Tension in the Middle East worsens the corporate crisis and could increase defaults and RJs

Brazilian companies started 2026 with a challenge far beyond what was foreseen in their budgets. Corporate default, which had already been driven by high interest rates and difficulties in accessing credit, gained a new aggravating factor: the global uncertainties triggered by the conflict in the Middle East. The macroeconomic scenario, which previously suggested a sharper drop in the Selic rate, now forces companies to operate at the limit of their capabilities, placing them in a state of constant alert and caution.

Experts consulted by InfoMoney state that financial hardship is not an isolated event, but rather the result of a complex equation that mixes internal and external factors. They warn that detailed cash flow management and debt restructuring have become the main ways to avoid judicial recovery processes, while the market waits for clarity that, according to the most realistic projections, will not arrive before next year.

Also read:

The weight of debts

The numbers reveal an upward trajectory of corporate negativity. Five years ago, Brazil already registered 5.8 million companies in default, according to data from Serasa Experian. Month by month and year by year this volume grew, reaching 7.8 million in June and 8.9 million in December. In January this year, the indicator fell to 8.7 million.

During this period, the Selic rate went from 13.25% in January 2025 to 15% in June, remaining at this level until March of this year, when it fell to 14.75%.

To understand the hardship, it is necessary to look at the nature of these debts, which are often not linked to banks, but to the production chain. “When we look at the participation of sectors in corporate defaults, we can clearly see that a large part of this default is outside the financial system”, explains Camila Abdelmalack, chief economist at Serasa Experian, pointing to the strangulation of relationships with suppliers.

Interest is not the only cause of strangulation

Pointing to interest rates as the only villains in this escalation is a misdiagnosis, according to Max Mustrangi, specialist in company restructuring and CEO of Excellance. “Interest is an effect, it is a consequence, it is not a cause”, explains the executive. “Of course, it worsens the scenario of highly indebted companies. The cost of carrying, the cost of payment, the need for cash flow, it increases. Companies with bad cash flow or deficits get worse. But this is a consequence, because the company is very indebted”, highlights Mustrangi.

The frustration of growth expectations is another central component of this crisis. For Lucas Pena, CEO of Pact, default and the search for judicial recovery are sides of the same coin in a troubled scenario.

“Both default and judicial recovery are part of a scenario of changing context in relation to what had been planned. It is always a frustration of expectations of the future that had been projected, a reflection of bad governance”, assesses Pena. He cites as an example companies that reserve a certain amount for legal expenses and, throughout the year, this cost proves to be triple what had been estimated.

This is without considering external uncertainties. He says that companies ended last year putting together plans that quickly proved unfeasible in the first quarter. Among the pressure factors are the conflict in the Middle East, which acts as a vector of increased costs for companies and a slowdown in the fall of the Selic, in addition to the variation in the dollar and the price of oil, which affects the companies’ original planning.

He highlights that external instability has even overwhelmed concerns about the 2026 electoral scenario. “A change in political management, which could happen from next year, will not have an immediate impact on interest rates, inflation and economic dynamism”, points out Pena. The focus of the boards, therefore, became a question of immediate survival. “Companies are less concerned about this electoral scenario and much more concerned about understanding how interest rates and international conditions will behave in order to put together a strategy”, says the CEO.

Stagnation in projections and forced caution

The difficulty of growing in the current economic environment has scared even the most experienced academics. Eduardo Menicucci, finance professor at Fundação Dom Cabral (FDC), reports an unprecedented scenario in his two decades of experience. “It was the first time I saw three different sectors estimating equal revenue in 2025 and 2026. In other words, considering the best case scenario, they expected to repeat revenue instead of growing”, reveals the professor, citing supermarkets as one of these affected sectors.

Menicucci also draws attention to short and medium-term challenges, such as adapting to tax reform, which requires preparation and further impacts companies’ cash flow.

The advancement of recoveries

As a direct reflection of financial suffocation and the difficulty in accessing new credit, the corporate market began to deal with a flood of recovery requests, both extrajudicial and judicial. Far from being a taboo or a certificate of irreversible bankruptcy, the movement has been seen by experts as a legitimate mechanism for survival and reorganization in times of external shocks and frustrated projections.

For Lucas Pena, CEO of Pact, going to court does not change the root of the problem, but it changes the coping strategy. “I think the issue of recovery, whether judicial or extrajudicial, is just a choice of how to get through a troubled time”, analyzes the executive.

According to him, knocking on the doors of justice or seeking extrajudicial agreements is the direct consequence of plans that were overturned by reality. “The scenario of default and judicial recovery are the same. They reflect a change in the planned context, along with the discovery of factors that, eventually, you mispriced”, points out Pena, citing as an example companies that provisioned a certain amount for legal costs, for example, and later saw that the real number was three times higher.

But entering into a restructuring process — whether guided by the courts or by private agreements — requires a radical change in the board’s stance. For Max Mustrangi, CEO of Excellance, the market severely punishes companies that try to renegotiate without transparency.

“The first important thing is: promised, signed, said, fulfill. And this builds credibility and trust, and you are increasingly able to negotiate with creditors”, says Mustrangi.

The expert emphasizes that resolving liabilities requires “eye-to-eye” communication and the awareness that failing to reach a renegotiated agreement definitively closes the market’s doors. “People don’t realize that this intangible asset is more valuable at this moment, because everything else has already been lost and what’s left is your credibility”, he assesses.

The scenario ahead is one of uncertainty

Faced with successive crises, Menicucci warns about the lasting consequences of the current instability: “We will only see the intensity of this when the clouds dissipate in 2027, and we count deaths and injuries”, he estimates.

The prospect of a cleaner horizon only in 2027 is shared by Alex Nery, professor at the Fundação Instituto de Administração (FIA). Analyzing the data and the situation, Nery sees the current calendar as a period of arduous transition. “2026 still seems like a very difficult year to me. The word has to be caution”, he says. According to him, the possible positive effects of a gradual fall in the Selic rate and greater political clarity will only become “more visible in 2027”.

Until then, the unanimous recommendation among the experts interviewed is transparency and financial discipline. With restrictions on the market, exit must undergo an internal review of operations. “It means looking inside the company, reorganizing and doing management work, thinking about the cost structure, understanding alternative sources of revenue”, advises Abdelmalack. She warns that the current scenario requires even more caution: “We are in a year in which credit is slowing down, institutions are very careful and credit support for this financial reorganization will be more complicated”.

For companies that already have a rope around their neck, renegotiating is not enough; It is necessary to comply with the agreements signed. As Mustrangi reminds us, when reaching a critical moment, a company’s most valuable asset ceases to be its physical capital and becomes its credibility in the face of the market and creditors. In a year where the rule is to survive the storm, promising and delivering has become the only safe strategy.