Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
According to Lawyer Jorge Fernandes, PEC 66 Devalues Credits of Retirees, Public Servants, and Companies and Already Provokes Reaction from OAB in STF
The PEC 66 was approved on September 9, 2025, and transformed into a constitutional amendment, radically changing the rules for the payment of precatórios in Brazil. According to lawyer Jorge Fernandes, a public finance specialist, the measure limits transfers from States, municipalities, and the Union and significantly reduces the amounts owed to creditors of final judgments.
In practice, the change impacts retirees, public servants, and companies that were waiting for the release of funds for consumption, health, and investments. The Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) classified the PEC as “official default” and announced a direct action of unconstitutionality (ADI) in the Federal Supreme Court (STF).
What Changes with PEC 66
With its approval, the PEC 66 established a cap of 1% of net current revenue for the payment of precatórios, reducing the annual amount that States and municipalities need to disburse.
-
The noise law will no longer be in effect at 10 PM starting in June with a new rule valid during the 2026 World Cup.
-
The Chamber opens a debate on driver’s licenses at 16 years old as part of a reform that includes around 270 proposals to change the Brazilian Traffic Code and may redesign rules for licensing, enforcement, and circulation in the country.
-
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 interest rates were changed from 15% per year (equivalent to Selic) to IPCA + 2% per year at simple interest, or the lower of that index and Selic.
This means that, in practice, creditors will receive about 7% per year, less than half of what they received before.
For Jorge Fernandes, the amendment creates an environment of insecurity:
“PEC 66 institutionalizes the postponement of payments and devalues precatórios as financial assets, especially harming retirees and public servants who depended on these amounts,” he stated.
Examples of Impact on States
The case of Paraná helps illustrate the effect of PEC 66.
In 2025, the State had a stock of R$ 8.6 billion in precatórios, equivalent to 13.6% of net revenue.
Before the change, it was expected to disburse R$ 1.48 billion per year. With the new cap, this amount drops to R$ 944 million, extending deadlines and leaving creditors in an even more uncertain situation.
This model, supported by state finance secretaries, has been criticized by class entities and specialists, who warn of a “snowball” of debts with no real prospect of payment.
Reaction of OAB and Questioning in STF
The National OAB, led by Beto Simonetti, reacted immediately.
For the entity, PEC 66 violates constitutional guarantees by allowing the indefinite postponement of debts recognized by the Judiciary.
Therefore, a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality has already been filed in the STF to try to overturn the amendment or limit its effects to precatórios issued after 2025.
According to Jorge Fernandes, this judicial dispute will be decisive:
“If the Supreme Court does not intervene, States and municipalities will have a permanent incentive to delay payments, reducing families’ purchasing power and compromising trust in the system”.
Precatórios Market in Collapse
In addition to the legal impact, the market for buying and selling precatórios has been directly affected.
Investment funds and specialized platforms, such as precashop.com.br, report a sharp decline in offered values and a retraction of buyers.
For many creditors, early sale, previously seen as an alternative, has now become even less attractive, as offers are well below the nominal value.
With PEC 66, retirees and public servants who depended on the sale of these titles to generate liquidity face immediate devaluation and uncertainty about the future of payments.
The approval of PEC 66 marks a profound change in the precatórios regime in Brazil: it reduces interest rates, limits disbursements, and creates space for public managers to postpone judicial debts.
While the OAB seeks to reverse the amendment in the STF, millions of creditors are already suffering from devaluation and uncertainty.
Do you believe that PEC 66 represents an institutionalized default or a necessary form of fiscal adjustment? Do you know someone who was directly affected by these changes? Leave your opinion in the comments — your experience can help enrich this debate.
Seja o primeiro a reagir!