Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
The STF Resumes Crucial Judgment That May Impact Up to R$ 48 Billion on Electricity Bills, Resulting in Increases of Up to 50% for Consumers Nationwide
The Supreme Federal Court (STF) resumed the judgment of a case that may cause an increase in electricity bills for some consumers. The virtual plenary judgment is related to an important issue: the refund of tax credits overpaid on electricity bills.
Depending on the decision, consumers may face increases of up to 50% on their electricity bills, according to estimates from consumer advocacy associations.
According to a report by UOL, the central issue is whether part of the tax credits, which were paid excessively, should be retained by electricity distributors.
-
Heir worked at thirteen in an ice cream factory without revealing he was the owner’s son; today, at twenty-five, he leads the best-selling ice cream brand for home consumption in the Northeast, grosses almost R$ 300 million, has 145 stores, and competes with multinationals with regional flavors.
-
Lock manufacturer from Rio Grande do Sul invests R$ 150 million to surpass R$ 1 billion in revenue, create 200 jobs, and double storage capacity, while choosing Santa Catarina to set up a new logistics center and speed up deliveries in Southern Brazil.
-
Neymar elevates the status of the Northeast with a billion-dollar megaproject of 28 luxury developments, 100 km of turquoise-blue beaches, 10 residential projects already under construction, multimillion-dollar beachfront mansions, an exclusive sports arena, and an expected impressive movement of R$ 7.5 billion in Pernambuco and Alagoas.
-
Luciano Hang’s cousin left Havan after nearly a decade, invested in real estate, and now manages R$ 6 billion in launches; the entrepreneur, who only gets paid when he sells, claims to have sold out an entire building in Santa Catarina in just 45 minutes.
If the STF decides in the affirmative, consumers may be required to return the amounts already credited to their accounts or lose discounts on future bills.
Estimates indicate that the impact could be significant, mainly affecting consumers of companies like Light, Cemig, and Enel SP, with average increases of about 30%.
The judgment is ongoing, with five ministers already voting for the return of credits to consumers and one minister, Flávio Dino, voting against the return, which would lead to a slight decrease in electricity bills.
Currently, the score is 6 to 0 in favor of returning the credits, but the debate over the refund period is still open, with decisions that may or may not be suitable for consumers.
Impact on Electricity Bills and Inflation
The debate in the STF is not just a simple dispute between consumers and distributors. While the distributors claim that costs associated with pro-consumer actions should be reimbursed, there is also the risk of a substantial impact on electricity bills, which could affect inflation.
According to estimates from the Brazilian Association of Energy Consumers (Abrace), the total value of the credits may reach R$ 48 billion, directly affecting consumers in regions served by the distributors involved in the process.
The impact on electricity bills may vary depending on the distributor and the STF’s decision. If the court opts for a longer refund period, consumers may be required to pay back part of the amounts, which would mean an increase in bills. A shorter period could relieve the situation for consumers, resulting in a decrease in energy costs.
Understand the Context of the Discussion
The origin of the dispute dates back to Law 14.385/22, which mandated the compensation of improperly charged PIS/Cofins credits from energy consumers. This improper charge occurred due to a controversy regarding the inclusion of ICMS in the calculation of these taxes. The law provides for the return of the credits to consumers, but the distributors question the constitutionality of the norm, arguing that they should receive part of the credits to cover the costs of judicial actions taken in favor of consumers.
Currently, the STF already has a majority on the constitutionality of the law, meaning that the ministers have agreed that the credits should be refunded to consumers. What is still under discussion is whether the distributors should retain part of these credits to cover the costs of their actions.
Furthermore, the issue of the refund period for the credits is also under debate. If the ministers agree to a prescription of five or ten years, some consumers will have to return the credits received, which could lead to significant increases in electricity bills.
If the STF determines that there is no prescription, consumers may continue to enjoy discounts or even see a slight reduction in their bills.
The STF Score
Currently, the score is 6 to 0 in favor of returning the credits to consumers, but the issue of prescription still needs to be defined. Minister Flávio Dino is the only one voting against the prescription, which would keep the credits for consumers. Ministers Alexandre de Moraes, Cristiano Zanin, and Nunes Marques advocate for a ten-year prescription period, while Luiz Fux and André Mendonça suggest a five-year period.
The judgment will continue until November 29, when the ministers will present their final votes. Until then, the future of many consumers’ electricity bills will depend on the STF’s decision.
Be the first to react!