Extraordinary panel upholds NCM 3824.90.39 for an additive with silica and removes ICMS from the PIS and Cofins base. What to separate in each case.
CARF waived the 1% penalty on customs value for a classification error but upheld the new tariff classification of the imported product. Decision (Acórdão) No. 3004-000.328 was published on 23 October 2026 and ruled on the voluntary appeal of a petrochemical company. The 4th Extraordinary Panel of the 3rd Section of CARF, Brazil's federal tax appeals board, partially upheld the appeal unanimously, at a session on 3 September 2026. The rapporteur was Semíramis de Oliveira Duro, and the taxable event dates from 5 March 2010.
CARF kept the additive Millad 3988i under heading 3824.90.39 of the Mercosur Common Nomenclature (NCM), not under 2932.99.99 as the company declared. The added silica, at 2% to 4%, rules out classification as an isolated organic compound under Chapter 29. The product's composition decided the classification.
CARF recognized on its own motion, that is, without a request from the company, that the 1% penalty on customs value, applied for incorrect description or classification error, is extinct. CARF held that Article 181 of Complementary Law No. 227/2026 revoked it. That law was published in the Diário Oficial da União, Brazil's official gazette, on 15 January 2026. For the PIS and Cofins federal contributions on imports, CARF removed ICMS, the state VAT, and the contributions themselves from the tax base, in line with the Supreme Federal Court (STF) thesis in RE 559.937.
<strong>Importers.</strong> The penalty generally falls on whoever files the declaration, and it was the penalty that CARF waived in this case. The reclassification, however, stood, and the PIS and Cofins base was treated separately. Each of the three issues had its own grounds and outcome, and the result of one does not carry over to the others. A product that mixes components requires the declared classification to account for everything in its composition.
<strong>Exporters.</strong> The decision concerns imports. What matters to exporters is the criterion: the product was classified by what it contains. For those who export formulations and mixtures, the description in the documents must state what the product contains.
<strong>Carriers, freight forwarders and NVOCCs.</strong> The decision concerns a petrochemical importer and does not address the liability of carriers or freight forwarders. The 1% penalty generally falls on whoever declares the goods. The point of contact is the description of the goods, which gives the waived penalty its name.
Our take
the decision separates three disputes that usually travel together: classification, the 1% penalty and the PIS and Cofins base. Classification went against the company, and the penalty fell because of Complementary Law No. 227/2026, in the panel's reading. As a ruling of an extraordinary panel, it does not bind other cases. Map which open assessments carry the 1% penalty and at what stage they are, and which imports mix components. Applying it to each case requires a technical reading of the decision and of the law.
Questions for your company
- Importers: Which imported products are mixtures or formulations, and does the declared classification account for everything in the composition, including additives such as silica?
- Importers: Which open assessments carry the 1% penalty for incorrect description or classification error, and at what stage is each one?
- Importers: On which imports were PIS and Cofins calculated with ICMS and the contributions themselves in the base, and who in your company checks this?
- Exporters: Who in your company checks that the description of the exported product states what it contains, and that it matches the technical data sheet?
- Freight forwarders and NVOCCs: What goods description do your customers enter in the cargo documents, and who in your company checks that it says what the product is made of?
- Carriers: If a customer is assessed for incorrect description, who in your company can locate the cargo documents with the description provided?
In numbers
- US$4,429
- per 40-foot container in the Drewry composite index, down 3% on the week
- US$7,514
- Shanghai to Los Angeles, down 6%
- US$9,631
- Shanghai to New York, down 5%
- US$3,686
- Shanghai to Rotterdam, up 1%
- US$4,151
- Shanghai to Genoa, unchanged
Drewry attributes the drop in the composite index to transpacific rates. The Europe routes did not follow: Rotterdam rose and Genoa was unchanged.
Sources
- Lei Complementar nº 227/2026
- Acórdão CARF nº 3004-000.328/2026
What changed
Drewry records drop in composite container freight, led by the transpacific
Freight
Drewry published on 29 October 2026 a weekly drop in composite container freight. Drewry attributes the drop to transpacific rates, with Shanghai-Los Angeles down 6%. Shanghai-New York also fell, and Shanghai-Rotterdam rose 1%. Shanghai-Genoa was unchanged.
Gentil reading: Those who import from Asia should ask the carrier or freight forwarder to review quoted rates with long validity. The index lanes start in Shanghai and do not measure freight to or from Brazil, so the index is a trend signal, not a rate. Define who in your company compares each quote with the index at each weekly release.
Source: Drewry, World Container Index
WCO adopts opinion on customs valuation when physical inspection reveals new documents
WCO
The World Customs Organization (WCO) announced on 26 October 2026 that its Technical Committee on Customs Valuation adopted Advisory Opinion 28.1. The opinion covers the case in which, during a physical inspection, additional documents appear showing a different price actually paid or payable. If the documents are verified as true and accurate, the transaction value method applies. The committee met from 12 to 16 October 2026, and the opinion is international guidance, not binding.
Gentil reading: Importers: map which of your imports have already gone through physical inspection with a request for documents, and who keeps the contracts and payment records for each one. What customs accepts as proof of the price paid changes the customs value and the taxes on it. Reading each operation requires a technical analysis of the opinion.
Port of Santos handles 141.4 million tonnes through September
Port of Santos
The Santos Port Authority (APS) published on 28 October 2026 the port's cumulative figures for January to September. The total was 141.4 million tonnes, up 2% on 2025. September came in 6.3% lower, at 15.5 million tonnes. The APS attributes the drop to unusual rains that halted dry bulk.
Gentil reading: Dry bulk exporters through Santos: map which September shipments were delayed and what your contract says about delay caused by rain at the port. Freight forwarders and carriers: check who bears waiting time and demurrage when weather stops the terminal.
Source: Agência iNFRA, Porto de Santos movimenta 141; Transporte Moderno, Porto de Santos movimenta 141
Calendar
- 30 Oct
- Deadline for comments to the USTR on extending the suspension of the Section 301 fees on maritime transport, 5:00 p.m. US Eastern Time (ET)
- 4 Nov
- Deadline for contributions to ANTAQ's Call for Input SRG No. 03/2026 on container demurrage and detention, 23:59 Brasília time
- 9 Dec
- Auction of the MUC04 terminal at the Port of Fortaleza, 2:00 p.m. Brasília time, at B3 in São Paulo
Read in: Português · Español
All issues (Portuguese archive) · Subscribe to the newsletter · RSS