Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
0 comments 
The Decision of the STF That Overturned the Comprehensive Review Changed the Expectation of Thousands of Retirees and Reignited the Debate About INSS Calculations, Fiscal Impact, and Legal Security, While Insured Report Significant Losses.
The Supreme Federal Court definitively ended the possibility of the “Comprehensive Review” of INSS retirements, a thesis that allowed the inclusion of contributions made before July 1994 in the calculation of the benefit.
According to a report published by UOL, in a virtual trial, the Court canceled the legal thesis and consolidated the understanding that insured individuals can no longer choose the rule considered more advantageous, frustrating retirees who expected to increase, in some cases, up to three times the amount received.
Those who have already obtained favorable decisions until April 2024 will not need to return overpaid amounts, but the future effects of these benefits will now follow the new guidance of the Court.
-
The institute that trained the greatest aerospace engineers in Brazil has just opened its first campus outside São Paulo after 75 years: ITA Ceará will have R$ 445 million, new courses in energy and systems, and classes are expected to start in 2027.
-
Luciano Hang, owner of Havan, goes to Juiz de Fora after the tragedy in February, brings R$ 1 million, hands out R$ 2,000 cards, and donates up to R$ 15,000 to victims in the region.
-
The Brazilian passport allows legal residence in dozens of countries without the need for a prior visa, and most Brazilians are unaware that they can apply for residency directly upon arriving in nations in South America, Africa, and even Europe.
-
Petrobras sends a message to Brazilian truck drivers after fuel collapse and reveals plan to have 100% domestic diesel.
Direct Impact on Retirees
The change directly affects retirees who were counting on the review to balance their budget.
This is the case of Iracilda Soares, 69, who has worked formally in the industry and commerce since 1974.
She claims to have contributed high amounts at the beginning of her career but retired receiving only a minimum wage, calculated based on the lower contributions from her last years of work.
Today, Iracilda lives in Portugal with her family and reports that she can only get by thanks to the support of her children and loans.
According to an investigation by the newspaper UOL, since 2017, when she retired, she had been waiting for the possibility of filing a lawsuit to try to review the benefit.
According to her calculations, the comprehensive review could add about a thousand reais per month to her income.
Summarizing her feeling of loss, she compares the social security system to buying a property: “It’s like buying a house and being told that you only have the right to the bathroom and kitchen.”
A similar situation is faced by Almezinda Lauvs, 69, known as Nena.
A former business executive, she shares that, despite having contributed high amounts at the beginning of her career, she now receives only a minimum wage.
Unable to afford her own housing, she lives temporarily in the homes of others in exchange for work.
Nena retired in 2018, suspected the payment amount made by the INSS right away, and decided to take legal action two years later.
She reports that she managed to have the review recognized in court, which, according to her calculations, would triple her retirement amount.
However, the supplement was never effectively paid.
With a higher benefit, she planned to travel, take care of her health, start a business, pay rent to live alone, and settle accumulated debts.
With the end of the review thesis, Nena says she feels unfairly treated.
The newspaper also pointed out that she reports having developed depression over five years of legal proceedings, which ended without securing the income improvement she had hoped for.
Another retiree who saw the review as a potential course correction is Luiz Antônio Rodrigues, 73.
He says he contributed for many years with amounts close to the INSS ceiling, especially at the beginning of his professional life, almost always in formal jobs in supermarkets.
Today, however, he also receives only a minimum wage.
How the INSS Calculates Retirements
The frustration of these retirees is linked to how legislation defined the calculation of benefits after the Real Plan.
Since Law 9.876 of 1999, Social Security considers 80% of the highest contributions made from July 1994, when the real was implemented.
Contributions made in previous currencies were practically excluded from the calculation for a large part of the insured, even in cases where those payments were higher.
The law provides for conversion mechanisms, such as the URV (Real Unit of Value), but the application of these rules to the entirety of the contribution history became the center of legal dispute.
The comprehensive review defended that the insured should be able to opt for an alternative calculation, considering all contributions, whenever it was more advantageous.
Decisions and U-Turns in the STF
In a tight decision made in 2022, the STF recognized the right of retirees to choose the most favorable criteria.
After the result, thousands of lawsuits were filed across the country, and judgments began to be handed down in first instance.
With the increase in the number of claims, the INSS and the Attorney General’s Office appealed.
In 2023, Minister Alexandre de Moraes suspended the processes until a new definition from the Supreme Court.
The following year, while judging cases about the 1999 pension reform, the Court deemed the rule limiting the calculation to contributions made after July 1994 to be constitutional.
In practice, the understanding became incompatible with the review thesis and the current interpretation of the law.
The conclusion came in the recently concluded virtual trial.
By 8 votes to 3, the ministers decided to cancel the legal thesis that allowed the review.
Fiscal Weight and Defense of System Sustainability
At the center of the discussion was the potential impact of the review on public accounts.
Official estimates projected a cost of up to US$ 480 billion if the benefit were recalculated on a large scale.
Entities representing insured individuals disagreed, calculating much lower amounts.
The divergence involved the actual number of retirements that would benefit from the change and the limits of prescription.
During coverage of the subject, UOL highlighted that at the time, then Attorney General of the Union, Jorge Messias, released a note arguing that the overturning of the thesis would avoid risks to public accounts and administrative collapse at the INSS.
Today, Messias is nominated by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for a position on the STF.
What Happens to Already Opened Processes
Although the STF revoked the thesis, it modulated the effects to protect some retirees who already had judicial decisions.
The Court established that no return of amounts received will be required until April 5, 2024.
Payments made until that date are preserved.
In practice, however, these beneficiaries will lose the right to continue the review.
The retirements will be readjusted, which tends to reduce the future monthly amount.
For those who had ongoing actions but without a definitive decision until April 2024, the scenario has also changed.
The actions will be resumed only for the application of the new understanding.
Retirees who were waiting for the case’s conclusion lose the possibility of reviewing the calculation based on contributions made before 1994.
Experts and Retirees React to the Decision
Social security lawyers argue that the decision brings greater legal certainty to the system.
For these professionals, the unification of interpretation prevents conflicting decisions in identical processes.
On the other hand, retirees who contributed high amounts at the beginning of their careers report loss, frustration, and a sense of unfulfilled promise.
Many claim that the review was their only chance to adjust the benefit to the real standard of contribution maintained for decades.
With this clash between fiscal balance and the expectations of the insured, how should the country conduct new debates about changes in retirement rules?
-
-
3 pessoas reagiram a isso.