Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
7 comments 
Measure Approved by the Chamber Resparks Discussion on INSS Anticipations, Changes in Payroll Deductions, and Financial Impact for Retirees, While the Text Goes for Review by the Senators.
The Chamber of Deputies approved, at the beginning of September, the project that prohibits automatic association discounts on INSS benefits and, simultaneously, authorizes banks to deduct directly from retirement amounts referring to anticipation operations of the social security benefit.
The provision was maintained after the rejection of an amendment by 259 votes to 126 and is now sent for evaluation by the Senate.
Changes in INSS Legislation
The project changes social security legislation by prohibiting unions, associations, and class entities from making automatic deductions on the INSS payroll, even with the beneficiary’s authorization.
-
The new Civil Code could revolutionize marriages in Brazil with “express divorce” and changes that could exclude spouses from inheritance.
-
Banco do Brasil sues famous influencer for million-dollar debt and intensifies debate on delinquency, risks of seizure, and direct impact on Gkay’s credibility.
-
The Senate approves a bill that criminalizes misogyny, hatred, or aversion towards women, and includes the crime in the Racism Law with a penalty of up to 5 years.
-
Chamber Approves Bill That Allows Pepper Spray for Women Over 16 and Imposes Strict Rules for Purchase, Possession, and Use as Self-Defense
Under the proposal, these payments can only occur by other means, such as bank slips.
On the other hand, the text allows payroll deductions for amounts related to the anticipation of the social security benefit granted by financial institutions.
This operation consists of advancing part of the benefit amount, at a discount, with subsequent adjustment directly in the retirement or pension.
The proposal does not set a specific ceiling for interest rates or fees for this modality, a point that generated controversy in the plenary.
Another relevant change transfers from the National Social Security Council to the Monetary Council the responsibility for defining the ceiling for payroll-deducted credit.
This shift places the decision under the economic area of the government.
Relationship with My INSS Vale+ and History of Anticipations
The new rule emerges after the experience of My INSS Vale+, a program launched in November 2024 that allowed anticipation of up to R$ 150, interest-free, with full deduction in the following month.
In February 2025, the limit increased to R$ 450.
According to documents released at the time, reports of fee charges by some authorized institutions led the INSS to suspend the program in May 2025.
Experts consulted by congressional committees state that the approved provision resumes, under a different design, the practice of benefit anticipation, but now operated by banks and with parameters that still depend on regulation.
According to these analysts, the absence of explicit rules regarding the total effective cost and timelines could differentiate the banking operation from the previous model, which required settlement in the following month and forbade fees.
Frauds in Social Security and Operation Without Discount
The processing occurred after Operation Without Discount, conducted by the Federal Police and the Office of the Comptroller General, pointed to around R$ 6.3 billion in irregular association discounts between 2019 and 2024.
The investigation prompted internal changes in the INSS and a review of agreements with entities.
The approved text includes “active search” rules, which require the INSS to identify beneficiaries affected by undue discounts based on audits, complaints, reports, and judicial data.
It also establishes that, if the responsible institution does not return the amount within 30 days, the reimbursement must be made by the INSS itself, with subsequent regressive collection.
Debate in the Plenary and Dispute Over Anticipation
The point regarding the anticipation of the benefit was the target of an amendment presented by the PSB, which sought its removal.
However, the passage was maintained by a wide majority.
Deputies defending the suppression argued that the current wording does not set limits tied to the income of the insured, nor does it provide that settlement occurs in the following month.
They argued that this could generate costs higher than those of traditional payroll deductions.
Deputy Rogério Correia (PT-MG) stated in the plenary that, without these safeguards, the provision could result in higher charges than those currently practiced in payroll loans.
He also emphasized that My INSS Vale+ had already been discontinued after reports of fee charges.
Arguments of the Rapporteur and Dialogue with the Government
The rapporteur Danilo Forte (União-CE) defended the substitute, claiming that the proposal combats association fraud and simultaneously preserves an option for beneficiaries who need immediate resources.
According to him, the text was discussed with the Civil House during its preparation.
Forte stated that he received a version suggested by the Civil House containing the expression “without financial burden for the beneficiary,” but that this wording did not remain in the approved text.
On the transfer of the definition of the interest rate ceiling to the CMN, he stated that it is a credit policy decision, considered technical by the government.
Position of Banks and Financial Sector Entities
During the final phase of the Vale+ program, Febraban informed the government of reports of fee charges estimated at around 5% on anticipating up to R$ 450.
The entity states that it did not act for the inclusion of the new provision in the project approved by the Chamber.
ABBC, which represents smaller banks, has been advocating for adjustments in the payroll loan regulations and questioning in the Supreme Federal Court the CNPS’s competence to define the interest rate ceiling.
According to the entity, this responsibility should lie with the CMN, a point that aligns with the passage approved in the Legislature.
Risks Raised by Experts and Undefined Points
Analysts consulted by lawmakers evaluate that the absence of a specific ceiling for anticipation and the lack of definition regarding timelines may allow institutions to offer products more expensive than payroll deductions.
There are also doubts about whether the operation will be subject to the same rules as the permissible payroll margin.
The text, in contrast, tightens the requirements for traditional payroll loans by requiring biometric authentication or qualified electronic signature and imposing temporary blocking of the benefit after each hiring.
These mechanisms aim to reduce frauds occurring by phone or through powers of attorney.
Analysis in the Senate and Upcoming Debates
With the approval in the Chamber, the project moves to the Senate, where lawmakers may modify, maintain, or exclude the provision regarding anticipation.
The criteria for reimbursement, mechanisms for active search, and new requirements for conceding payroll loans will also be discussed.
The handling of this stage will define how measures related to combatting fraud and access to credit will be adjusted.
Amid the discussions, the question persists among lawmakers, experts, and consumer advocacy entities about the practical effects of the new rules for INSS beneficiaries.
O interessante é que quanto mais roubos aparecem mais as leis facilitam a roubalheira. O que falta no Brasil é moralidade!
Congresso inimigo do povo e amigo de governos, num representam nada a não ser a si proprios
Isso é um crime uma barbaridade um roubo. Os juros de devem ser mínimos pois trata-se de um empréstimo aos aposentados descontados diretamente e por isso com total garantia de pagamento, devem ser estabelecidos préviamente e no máximo de 1% ao ano acima dos juros anuais praticados ao financiamento de imóveis praticados pela Caixa Econômica Federal.Toda e qualquer atitude do congresso nacional que tiver como propósito lesar o cidadão deve ser caracterizada como criminosa e os congressistas ter imediata cassação dos seus mandatos.