Direito animal e tributação: as deduções do IRPF como instrumentos financeiros de estímulo à preservação da saúde de cães e gatos
The so-called “companion” animals are increasingly present in Brazilian homes, sometimes either replacing or adding to the family's desire to have children. These animals become true members of the family unit, with clear bonds of affection. Because of this, the possibility of these non-humans...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/46589 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | The so-called “companion” animals are increasingly present in Brazilian homes, sometimes either replacing or adding to the family's desire to have children. These animals become true members of the family unit, with clear bonds of affection. Because of this, the possibility of these non-humans having rights has been brought into consideration. In particular, the right to health, hold as a basic element necessary to ensure the survival of any living being. However, as the Constitution is not clear about the rights guaranteed to species other than humans, the general objective of the present research was to find out if tutors of non-humans have the right to deduct veterinary expenses from the Physical Person Income Tax (IRPF), due to the possible obligation to ensure the health of these beings. As for the specific objectives, it was intended to: (i) verify which animal type could be eligible to become a holder of rights; (ii) analyze if there are and what would be the constitutional rights of non-humans in Brazil; (iii) to observe if there is any correlation between the health of non-humans and their tutors; (iv) study whether the use of the IRPF would be appropriate as a way of funding the health care of these non-humans by the State; (v) investigate how this deduction hypothesis could happen in practice. Thus, based on bibliographical, documentary, and jurisprudential research using a qualitative approach and hypothetical-deductive method, it is concluded that dogs and cats have greater legislative and jurisprudential protection, being the duty of their tutors and the Brazilian State to ensure their health through periodic visits to a veterinarian. And, as there is no national program similar to the Unified Health System (SUS) to pay for these visits free of charge, it is up to the state to take part in this financial burden of preserving the health of these beings. Be it by deducting the spences on veterinary consultations from the IRPF, or by creating a new Normative Instruction or even through the judicial process, as it is a public responsibility to protect against ill-treatment, in the form of article 225 of the Federal C. |
|---|