The bomb agenda approved by senators could generate an estimated impact of around R$140 billion on public coffers
The minister of published on your account this Wednesday (June 10, 2026), a note criticizing the approval, by the Senate, of proposals that create expenses covered by states and municipalities without previously indicating the source of funding. According to the dean of the STF, “the National Congress cannot create expenses for States and municipalities“.
The criticism was published after the approval by the Senate of projects classified as bomb agendas. The proposals could generate an estimated impact of around R$140 billion on public coffers.
Among the measures approved are:
- : approved by the CAE (Economic Affairs Commission) on June 10, 2026. The proposal allows the renegotiation of agricultural debts and could generate a estimated at more than R$140 billion;
- : approved by the CAS (Social Affairs Commission) on June 10, 2026. The project establishes a floor of R$13,662 for the categories, with a 20-hour work week;
- : approved by CAS, on November 25, 2025. The proposal guarantees special retirement for Community Health Agents and Agents to Combat Endemic Diseases, with impact at around R$24.7 billion.
According to Gilmar Mendes, the measures are unconstitutional. The minister stated that the restriction is foreseen in which prevents federal legislation from imposing new financial obligations on subnational entities without transferring the necessary resources, including personnel expenses and charges.
As an example, the minister cited the what it was by the STF in 2022 after the Court understood that there was a risk of financial impact for states and municipalities.
“In the case of the national nursing minimum, the STF suspended the effectiveness of the law precisely due to the absence of a source of funding and made the payment of the minimum wage by federative entities conditional on the transfer of resources by the Union”he stated.
Gilmar also warned of a possible opposite effect of the measures. “AInstead of achieving the intended objectives, the measure may produce opposite effects, such as unemployment in the very category that was sought to be protected and the precariousness of public services provided to the population.”he declared.
