It is relatively common in practice that the time come for the fulfilment of an obligation, the debtor is not able to execute the proper provision. This possible situation the creditor can take legal action against the assets of the debtor to satisfy their right to credit. However, such a possibility may be scarcely striking for the creditor according to various reasons related to the judicial reality. This situation isn’t at all strange that any of the subjects involved in an obligation to adopt the initiative to replace the benefit due by another, although that eventuality not is has initially contemplated in establishing the obligation when (assumed that would give rise to an obligation to alternative or optional). This change of the due provision is often called in real traffic as credit or debt renegotiation and has tax by economic or commercial agents without the need of attributing a technical and legal sense accurate, approximately connected with the theoretical notion of legal business. Negotiate a credit is therefore a term colloquial to trafficking to manifest that, face the difficulty of his collection, parts of the compulsory relationship are trying to find an alternative solution, replacing the delivery due to any one that meets best the interests of the creditor and the debtor or, otherwise, be preferable to the exercise of legal actions or the delay in the implementation of the provision initially due. On certain occasions, this workaround will entail the conclusion of a contract of novatorio nature of the obligacional relationship, and in other cases the change of the provision will not being an act of the debtor effectively full solutoria compliance. Obviously the business of such agreements character not unnoticed as it requires the consent of both parties, because without the agreement between the creditor and the debtor, the conditions initially agreed upon in establishing title of obligation cannot altered. .
Made all these considerations, we arrived at the climax of the matter, and it is that as a result of the systematization of the accounting and administrative processes, existing programs on the market conform to the requirements of State control, and the State through the SENIAT 6 requires that declarations are made using the technology platform designed for the purposewhich prevents the registration of operations if not incorporate all the data required by the system, including the number of invoice, number control, base tax among others, many of these data are exclusive of the invoice and other documents not therefore the system would not incorporate them. Now according to the physical delivery of the goods or the effective provision of the service, being that any of these is the first thing that happens, it is common in our commercial practices and pursuant to the business relationship vendors, to deliver goods to your customers or you read to provide services, to cover shortcomings of last-minute inventory, for respond to situations of urgency, or for any other reason, without using any documentation, the operation occurs with a simple phone, according to the standard communication, already opened born the tax obligation, now well, how can be recorded these operations both in systems of the taxpayer and on the platform of the SENIAT?, the biggest problem arises when these events occur near the scheduled dates for the Declaration because there is a risk of the extemporaneous. In conclusion, the opinion of the undersigned, we have standards that are unenforceable in a practical sense, it is time to revise the regulations and honest to the reality of our country, and technological advancement. 1 Arts. 1 and 3 LIVA 2 law that establishes the value added tax 3 recommended reading the article the temporality of the taxable transactions in the case of sales and services to State enterprises (Sunday 6 June 2010). Camilo London Advisory tax 4 subsection of the author 5 subsection of the author.