not the six formulas
RFB Normative Instruction 2,342/2026 was published on 18 September 2026 and is effective from publication. It updates the OECD reference-document cut-off to January 2026, refines the treaty-based permanent-establishment definition, extends the transition safe harbour to fiscal years beginning by 31 December 2027 and ending by 30 June 2029, and inserts Articles 143-A to 143-L on RSGIF. Within that transitional safe harbour, the simplified ETR threshold is 16% for fiscal years beginning in 2025 and 17% for those beginning in 2026 or 2027; those are transition tests, not new general nominal rates.
The RSGIF decision chain
For fiscal years beginning on or after 1 January 2026, Article 143-A permits a one-year election for a qualifying substance-based tax incentive. The permitted RSGIF addition is the lower of the IFQ amount used in the fiscal year and the jurisdictional Substance Limit. The incentive must pass Articles 143-B to 143-J; its commercial label cannot establish qualification.
| Provision | Decision |
|---|---|
| Article 143-B | Expense- or production-based incentive that reduces a Covered Tax, subject to stated exclusions |
| Articles 143-C–E | Direct expense link, ceiling and treatment of temporary versus qualifying permanent differences |
| Articles 143-F–G | Physical production quantity in the granting jurisdiction; value-based production does not qualify |
| Articles 143-H–I | Incurred expense or completed production; a future commitment is insufficient |
| Article 143-J | Separate one-year election for qualifying refundable credits that also meet IFQ conditions |
| Article 143-K | Amount used follows credit, enhanced-deduction, exemption or reduced-rate form |
Article 143-L sets the default Substance Limit at 5.5% of the greater of eligible payroll costs and eligible tangible-asset depreciation plus depletion. A five-year election can instead use 1% of the carrying value of eligible tangible assets, excluding land and other non-depreciable assets. The limit applies to all IFQs jointly and is not the Article 68 SBIE.
Where RSGIF enters the chain
Adjusted Covered Taxes before RSGIF + permitted RSGIF addition = Adjusted Covered Taxes used in Article 63. The adjustment is upstream of Article 63. The resulting ETR then feeds Article 67 while Articles 68 and 69 remain unchanged. RSGIF is not a seventh formula, does not guarantee zero liability and does not amend Articles 17(3), 64, 67, 68, 69 or 72(II).
8. Who owns each close decision
A workable RACI separates rule ownership from data production and filing execution. Group Tax owns global scope, elections and consistency; Brazil Tax owns the local legal version, surtax and payment; Controllership owns the book-to-GloBE bridge; Tax Technology controls mappings; Treasury executes payment; Legal supports incentive and election qualification.
| Decision | Responsible | Accountable | Close evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group scope and fiscal year | Group Tax | Global Head of Tax | Scope memo and four-year revenue test |
| Book-to-GloBE and covered taxes | Controller + Tax Technology | Brazil Tax lead | Reconciled bridge and data lineage |
| RSGIF eligibility and limit | Brazil Tax + Legal | Global Head of Tax | IFQ memo, election and lower-of calculation |
| SBIE and Article 69 output | Brazil Tax | Brazil Tax lead | Payroll/assets file and formula review |
| DCTFWeb, DARF and payment | Tax Operations + Treasury | Brazil Tax lead | Return, receipt, bank evidence and tie-out |
| GIR mapping | Group Tax + Data | Global Head of Tax | Versioned data-point mapping |
Where one person performs several roles, the responsibilities still need separate evidence. The close should show who prepared, reviewed and approved each legal decision and numerical output. Entity scope and intragroup facts should also reconcile to the Brazil transfer-pricing documentation and Brazil Master File where relevant, without merging their legal tests into GloBE.
9. Review questions before sign-off
A robust review tries to falsify the model. Legal review asks whether the correct version, scope rule, election and date were used. Accounting review tests the GloBE mappings and signs. Data review reconciles populations, currencies and transformations. Filing review ties the approved output to DCTFWeb, payment and reporting.
| Review lens | Question that must have an answer |
|---|---|
| Legal | Do the cited article, fiscal year, election and safe-harbour version apply to these facts? |
| Accounting | Can Net GloBE Income and Adjusted Covered Taxes be reconciled by entity and jurisdiction? |
| Data | Did every source row enter once, with controlled FX, sign and version? |
| RSGIF | Did each incentive qualify, was the amount used measured correctly and was the joint limit applied? |
| Calculation | Do Articles 63, 64 and 67–69 reproduce independently, including rounding and adjustment? |
| Filing | Do entity allocation, DCTFWeb, DARF, domestic data and GIR mapping tie to the signed output? |
A zero arithmetic difference is not enough if the population or legal classification is wrong. Conversely, a legal memo without a reproducible data bridge cannot support the amount paid.
10. Primary sources and limits of this guide
The legal hierarchy for this workstream is: Law 15,079/2024 for scope, charge, payment and reporting authority; the original official facsimile of RFB NI 2,228/2024 for the six image formulas; the official RFB text of NI 2,342/2026 for RSGIF and the September 2026 update; and OECD materials for the international GIR context.
The six image expressions were transcribed from an official original-publication record preserved in the TaxUp research archive; both original DOU endpoints returned errors when retried on 23 September 2026. The current NI 2,342 full text was opened in the RFB Normas system and reconciled with its DOU publication. That act did not amend the six formula provisions and did not turn the “not before 30 June 2027” guidance into a final detailed-filing deadline.
This guide explains a controlled calculation architecture; it does not calculate a group liability without its perimeter, accounts, tax mappings, elections, safe-harbour facts, incentives, payroll, assets and fiscal-year calendar. The international tax team can structure the Brazilian workstream and its evidence with the group close.
References and official sources
Turn the Brazilian CSLL Surtax into a controlled close
TaxUp maps the six formulas, legal versions, RSGIF file, data lineage, entity allocation, payment and reporting evidence with Group Tax and Brazil controllership.
Structure the Brazil closeFrequently asked questions
How many formulas are in the original RFB NI 2,228/2024 publication?
Does the CSLL Surtax equal 15% minus the Brazilian nominal rate?
Is exactly EUR 750 million outside the general scope threshold?
Why does the example produce BRL 4.8 million rather than BRL 6 million?
When is Article 72(II) used?
What was the payment date for a fiscal year ended 31 December 2025?
Is the GIR filed through the Brazilian ECF?
What is RSGIF and when can it affect the ETR?
Did RFB NI 2,342/2026 change the six formulas?
Bring this analysis to your company’s case
30 minutes with a senior consultant. We map your specific tax scenario and point out the technical path forward — no obligation.
Book a diagnostic