Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
5 min read
17 comments
A bill currently under consideration in the Senate changes inheritance rules and removes spouses from the list of required heirs. Lawyers warn of the risk of lack of protection and emphasize the importance of estate planning.
O 4 / 2025 Bill, which updates the Civil Code, advances in the Senate with a central change in legitimate succession: the spouse or partner Stop being necessary heir and no longer competes with descendants or ascendants.
Under the proposal, the survivor preserves the share according to the property regime, but loses the automatic right to the mandatory share of the inheritance when there are children or parents of the deceased.
New order of succession: who inherits first
The text reorders the distribution of assets when there is no will.
-
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.
-
So, does paying tolls infringe on the right to come and go? Here's what the law clearly states.
If there are descendants, the inheritance is divided among them; in the absence of children, the ancestors are called upon.
In these cases, the surviving spouse does not receive an inheritance share, unless benefited by will or by other valid succession instrument.
The priority, therefore, becomes that of descendants and, later, that of ascendants.
Share inheritance remains; automatic inheritance disappears
Nothing changes regarding what is already common to the couple.
Em partial communion, the widower or widow keeps 50% of the assets acquired for consideration during the union, but does not automatically inherit the deceased's private assets, such as real estate obtained before the marriage or received through inheritance.
Em conventional separation of assets, when there is no co-owned property, the absence of a last will and testament may result in no receipt of the inheritance.
Already in universal communion, the share reaches the entire communicable estate; even so, the division of the remainder will follow the preference of descendants and, in their absence, of ascendants.
End of succession competition and the role of planning
The proposal closes the succession competition of the spouse with descendants and ascendants.
The survivor becomes an optional heir, called to the inheritance only when there are no descendants or ascendants or when there is an express provision in a will, donation or equivalent instrument.
This drawing replaces the succession planning at the center of family decisions, encouraging the adoption of prenuptial agreements, wills and other solutions that ensure protection beyond the share.
Blended Families and Income Asymmetry: Where the Risk Lies
In long-term unions, blended families, and couples with significant income differences, the elimination of mandatory protection can increase the economic vulnerability of the survivor without prior planning.
Family and succession professionals highlight the need to spread the culture of wills, review agreements to foresee protection clauses and use lawful instruments, such as donations with reservation of usufruct e life insurances, to guarantee the subsistence of those who remain.
Property regimes: practical effects on division
Reading the regimes from the perspective of the proposal indicates significant changes in the inventory.
Na partial communion, the division of the common estate is preserved, while private assets no longer reach the spouse through legitimate means when there are priority heirs.
Na conventional separation, the impact is more acute because there is no share, and the survivor's protection will depend almost entirely on the expression of a last will.
Even in universal communion, the share does not eliminate the prevalence of descendants and, in their absence, of ascendants, as to what exceeds half of the couple.
Registry offices and courts: new conference routines
The change tends to require a thorough check of the property regime, the origin of each asset and the existence of last will provisions in judicial and extrajudicial inventories.
Without a will, executors must observe the new order of calling, which excludes the spouse in the presence of descendants or ascendants.
In the courts, experts predict disputes over the classification of assets as common or private, the validity of donations in life, the scope of incommunicability clauses and challenges to wills that benefit the survivor.
Legal and financial market: adjustment of products and services
Banks and insurers must recalibrate offerings aimed at succession and income protection of the spouse.
Notary offices and registries tend to be more in demand by guidance on wills, donations and covenants.
Law firms are already reporting an increase in demand for pre-marital marriage regime reviews, with specific provisions to safeguard the survivor.
In elderly couples, late unions and situations where assets are concentrated in one ownership, the recommendation for preventive intervention becomes urgent.
Legal debate: arguments and counterpoints
The proponents' justification takes up the view that the share would already protect the spouse, with the inheritance going to the blood heirs.
Critics dispute this, claiming that the sharecropping only covers communicable goods and that, in conventional separation, increasingly used, the survivor may be left without a minimum protection network when there is no common collection.
Another recurring issue is the spouse's non-patrimonial contribution—childcare, household management, and career support—which may not translate into ownership of assets, increasing vulnerability in widowhood.
Senate proceedings and possible adjustments
The analysis continues in Senate committee, with the possibility of editorial adjustments and safeguards during the debate.
At the center of the controversy is the removal of the spouse from the list of necessary heirs and the end of succession competition with descendants and ascendants, an axis that divides civil society entities, legal institutes and professional orders.
While defenders evoke the freedom to test combined with the preservation of sharecropping, opponents point to social risks and increased litigation if there are no clear protection mechanisms for cases of greater vulnerability.
Strategies for couples: how to ensure protection
Without altering the essence of the project, experts recommend mapping common and private assets, formalizing wills when the intention is to support the surviving spouse, adjust prenuptial agreements with safeguard clauses and evaluate donations e payments as additional layers of security.
In parallel, the guidance is to accurately record the property regime and keep documents organized, reducing the scope for conflict when opening the succession.
If the proposal is successful, what should be the new standard of spousal protection: strengthening life planning with private instruments or creating minimum legal safeguards for scenarios of greater vulnerability?
Neither mother nor father. Those who think this way want to destroy the family. What's the point of this bill being discussed in this Senate? Currently, all we see is issues that drive the Brazilian people into poverty and the country into a state of disgrace. This bill needs to be thrown out. Those elected by the people should work on good causes that benefit the Brazilian people, not to abandon A or B.
In part, it's good because there are widows who get everything with the real right of qualification, and the children who inherit from a previous marriage are left with nothing. It's also not fair to arrive and sit at the window, leaving the children's assets without use because of their stepmother.
That's what's happening to me.
Well, and when the stepmother who works and the children stay at the window waiting for everything to fall from the sky!
Well, in my case, I've been working hard for years to build something, and his daughters have never contributed anything to it. Quite the contrary, they just exploit him. His mother, then, only creates discord in the family, and here I am, not buying and going to many places so we can finish building our house, while they are "living" well without any worries. I don't think it's fair, in this situation, for them to inherit what only I helped him build.
I'll advise anyone applying to get married or live together not to do so! This is a mockery! Whose interest does this law have? We can investigate thoroughly and we'll know there's a looooot of money involved! Everyone has to pay, and who will pay in this case? These occult forces want to destroy civil society, which for many years, especially after the 88 Constitution, expanded rights from the poor to the middle class! Vultures!! Vampires!
This serves to fuel the notary mafia. Now imagine a lower- or middle-class family that can't afford the fortunes notaries and lawyers charge to draw up a will or other documents. The wife who spent her life taking care of the house and children so her husband could build up his meager assets (sometimes just the house they live in) will be left in the lurch.
If it's a second marriage, then the person spends 20, 30 years with someone who had a previous relationship with children, often helping to raise those children, only for them to throw the person out, under the protection of the law. Another law to benefit men and the rich!
Just to enrich the richest people
It is very good to attach to this document that the responsibility for caring for widowed parents is strictly that of the heirs, children, relatives, etc.
INHERITS THE ASSETS AND THE ELDERLY SPOUSE TOO!!!
Truth