Simples Nacional or Lucro Presumido: How to Decide in 3 Steps

The accountant sends the message: “we need to define the company’s tax regime.” A lot of people respond by looking only at the Simples Nacional (simplified tax regime) ceiling and move on with their lives. The problem is that this choice usually lasts the entire year and affects not just the amount of tax, but also cash flow, pricing and the compliance routine.

Vivian Sampaio brings 26+ years of experience in accounting and law, and one of the most expensive mistakes she finds in new operations is exactly this: choosing a regime by shortcut. This guide exists to replace the shortcut with a method.

If you’re in this opening or review phase, it’s worth cross-referencing this read with the landing page on opening a CNPJ online, with the tax strategy page, and with the guide opening a company in São Paulo: how to choose the right tax regime. If the question comes alongside choosing the firm, also compare accountant for small businesses in São Paulo.

The mistake of looking only at revenue

Revenue matters, of course. But it only answers the first question: “does the law allow this regime or not?” It doesn’t answer the question that actually matters to the business owner: “which regime makes the most sense for my case?”

Two businesses with the same revenue can reach opposite conclusions. One may benefit from Simples because it has a significant payroll, an activity classified under a lighter annex, and a B2C client base. The other may do better under Lucro Presumido (presumed-profit regime) because it has high margins, a lean payroll, and an operation better prepared to absorb additional ancillary obligations.

Quick example: two companies bill R$ 720,000 a year. The first is a service provider with a larger team and a consistent payroll. The second is a lean consultancy, with few costs and a high margin. The revenue is the same. The best regime may not be.

That’s why a good decision isn’t born from an isolated table. It’s born from three steps.

Step 1: start with what the law allows

Simples Nacional was designed for micro and small-sized enterprises. Under Complementary Law 123/2006, the general gross-revenue limit to remain in it is R$ 4.8 million per year. The choice, as a rule, is irrevocable for the entire calendar year. In plain terms: in most cases, you don’t freely change your mind midway.

Lucro Presumido, as a rule, can be adopted by companies with total gross revenue of up to R$ 78 million in the previous year, under Law 9.718/1998. This choice is also not something to improvise month by month. It is usually tied to the calendar year and, in general, materializes with the payment of the first assessment of the period.

But the legal question doesn’t stop at the revenue limit. It also runs through:

the activity performed;
the applicable Simples annex;
whether or not the Fator R applies to certain service providers;
the ancillary obligations that model will generate.

Here’s an important point for services: the same revenue can place a company in Annex III or Annex V of Simples, depending on the relationship between payroll and revenue. Under LC 123/2006 itself, taxation under Annex III depends, in many cases, on the ratio between payroll and gross revenue being equal to or above 28%. And that difference materially changes the effective burden.

Practical example: an intellectual-services company billing R$ 60,000 a month and maintaining a payroll sufficient to sustain a Fator R above 28% may fall under Annex III. Another, with the same revenue and a much smaller payroll, may land in Annex V. That detail alone already changes the math considerably.

Before discussing what is “cheaper,” first confirm what is actually available for your activity.

Step 2: compare real margin against the cost structure

The second step is to leave the nominal table behind and enter the real economics of the business.

Under Lucro Presumido, the tax authority presumes a portion of revenue as the base for IRPJ and CSLL. Broadly speaking:

for IRPJ, the presumption is usually 8% for commerce and industry and 32% for most services;
for CSLL, the usual base is 12% for commerce and industry and 32% for services in general;
in addition, the calculation normally includes PIS, Cofins, ISS or ICMS, depending on the operation.

These percentages help to understand the logic of the regime, but they don’t close the math on their own. You still need to add indirect taxes, possible withholdings and, depending on the case, the social-security cost on payroll.

And here lies the classic mistake: comparing only the “Simples rate” with the “presumption percentage” and thinking the answer has appeared.

A high margin tends to make Lucro Presumido more comfortable because the presumed base may end up below the operation’s real economic profit. But a high margin alone isn’t enough. If the company has a significant payroll, falls under Annex III and benefits from a lower effective burden in Simples, the result can flip.

Likewise, a tighter margin usually demands more caution with Lucro Presumido, because you may end up paying tax on a base that doesn’t match the profit the company actually generates.

Practical example:

a service company with a 30% operating margin and a strong payroll may benefit from Simples, because the combination of Annex III and the employer contribution within the DAS reduces the total pressure;
a consultancy with a 60% margin, little payroll and little structure may discover that Lucro Presumido starts to compete better, especially if under Simples it falls into Annex V.

The moral of the story: margin doesn’t decide on its own, but ignoring margin almost always produces a mistake.

Step 3: look at the customer profile, not just inside the company

The third step almost never appears in generic comparisons, and that’s why it tends to be where the decision matures.

A blunt question: do you sell to end consumers or to other companies?

If the client base is mostly B2C, the weight of operational simplicity tends to count more. The end customer isn’t looking at tax credits, withholding structure or document format to make a purchase decision. In that context, a well-classified Simples can make a lot of sense.

In B2B, the conversation changes. The supplier’s tax regime can influence negotiation, withholdings and the reading of the operation’s total cost. In goods supply chains, for example, LC 123/2006 itself provides ICMS credit for buyers who aren’t Simples participants in certain purchases from participants, within the limits of the tax actually due. In services, the effect usually appears less as a “credit” and more as withholdings, registration requirements and the corporate client’s internal standards.

Practical example:

a small agency selling to a few individual clients usually feels the benefit of the simple routine and the predictability of the DAS more;
a distributor selling to industry may need to simulate how the buyer views the tax document and the operation’s tax cost, because that enters the negotiation.

In other words, the best regime doesn’t depend only on what happens inside your company. It also depends on the market you sell to.

Comparative simulation: same revenue, different answers

Reference for this simulation: rules in force on May 26, 2026.

To make the method concrete, let’s use two scenarios with the same annual revenue of R$ 720,000. The simulation below is simplified: it assumes a service provider, ISS of 2%, uniform distribution of revenue across the year, and does not include sector incentives, specific withholdings or employer INSS outside Simples. It serves to show reasoning, not to replace an individual calculation.

How I arrived at the numbers

In Scenario A, the company fell under Annex III. In the third bracket of that annex, the nominal rate is 13.5% with a deduction of R$ 17,640. The effective rate on R$ 720,000 comes to roughly 11.05%, generating an annual burden close to R$ 79,560.

In Scenario B, the same revenue fell under Annex V. In the third bracket, the nominal rate is 19.5% with a deduction of R$ 9,900. The effective rate comes to around 18.13%, taking the annual burden to about R$ 130,500.

Under Lucro Presumido, the simplified calculation for this service provider came out as follows:

PIS and Cofins under the cumulative regime: 3.65% on revenue, or R$ 26,280 for the year;
IRPJ on a presumed base of 32%: R$ 34,560 for the year;
CSLL on a presumed base of 32%: R$ 20,736 for the year;
ISS of 2%: R$ 14,400 for the year.

Estimated total: R$ 95,976.

What the simulation really teaches

In Scenario A, Simples wins because the operation combines three favorable elements:

a payroll sufficient to pull taxation into Annex III;
a margin that isn’t so generous as to neutralize the advantages of the DAS;
a B2C client base, which values less a more sophisticated tax engineering and more the operational simplicity.

In Scenario B, Lucro Presumido wins because the game changed:

a lean payroll, with a chance of staying in Annex V;
a high margin, which better absorbs the presumed-base logic;
a B2B operation, which usually demands a more detailed simulation of the contract’s total cost.

Notice the central point: revenue didn’t change. What changed was the set of variables surrounding that revenue.

When to review or migrate regimes

The best time to simulate a regime is before opening the company. The second best time is before the calendar year turns.

In practice, voluntarily switching regimes is usually planned for January. That’s why waiting until December to look at the numbers is almost always too late. The ideal is to review with enough lead time to:

finalize the revenue projection;
measure the real margin;
recalculate the Fator R, when applicable;
map the operational impact and ancillary obligations.

There is, indeed, a mid-year urgency, but it goes by another name: mandatory declassification or exclusion. In Simples, excess revenue can produce effects in the following year or in the subsequent month, depending on how far over the limit you go. When the excess exceeds 20% of the limit, the rule gets harsher. That is exactly why companies in acceleration shouldn’t wait until January to monitor the issue.

Clear signs that you need to revisit the choice:

the margin rose or fell significantly;
the payroll changed and the Fator R may have crossed the 28% line;
the customer mix shifted from B2C to B2B, or vice versa;
the company began selling an activity different from the one stated at incorporation;
the compliance cost started growing more than the expected tax saving.

When the review involves not just tax, but also registration, ancillary obligations and process organization, VMA Compliance, a specialized vertical of VMAHUB, steps in to structure the compliance side of the decision.

The mistakes that most often make a company pay more

If you want a short list of pitfalls, here it is:

choosing by the Simples ceiling and stopping there;
ignoring the applicable annex and the effect of the Fator R;
comparing only IRPJ and CSLL, forgetting PIS, Cofins, ISS, ICMS and payroll;
copying another company’s regime because “it worked for them”;
requesting a simulation only when the deadline is already tight.

Practical example: a business owner opens the company in February, chooses Simples because “it’s easier” and spends the entire year without recalculating the Fator R. The following January, they discover that, with the operation’s real structure, they could have paid less or organized cash flow better. There was no tax evasion. There was a lack of method.

The right decision isn’t intuition, it’s comparison

Choosing between Simples Nacional and Lucro Presumido isn’t about answering a message from the accountant based on memory or habit. It’s about comparing scenarios with your business’s real numbers.

When the analysis is done well, the decision becomes much clearer:

first, you confirm what the law allows;
then, you measure margin and cost structure;
finally, you test that math against the customer profile.

That’s the path to opening correctly and to migrating with sound judgment when the company changes in size, payroll or market.

Want to run this simulation with your company’s real numbers?

VMAHUB performs the accounting-tax analysis together with the legal one, because the choice of regime affects contracts, cash flow and corporate structure all at once. Vivian Sampaio brings 26+ years of experience in accounting and law.

If this content helped, continue on /en/napratica and compare it with the other guides in the cluster. If you want to leave theory behind and put your company’s numbers on the table, talk to the team:

WhatsApp: +55 11 91568-5570
Email: [email protected]
Address: R. Alexandre Dumas, 1562 — Chácara Sto. Antônio · São Paulo / SP