Opened 1,437 tax procedures in 2025 against public agents who are part of the list of people who hold relevant public positions, such as parliamentarians, ministers, judges and their families, the so-called PPEs (Politically Exposed Persons).
This is a 54% drop compared to the 3,137 opened in 2019, when the minister of the (Federal Supreme Court) launched the Federal Tax Authority to investigate around 800 public agents from the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary suspected of having committed fraud.
Nicknamed at the time the elite troop of auditors, the group selected public agents and family members with evidence of increased assets related to money laundering crimes and concealment of assets. Wanted by Sheet Through the Supreme Court’s press office, Moraes did not comment.
In 2019, 15 ministers of higher courts, 56 federal deputies, 31 senators, nine ministers of state and four family members of authorities were targets of tax procedures.
In 2025, the number dropped to four higher court judges, 37 federal deputies, six senators, four state ministers and no family members.
In the last 16 years, from 2010 to 2025, 31,051 tax procedures were opened in PPEs. The report from Sheet obtained the data via LAI (Access to Information Law). The information shows that in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic, procedures fell to 2,187, but rose again the following year to 3,065. They then fell again and reached the lowest level of the analyzed period: 1,122. In the following years, they remained below the 2,000 level.
Tax procedures are inspection processes opened after identifying inconsistencies in the payment of taxes. These procedures may result in a fine or filing after the inspected person defends himself.
The inspected authorities are part of the group of 105.2 thousand PPEs monitored by the Revenue. The CNPEP (National Register of Politically Exposed Persons) is managed by the CGU (Comptroller General of the Union), which also considers information received from the National Council of Justice.
According to the IRS, the data available in the registry is dynamic, and there is no specific list per year. Despite the drop in the nominal value of PPEs that underwent tax procedures between 2019 and 2025, the body maintains that it operates more frequently in this segment.
To this end, it mentions that PPEs were the target of tax procedures almost three times more frequently than the general population in the last five years. “In practice, Federal Revenue inspection provided greater action in PPE”, says the Tax Authority, since the level of fiscal presence (number of procedures initiated) was 3.75% for individuals in general and 9% among PPEs.
This is the first time that the IRS has made this data available.
In the same LAI response, the IRS admits having terminated the work of the special group created to investigate tax crimes committed by high-ranking authorities, such as STF ministers. Minister Alexandre de Moraes related to the task force in 2019, as part of the recently opened survey of fake news – still in force today.
“It is worth highlighting that the judicial decision of the Honorable Minister of the Federal Supreme Court Alexandre de Moraes is still in force, within the scope of Inquiry 4,781/DF [inquérito das fake news]dated August 1, 2019, which determined the immediate suspension of all procedures related to Copes Note No. 48, of 2018”, says the response provided by the Revenue.
The Note from Copes (General Coordination of Programming and Studies) cited by the IRS is the reserved document that described the activities of the EEP (Special Programming Team) to Combat tax fraud, as the task force was called.
The fake news research, also cited by the Tax Authorities in its response to Sheetwas opened in 2019 by the then president of the STF, Dias Toffoli, to investigate “fraudulent news, threats and defamation, false reports of crimes, slanderous reports, threats and other infractions [que] affect the honorability and security” of the court, its ministers and family members.
“At the time [da ordem de Moraes]there were no fiscal inspection procedures instituted and, in compliance with the decision, none were instituted”, stated the Tax Authority.
Although the IRS did not have any inspections in place, the body had already taken steps (initial stage of a tax procedure), according to auditors familiar with the matter heard by the Sheet under the condition of anonymity. According to these auditors, the IRS used the technical difference between diligence and tax procedure to say that there was no ongoing action.
In February, based on the same fake news investigation, Moraes against IRS employees who had accessed confidential tax data from STF magistrates and relatives.
The president of Unafisco (National Association of Tax Auditors of the Federal Revenue), Kleber Cabral, assesses that there has been a lack of oversight work on PPEs in recent years.
“That [maior percentual de PPEs alvo de procedimento fiscal] It’s statistical trickery, because you’re taking individuals in general, [juntando] who is exempt or earns three minimum wages”, he says. “So, it is clear that the number of tax procedures in this group of taxpayers will be lower.”
For him, the Revenue’s response is very generic and does not make it clear that, at the time the task force was demobilized, other inspection actions may have been interrupted. “What could be a tax procedure? It could be anything. It was dirty information, which does not clarify”, he states. “Tax procedure is a nomenclature that fits everything”, says the auditor.
A Sheet asked the Revenue what criteria were applied in the inspection of PPEs. The Tax Authority said that, as they contain restricted information, the details of the selection rules are restricted to tax auditors who work in the area, and that it is not possible to share details of the criteria used in PPE risk management.
“Even so, it can be stated that, in relation to individuals, the selection rules aim to identify tax non-conformities, considering the income and assets declared to the Federal Revenue Service, comparing them with the numerous sources of information available, including from related parties, for example, companies and dependents, including considering temporal evolution.”
