The Era of Financial ‘Big Brother’: Invasion of Privacy or Fight against Crime?

The recent controversy involving the monitoring of financial transactions exceeding R$5,000 per month by the federal government generated intense discussions in Brazilian society. Despite the announcement of the revocation of Federal Revenue Normative Instruction No. 2,219/2024, the proposal exposes profound challenges related to privacy, legal security and impacts on , especially in the use of and other electronic payment tools.

Under the justification of combating crimes such as tax evasion and money laundering, the measure expanded control over financial operations already monitored by . However, the inclusion of everyday movements carried out by citizens and small businesses raised questions regarding the proportionality and effects of this policy.

It is undeniable that financial monitoring is a practice used in many countries, but its expansion to values ​​accessible to the average consumer raises concerns about the protection of fundamental rights and the impact on the digital economy.

Main negative consequences and consequences

Risk to privacy and individual freedoms

Financial privacy is a fundamental right that protects individual freedom and prevents excessive state intervention. Measures that monitor transactions of relatively low values, such as the proposed R$5,000 per month, affect not only large transactions, but also small businesses, independent professionals and ordinary citizens, generating a feeling of excessive surveillance. This approach can create an environment of distrust between citizens and the State, affecting individual freedoms and inhibiting lawful financial choices.

Damage to the informal economy and small businesses

Small entrepreneurs and freelancers, who often use tools like Pix for daily transactions, could be disproportionately affected. The perception of increased supervision could lead many to return to the use of cash, reducing transparency and weakening the financial inclusion achieved in recent years.

Furthermore, migration to informal payment systems can reduce tax revenue, contradicting the original objectives of the measure.

Loss of confidence in the financial system and Pix

Trust is one of the pillars of the success of any digital financial system. Measures that increase surveillance over tools like Pix could discourage the use of these systems, harming the digital economy and the adoption of innovative financial solutions. A retraction in the use of Pix would be a significant setback in terms of financial inclusion in Brazil.

Possible future scenarios

The discussion on financial monitoring transcends the specific case of the revoked Normative Instruction, pointing to a broader issue: How to balance the fight against financial crimes with the protection of individual rights? To move forward in a balanced way, it is essential to consider the following points:

• Creating more transparent standards: the development of clear standards that explain the monitoring criteria, ensuring that the population understands how and why their data will be used. Without transparency, the perception of arbitrariness can weaken the relationship between citizens and institutions.
• Advanced data protection: ensuring that financial information is stored and processed securely, preventing leaks that could expose individuals to fraud or misuse of their data.
• Investment in technology and intelligent data analysis: To avoid being overloaded with irrelevant information, the government must invest in intelligent analysis systems that prioritize truly suspicious transactions, increasing the efficiency of combating financial crimes.
• Dialogue with the private sector and civil society: the inclusion of representatives from different sectors in the debate on financial monitoring ensures that policies are more balanced and representative, avoiding unilateral solutions that could harm certain groups.
• Proportional and reasonable supervision: limiting monitoring to values ​​that truly indicate suspicious movements, instead of including amounts accessible to the average citizen, ensures greater effectiveness and reduces the feeling of excessive control.

If these measures are not implemented, Brazil could face a scenario of mass judicialization, with individuals and companies questioning the constitutionality of policies that compromise fundamental rights. Furthermore, a lack of trust in financial and institutional systems can slow down advances in digital inclusion and the electronic economy, harming the country’s long-term economic growth.

The revocation of Normative Instruction No. 2,219/2024 represents an immediate relief, but does not eliminate the need for in-depth reflection on financial monitoring practices in Brazil. It is essential that public policies are guided by proportionality, transparency and respect for fundamental rights, preventing measures to combat illicit activities from compromising the population’s trust in the financial system.

The advancement of the digital economy in the country depends on an environment that balances legal security and economic freedom. Disproportionate measures not only threaten recent achievements, but also compromise the trajectory of growth and innovation.

Economic freedom and trust are the foundations of a prosperous society; To shake these foundations in the name of excessive control is to compromise Brazil’s future.

*This text does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Jovem Pan.