Representative José Priante (MDB-PA), rapporteur of the new legal framework for urban mobility, removed sections from the proposal that paved the way for the creation of new taxes with the aim of financing public transport.
PL 3278/21, which has already passed through the Senate, had its urgency approved by the Chamber of Deputies after a meeting between representatives of the FNP (National Front of Mayors) with the president of the House, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), at the beginning of this month.
The project can now be voted directly in the plenary. If approved, it will make the biggest changes in the sector since the sanction of the National Urban Mobility Policy in 2012.
Priante decided to exclude from his report all of article 30, which included the forecast of new taxes for financing public transport:
- Public parking fees
- Congestion charges
- Tariffs on technological platforms for intermediating transport services, such as Uber and 99
- Urban toll for specific areas, days and times
- Differentiated taxation regime due to the emission of pollutants
- Contribution of improvement resulting from real estate appreciation through public investments, such as new metro lines and stations
- Taxation, including on companies, for the availability of public transport services
The rapporteur decided to follow this path after controversy on social media about the creation of new taxes.
“In addition to generating unnecessary controversy and leaving the ball bouncing for sealers, this section of the project invaded municipal and state responsibilities,” he told CNN.
According to him, the devices — included by the government in a replacement approved by the Senate in 2024 — have questionable constitutionality and contrary jurisprudence in the STF (Supreme Federal Court).
The decision to withdraw the entire article 30 does not mean a definitive setback for these new sources of revenue for public transport, but leaves this possibility up to city halls.
“We have to do everything we can to gather enough support to pass the project,” Priante said.
The objective of PL 3278/21 is to create a type of “SUS” for public transport, making it legally possible to transfer funds from the Union to finance urban mobility.
The project defines that at least 60% of Cide-Combustíveis’ revenue must be allocated to public transport.
It also provides clear rules for concessions in the sector, avoiding a situation of precarious contracts and lack of targets or performance indicators for the provision of services by companies.
The text separates the user tariff from the companies’ remuneration tariff, establishing legal conditions for each mayor or governor to decide on the level of subsidy for bus and train or subway tickets in their region.
The proposal also establishes that free fares and fare discounts — which currently correspond to 22% of fare costs — are covered by resources already provided for by law, without generating burdens on other passengers.
Currently, Brazil has 256 cities that provide public subsidies for passengers, guaranteeing reasonable fares, in addition to another 182 cities that adopt zero fares, either partially or universally.
A group of nine entities in the sector, such as NTU (National Association of Urban Transport Companies) and ANPTrilhos (National Association of Rail Passenger Transporters), released a statement last week in support of PL 3278/21.
“The project, already approved by the Senate and in the voting phase in the Chamber, corrects historical distortions and is the basis for the modernization of urban mobility in Brazil, allowing city halls and states to offer a higher quality service and more affordable rates, without compromising fiscal balance or creating new taxes for citizens”, says an excerpt from the note.
“Prioritizing public transport is the way to comply with what is established in article 6 of the Federal Constitution, which defines transport as a social right. It is also a way of recovering passenger demand and ensuring sustainability and quality of life in cities. Attacking the project with unfounded allegations of ‘tax increases’ is, in practice, defending the increase in fares and the scrapping of an essential service for all citizens.”
