STF TAX DECISIONS AND THE NEED FOR CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS: CAN JUDGE-ROBOTS DELIVER?

Abstract

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) has been criticized for its irrationality in tax decisions, which do not conform to the fundamental rights and guarantees of taxpayers. With the rise of judge-robots and predictive models in the judiciary, the question arises whether the use of such technologies can improve the quality of STF decisions. This paper examines some of the STF's pronouncements on tax matters to determine whether their decisions comply with the rationality requirements of the law when using robot judges. In addition, the paper seeks to determine whether this irrationality is supported by tradition, the positive legal system, and the intersubjective public language under which administrative and judicial decisions on tax matters are regulated and binding. The study utilizes a phenomenological-hermeneutic method and a bibliographical and jurisprudential review restricted to the object of the proposed analysis. The paper emphasizes that fundamental rights and other constitutional protections are crucial in tax matters, and their rational application should be a priority for the judiciary. The document finds that using judge-robots and predictive models may further aggravate the irrationality in tax decisions and lead to more unjust outcomes. The paper calls for more attention to be given to the impacts of using judge-robots by the STF in resolving tax disputes. The study highlights the need for a rational and effective application of the law to safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms of taxpayers and maintain legal stability in the country