Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
4 min read
3 comments
The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) is discussing whether parents who pay child support can demand accountability. The ruling could force guardians to disclose how their children's money is used and change rules in Brazil.
Em May of 2024, Superior Court of Justice (STJ) began to discuss one of the most delicate and controversial issues of Family Law in Brazil: the possibility of forcing those who receive alimony to account for the use of money. The trial, which has not yet been concluded, may change the way courts treat transparency in pension spending and directly affect millions of Brazilian families. The issue has divided jurists, parents, and civil law experts for over a decade.
What is being judged about the rendering of accounts for alimony?
The controversy revolves around one central point: Does a pension payer have the right to know exactly how the money is spent?
Currently, there is no law that requires automatic reporting. The person responsible for the child's custody is usually the mother — no need to submit monthly reports or receipts on how you use your pension amount.
-
Bill 1.409/2025 promises to shake up the automotive market: the proposal authorizes individuals to import used cars.
-
Brazilian Chamber approves bill that limits land expropriation and changes agrarian reform rules three decades after the original law.
-
With the new law signed by Lula, banks are required to disclose all costs, allow automatic salary portability, and create credit options with lower interest rates.
-
'CPF for Real Estate' starts in 2026 and could change how your property tax is calculated, but the tax authorities deny a tax increase.
However, recent court decisions have opened up loopholes for the paying parent can ask for formal explanations when there are indications that the money is not being used to support the child.
The STJ is now discussing whether this right should be widely and nationally recognized, turning an exception into a rule.
how it works today
Under Brazilian law (articles 1.583 and 1.589 of the Civil Code), the payment of alimony is a duty of support, and not a financial transaction subject to audit. Justice starts from the principle of good faith: whoever manages the amount uses the money for food, housing, health and education of the child.
But, if the payer suspects misuse of resources for example, if the amount is diverted for personal purposes, it can file a lawsuit requesting accountabilityThis possibility has already been recognized by the STJ in specific decisions, such as in REsp 1.624.287/SP, in which the court considered the father's request to be legitimate, as he presented evidence of misappropriation.
What could change with the new decision
The STJ analyzes whether this right of inspection should be automatic, even without prior proof of misuse.
If the court confirms this thesis, whoever pays a pension may demand an accounting whenever they wish, making the process more transparent, but also more conflictual.
The decision will serve as national precedent, Ou seja, all courts in the country should adopt the same understanding. For experts, the judgment may redefine the balance between rights and duties in the payment of the pension.
Arguments for and against
In favor of transparency: Defenders of the measure claim that accountability is not a form of distrust, but a act of zeal and responsibility. They argue that the pension money belongs to the children, not to the person responsible for administering it, so there must be transparency in use.
The family lawyer Rafael Rocha, interviewed by the Senate Agency, summarizes the argument: "If the amount is paid to ensure the child's well-being, there is no reason to hide how it is used. Accountability is about protecting the child, not punishing the other parent."
Against mandatory: Those who oppose it say that the measure could transform the pension into a surveillance instrument and generate constant conflicts between ex-couples.
According to the lawyer Maria Berenice Dias, from IBDFAM, “accountability should be an exception, not a rule, because constant monitoring undermines trust and judicializes family life”.
Bills on the topic
The debate at the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has reignited discussions in Congress. Bill No. 1.460/2022, which is being processed in the Chamber of Deputies, intends make the provision of child support accounts mandatory.
The text proposes that the person responsible present, annually, a simple report with the main expenses carried out with the pension amount. Proponents of the proposal claim that this would prevent abuse and would bring more balance to family relationships.
On the other hand, critics say that bureaucratization can overload the Judiciary and create humiliating situations for those who manage their children's money.
A debate that involves millions of families
IBGE data shows that more than 5 million children and adolescents receive child support in Brazil. Among those who pay, the majority are parents with incomes between $ 1.500 and $ 3.000, according to Ipea.
Lack of transparency and conflicts over the use of money are today one of the main causes of family legal disputesIf the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) transforms the right to accountability into a national rule, the impact will be immediate on pension review, collection, and enforcement actions.
The trial at the STJ may mark a turning point in the way the Brazilian justice system handles child support. The decision should determine whether the money paid for child support will continue to be managed based on trust or whether it will become supervised by legal obligation.
More than a legal issue, it is a debate about responsibility, transparency and trust in family relationships.
If the alimony is intended to meet the child's needs, it's only natural for the father to demand an accounting of how the alimony is being spent. May it actually be approved!
God bless that it is approved.
Come on, gentlemen of the supreme court of justice.
Let's also prioritize parents' rights.
There has to be accountability, they take 9 dollars, do their nails, spend it on gas, buy beer, sometimes spend the child's entire salary, they have to be responsible with money, because whoever shoots with other people's gunpowder doesn't care... I, for example, pay 1.500 and my son doesn't spend 5000 a month