Riggs National Corporation & Subsidiaries (f.k.a. Riggs National Bank and Subsidiaries) - Page 89

                                       - 89 -                                         
          The act of state doctrine applies to acts such as constitutional            
          amendments, statutes, decrees, and proclamations, and in certain            
          circumstances, to physical acts.  1 Restatement, supra sec. 443,            
          cmt. i & reporter's note 3.                                                 
               In the instant case, the March 1984 Brazilian IRS ruling               
          issued to the Central Bank was a private ruling.  Petitioner's              
          experts did not elaborate on whether the Central Bank, under                
          Brazilian law, was legally compelled to accept and follow the               
          ruling.  Thus, it appears that the Central Bank possibly could have         
          disputed that it was subject  to  withholding  tax  on  its                 
          restructuring debt interest remittances during the relending                
          periods of the DFA's and CGA's, and sought review in the Brazilian          
          courts.  In light of favorable existing Brazilian Supreme Court             
          precedents, such as the Parana II decision, in all substantial              
          likelihood, any effort by the Central Bank to dispute the ruling by         
          resorting to the Brazilian judicial system would have been                  
          successful, particularly since even petitioner's own experts                
          generally acknowledged that there was no such legal doctrine as the         
          borrowers-to-be theory under Brazilian law.  The borrowers-to-be            
          theory itself contravened a number of rules of Brazilian taxation.          
          The record further reflects that although Brazil was under a                
          military regime until about 1985, the Brazilian courts still                
          functioned during this period of military rule.43  Moreover, the            

          43        Although petitioner's expert da Silva testified that              
          SRF 368 was issued in June 1980, when Brazil was under a military           
                                                             (continued...)           



Page:  Previous  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011