Court unanimously denied appeal from the Federal District government; case involves resident with monocular vision who requested benefits to buy a vehicle
The STJ (Superior Court of Justice) unanimously decided that a person with visual impairment is entitled to exemption from ICMS when purchasing a motor vehicle. The decision was taken in May and announced by the court this Monday (June 8, 2026). Read (PDF — 330 kB).
The case involves a resident of the Federal District with monocular vision, a condition of someone who sees with only one eye or has significant visual loss in one of them. He asked the court for the right to buy a vehicle without tax.
The rapporteur, minister, stated that monocular vision is recognized as a disability by Brazilian legislation and by previous decisions of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) in the ADI (Direct Action of Unconstitutionality). For the minister, denying the benefit in this case would be incompatible with the rules protecting people with disabilities.
STJ DECISION
The STJ denied the Federal District’s appeal and maintained the exemption. The court understood that the Judiciary did not create a new tax benefit, but applied existing rules considering legislation on people with disabilities.
Francisco Falcão cited , which classifies monocular vision as a visual sensory impairment for all legal purposes. He also mentioned precedents from the STF and STJ that already recognized this condition as a disability.
The minister stated that the rule according to which tax exemptions must be interpreted literally does not prevent a reading that takes into account the purpose of the rule. According to the vote, tax benefits aimed at people with disabilities must be analyzed in order to preserve their objective: increasing mobility, autonomy and inclusion.
The judgment concluded that it would be contradictory to recognize monocular vision as a disability in other areas of law and deny this condition precisely in a public policy created to facilitate the movement of people with disabilities.
UNDERSTAND THE CASE
The process began in the Federal District. The resident filed a writ of mandamus, a type of action used when a person claims to have a clear right that was denied by a public authority.
He requested exemption from ICMS (Tax on Circulation of Goods and Services) and IPVA (Tax on Motor Vehicle Ownership) to buy a vehicle. The DF Court accepted the request in part: it recognized the right to ICMS exemption, but denied the IPVA exemption because the plaintiff did not yet have a vehicle in his name.
The Federal District government then appealed to the STJ to try to overturn the ICMS exemption. He claimed that tax benefits must be interpreted literally and that monocular vision would not be included in the rules of the agreement, a rule from the (National Council for Financial Policy) that deals with exemptions for people with disabilities.
WHAT IS ICMS
O ICMS It is charged by the States and the Federal District and is levied on the sale of vehicles.
When there is an exemption, the tax is no longer charged on the transaction and can reduce the final value of the car for people who meet the requirements set out in the regulations.
In the case judged by the STJ, the discussion was whether a person with monocular vision could be treated as a person with a disability to access the benefit.
