The 2026 campaign must move forward with a characteristic that tends to disturb the market with the candidates’ low willingness to detail tougher economic proposals. Without immediate pressure to force clear commitments, the debate on fiscal adjustment and structural reforms tends to take a backseat during the dispute.
In the Risk Map, the policy program of the InfoMoneyXP policy analyst Victor Scalet highlighted that the current environment does not favor tougher speeches. “It is not easy to campaign promising adjustments, promising severe reforms,” he stated.
The explanation goes through the macroeconomic context. Despite concerns about the debt and fiscal trajectory in the medium term, Brazil is not currently facing a crisis comparable to that of other countries that have undergone more radical changes in economic policy.
The absence of this immediate pressure reduces the political incentive for candidates to commit to unpopular measures. “We are not in a moment of acute crisis, no one will want to explain difficult and harsh movements”, summarized the analyst.
This diagnosis helps to understand why, until now, both the government and the opposition have avoided detailing more sensitive economic proposals. Instead, the tendency is to work with broader signals, without going into the political cost of reforms such as deeper tax changes or spending adjustments.
The pattern is not exclusive to one side of the dispute. The assessment is that caution applies to both the government camp and its opponents, albeit for different reasons.
Continues after advertising
Greater pressure on the opposition
However, if the government can rely on its recent management history, the opposition faces a greater requirement for explanation. This is because it needs to reduce uncertainties and present minimum guidelines to the market and the electorate.
“Those who are not in office need to show more than those who are”, highlighted Paulo Gama, political analyst at XP.
This asymmetry tends to become more relevant throughout the campaign, especially as candidates gain traction and demand greater clarity on economic policy.
Still, the expectation is that even the opposition will avoid excessive detail. The most likely strategy involves indicating general directions and, eventually, names that can give credibility to the agenda.
Non-market impact
For investors, this scenario increases uncertainty. Without clear proposals, asset prices start to react more to expectations than to concrete plans. “We may see more changes in asset prices due to this change in expectations”, pointed out Scalet.
This means that electoral dynamics can influence the market even before consistent economic programs are presented. Indirect signals, such as alliances, names listed for the economic team or specific positions, gain weight in the formation of expectations.
Continues after advertising
The result is a campaign in which the economic debate tends to be less explicit, but no less relevant. On the contrary, a lack of clarity can increase volatility and make the scenario even more sensitive to changes in perception.
O Risk Mappolicy program of the InfoMoneyairs every Friday, starting at 5am, on YouTube and your favorite podcast player.
