Ricardo Tosto Explains Brazil’s Electoral Courts

Unlike the United States, Brazil has a parallel court system that deals with electoral matters. The building blocks of the system are the Regional Electoral Tribunals, which operate at the state-level and are responsible for managing state and local elections. Any decisions made by a Regional Electoral Tribunal can be reversed by the high court for Brazil’s electoral system, the Superior Electoral Tribunal.

There is a Regional Electoral Court in each state capital, as well as one in Brasilia, Brazil’s Federal District. Justices on the court are elected by members of the bench, with two seats going to appellate judges and two seats to trial judges from the state judiciary. In addition, one seat is reserved for a member of the federal bench, to be elected by the federal judges from that state. In addition, the Brazilian president nominates two judges from the membership of the state bar based on their knowledge of the .

Normally, electoral justices can only serve for two terms of two years each, for a total of four years. Once the term limit has been reached, a new election should be held to replace the justice. Regional Electoral Tribunals are charged with regulating and monitoring the entire electoral process from the registration of local political party leadership to the dissemination of information during the vote-counting process.

The Brazilian legal system is complex, but Ricardo Tosto is well-versed in all aspects of the law. As one of Brazil’s foremost civil litigators, Ricardo Tosto has been at the helm of one of the country’s most respected law firms for more than two decades.

His picture, Ricardo Tosto received his undergraduate law degree from McKenzie University in Sao Paulo. In addition to being the lead partner at Ricardo Tosto & Associates, he also is also a well-known lecturer and speaker in the legal community. Ricardo Tosto is also known as a pioneer in dispute resolution in Brazil.

Whistleblowing To The SEC Can Be Lucrative

Recently, a jury awarded $12 million in a civil case related to the fallout of the Penn State whistleblower scandal. The person awarded the judgment had to file a lawsuit to receive the judgment. In the world of finance, whistleblowers may discover their path to receiving compensation for shedding light on illegal activity to be easier.

 

Why is this so? The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) positively does want people to come forward. Additionally, there are SEC whistleblower attorney firms set up to specifically handle this type of representation. Sadly, many people who know about illegal activities in the world of finance do not come forward. No one informed these persons that protections and rewards were written into the law for them via the expansive Dodd-Frank legislation drawn up by Congress and signed into law in 2010.

 

Some worry about popular Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections being rolled back. After all, there has been talk of repealing aspects of the Dodd-Frank legislation. The idea Congress would repeal any sections that deal with whistleblower protections would be balmy. Legislators do realize that law enforcement and regulating agencies do need to entice those who might be worried or scared about coming forward with information. The reward clause in the legislation is positive sure to help with this cause.

 

Rewards have been in the millions. Since there are privacy issues with the levying of fines, the sanctions do not receive the same amount of news coverage as would be the case with a high-profile civil suit. One press release about a whistleblower judgment revealed the unknown citizen received well over $15 million for his or her work. That means the full fine levied against the financial entity was in the tens of millions of dollars. Clearly, the entity was involved with doing something seriously wrong.

 

The high-volume of money directed towards whistleblowers is telling. The reason whistleblowing is so important in the financial world is whistleblowers have the potential to protect those who may be scammed or harmed by hedge fund managers and others who do not have the clients’ best interests at heart. Whistleblowers may even be completely self-serving in their motivations. Honestly, this is fine. Anyone can choose to do what they wish for whatever reason. In the end, if the decision to blow the whistle helps others, then something good has been achieved.

 

New Zealand’s Tax Transparency Model

A recently published article describes New Zealand as a tax haven. However, Karen Marshall, an expert in foreign trusts debunks the claim stating that New Zealand does not have the characteristic of a tax haven. According to Karen Marshall, a tax haven inhibits the flow of tax information to other countries, only impose nominal taxes, and its taxation model lacks transparency. Furthermore, New Zealand has a highly transparent private banking industry; therefore, does not qualify as a tax haven.

The 2002 OECD Tax Model supports the flow of information across governments to help in administering local tax law. New Zealand ranked as the first country on the OECD’S white list for having complied with the international tax law. One way in which New Zealand embodies the principles of internationally agreed tax standards is by facilitating the exchange of tax information. Under the newly introduced tax rules in New Zealand, foreigners living in New Zealand are required to submit the IR607 form and maintain their financial records for taxation purpose. These records include trust’s assets and liabilities, trust deed, details of trust settlement, and the money received and spent by a trustee. Furthermore, if a trust operates a business, the trustee must disclose information about their accounting systems. Notably, all records must be registered in English to avoid hefty penalties.

Founded by Geoffrey Cone and Karen Marshall, Cone Marshall is a world-class tax and trusts law firm. Cone Marshall’s headquarters are located in Auckland. Cone Marshall abides by international tax and trust transparency standards and provides reliable tax and trust advice. Karen Marshall has over ten years of experience working as an advisor in the London’s Commercial Litigation department. On the other hand, Geoffrey Cone is a highly experienced global-scale trust and tax planner specializing in trust and trustee management services. Over the years, Cone Marshall collaborates with international agencies and their advisors in establishing New Zealand’s trusts and planning global tax models.

In an article posted on Twitter and Facebook in 2012, Cone Marshall discredited the claim that New Zealand resembles a tax haven and that its private banking sector was highly secretive. He stated that New Zealand subscribes to the doctrines embodied in the internationally agreed tax model. He also noted that New Zealand’s foreign trusts had increased significantly. The increase is attributed to the country’s political stability, a well-structured judicial system, and safety. New Zealand’s excellent status as a safe place for one’s precious items leads to the increase of foreign trusts.

How Ricardo Tosto Has Redefined the Legal System of Brazil

The Brazilian Legal System has over 181,000 laws. Therefore, it is highly intertwined, complex, and confusing, especially for those who do not have a background in law. Fortunately, lawyers in Brazil such as Ricardo Tosto work tirelessly to understand even the most complicated laws and offer unparalleled representation to the Brazilians.

 

Efforts to update Brazilian laws

 

The Chamber of Deputies formed a special committee to analyze all of the 181,000 laws in Brazil and to get rid of those that were archaic or revoked. The committee linked laws that were almost similar and eradicated the contradictory ones. According to the committee’s estimate, the entire process leaves the legal system of Brazil with 1,000 laws.

 

Unique Brazilian laws

 

Gambling is not allowed in Brazil, especially the physical one – it is impossible for the government to screen wins made in physical gambling games. Surprisingly, online gambling is allowed since Brazil does not control the Internet as part of its territory. While subsistence hunting is approved in Brazil, professional hunting is strictly prohibited. However, sport-hunting rule varies from one state to another.

 

Ricardo Tosto

 

 Ricardo Tosto is a veteran lawyer and a reliable strategist in the legal community of Brazil. He co-founded Leite, Tosto e Barros Advogados, a prominent law firm that represents high-net-worth persons, corporate clients, and politicians. He is a partner at the company. Tosto specializes in the field of credit recovery, reorganization, mergers, acquisition review, administrative law, commercial law, and business restructuring. Over the years, Tosto has managed to earn the trust of a broad client base. His dynamic portfolio of services and legal solutions has enabled him to cement a top position in the Brazilian legal system.

 

Education and work history

 

Tosto studied law at the Mackenzie University. Later on, he advanced his higher education by studying Business Administration. Previously, he was an employee of Grupo Rede, a Brazilian Company – his role was to advise the Legal Management team and the HR. He was part of Brazilian Bar Association’s Judicial Reform Committee. He has pocketed multiple awards and acknowledgments from the Brazilian legal community, including recognition by Analise 500 and a nomination by Who’s Who Legal.

For more information visit https://www.crunchbase.com/person/ricardo-tosto#/entity