Proposal revokes deadline and creates model without a date for discharge; It also limits the payment to a percentage of revenue from federative entities
Experts evaluate that PEC of precatory (proposal for amendment to the Constitution), defended by the government to have more tax space, is a risk of “Calm down perpetual”. The text changes the way the federal government, the states and the municipalities pay their precatory – government directions recognized by the court.
In addition to revoking the deadline and creating a model undated for discharge, the proposal limits the annual payment to a percentage of revenue from each federative entity. For critics, this can postpone debts indefinitely.
The government took advantage of PEC, which dealt only with state and municipal debt, and inserted amendments to open tax space in the budget. It wants to accommodate the expense of R $ 12.4 billion with the. July 2025 decision of the Supreme Court (STF) ensured the benefit even to those who contributed only once to the INSS (National Institute of Social Security).
In addition, the president’s government (PT) wants the Union precatory stock to be internalized in the budget for 10 years, with annual installments of 10%.
With the removal for health reasons of the PEC rapporteur, the Senate government leader (PT-BA), the government risks seeing its rejected or modified amendments depending on those who stay with the rapporteur. The president of the Senate, (União Brasil-AP), postponed the vote in the 2nd round of PEC last week and should meet with the College of Leaders this week to define the new rapporteur.
Warning
PEC has many risks, experts. Gilberto Badaró, a lawyer specializing in precatory and partner of Badaró Almeida & Associates, said that PEC will revoke the discharge period that ends in 2029 and will adopt a new model without payment horizon.
The proposal makes creditors more vulnerable, such as retirees and small businesses, hostage to a debt without a date to be paid. For states and municipalities, PEC represents a “Fiscal relief” short -term, but weakens compliance with court decisions and compromises budget transparency, with “artificial cash leftover”In public accounts.
Luiz Fernando Casagrande Pereira, president of the OAB Paraná Section (Brazilian Bar Association), said PEC 66 “Frontally hurts the jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court (STF)”.
According to the lawyer, the court has already spoken out against installment models or spending ceiling that leave payment without a defined deadline. In addition, the president of OAB Paraná also stated that the proposal, which changes the monetary correction to a 2% per year index, will cause creditors to lose money.
“It means that creditors will lose money when waiting in this line that today, in Paraná, for example, has been in 17 years. Many have died and others will die in the line of the precatory. Companies have broken and others will break. Of all 5 defaults already given, this is the most serious“Pereira said.
Read the risks punctuated by Badaró:
- term change – Repeals the current rule that establishes 2029 as a deadline for the discharge of precatory, for a deadline, with payments limited by a ceiling proportional to the net current revenue of each federative entity;
- affected creditors – Creditors, such as retirees, civil servants, individuals and small businesses, are vulnerable, as they would have the payment of their legal debts postponed indefinitely;
- impact on states and municipalities – Although it provides short -term fiscal relief, PEC weakens budgetary predictability and may encourage federative entities that were paying on time to delay their commitments;
- legal security – takes the guarantee of payment of a judicially recognized right and ends the guarantee of payment in reasonable time;
- budget risk – Allows “mask” the actual volume of obligations, creating a growing and hidden liability that will be passed on to future management;
- judicialization – If approved, entities such as the OAB and political parties may file an action in the Supreme Court to suspend their effects;
- other risks – It lacks technical criteria for payment percentages and may impair the secondary market of precatory, resulting in degium (loss of value) of the assets. Fundef and FUNDEB Resource Repression can affect the quality of basic education.
