English 
Spanish 
4 min read
1 comments
The controversial concession of BR-163 is under threat! TCU may block a billion-dollar investment in highways, causing a planned solution to be set back.
A billion-dollar legal battle threatens to stall the long-awaited government reform bill BR-163, a strategic highway for transportation in Brazil.
The Court of Auditors of the Union (TCU), which has been reviewing a proposal between the concessionaire CCR MSVia and the federal government for over a year, has brought to light a turnaround.
The vote of the rapporteur minister Aroldo Cedraz, against the agreement, cast a shadow of uncertainty over the future of the concession.
- 69 kg emerald valued at R$1 billion is sold for just R$50 million in Bahia
- Offshore electricity: Project with incentive for COAL in Brazil could cost R$595 billion and increase electricity bills by 11%
- INTERNET disconnection: Russia successfully tests blocking millions of users and prepares a global alternative system
- R$20 million in debt and 20 months without salaries: Why did investors give up on buying Avibras?
TCU's Initial Decision
The TCU decision, scheduled for the 13th, will be decisive for the future of BR-163.
According to Cedraz, the project disregards legal norms by including changes in toll values, in addition to extending the concession period and modifying mandatory investments, without guarantees of compliance.
The rapporteur's rejection, if confirmed, would make the billion-dollar investment unfeasible, putting the continuity of the work at risk.
Intense debate in the Plenary
Cedraz's vote divided the plenary. Minister Augusto Nardes requested a more in-depth analysis, postponing the decision.
Another minister, Benjamin Zymler, positioned himself against the rejection, arguing that the TCU has already approved similar concessions.
TCU president Bruno Dantas agreed, highlighting the benefits of a consensual solution.
“This procedure is advantageous to society and should not be blocked for purely legal reasons,” said Dantas, according to sources at TCU.
Cedraz's Justifications
In his justification, Cedraz emphasized that the National Land Transport Agency (ANTT) and CCR MSVia did not respect the rules provided for by law, such as re-bidding in cases of poor performance by the concessionaire.
“This court cannot allow a consensual solution to replace re-bidding, the legal instrument for these cases,” declared Cedraz.
For Cedraz, the current proposal creates an indefinite link between the concessionaire and the highway.
Furthermore, he stated that the change in toll rates and the extension of the concession period is a direct affront to the legal provisions of concession, which require that contractual changes respect the initial bidding conditions.
Challenges and economic impact
According to the State Secretariat for Infrastructure and Logistics (Seilog), the project's resources would be applied until the end of the concession, in 2059, including R$2,3 billion for the first three years.
Experts warn that canceling the agreement would result in economic and logistical losses, impacting the transportation of goods and the flow of crops.
Cedraz mentioned that although the federal government faced difficulties in retaking BR-163, he could not support an act that he considers illegal.
According to him, the self-composition term – technical document with rules and conditions of the agreement – does not comply with the principles of proportionality and legality required by the TCU.
Process and deadlines
The ANTT proposal, which included CCR MSVia, has been under analysis at the TCU since September last year.
After 14 months of procedures, Cedraz's report and the draft of the self-composition term were presented to the plenary only last month.
Although the document has been ready since June, the vote has been postponed several times, now depending on the plenary's final position.
Opposition to the consensual proposal
For Cedraz, the problem lies in legality of the proposal, as this could compromise future road concessions.
According to him, “the consensual solution, although useful, should not replace the re-bidding process, which guarantees transparency and competitiveness.”
In response, the Public Prosecutor's Office at the TCU also positioned itself against the proposal, stating that ANTT and CCR MSVia were favoring a single company, compromising the legal principles of equality in concessions.
Consequences of the final decision from TCU
The outcome of this vote will not only decide the future of BR-163, but will also set precedents on how the TCU will deal with consensual proposals in infrastructure concessions.
Many experts point out that the decision could influence highway concessions throughout the country.
Would the renovation of BR-163 bring a real solution to Brazil's transportation problems, or would it just be another project shrouded in bureaucracy and irregularities?
Brazil needs to evolve economically,
I always thought; why haven't they built a highway in Brazil yet? What happens?
By regions, where there already is and just colleague. Tolls at low annual price.. follow the Swiss model.