About the votes presented

The Ranking of Politicians expresses its support for PLP 73/2025, understanding that the technical autonomy of regulatory agencies necessarily depends on budgetary autonomy. An agency whose performance can be compromised by discretionary budget cuts from the Executive Branch loses part of its independence and reduces its capacity to fulfill the mission for which it was created.

Regulatory agencies play a strategic role in the Brazilian economy. They are responsible for overseeing essential sectors, ensuring contract compliance, protecting consumers and investors, and guaranteeing regulatory stability. To perform these functions independently, it is not enough for their leaders to have fixed terms or protection against arbitrary dismissal. It is essential that they also have the necessary resources to carry out their duties.

Brazil has already recognized this principle by approving the autonomy of the Central Bank. Complementary Law No. 179/2021 strengthened the institution by granting fixed terms to its board of directors, reducing short-term political influence on monetary policy. The logic is simple: eminently technical decisions should not be subject to the conveniences of the government in power. The same reasoning applies to regulatory agencies. It is of little use to guarantee formal autonomy if their actions can be limited by budget constraints that render their activities unfeasible.

PLP 73/2025 seeks precisely to correct this distortion. The proposal prevents the agencies' own revenues—largely derived from inspection fees paid by the regulated sectors themselves—from being earmarked for other purposes. This is not about increasing public spending or relaxing fiscal responsibility. It is about ensuring that resources collected for a specific purpose are effectively used in the regulatory activity for which they were established.

The withholding of these revenues creates a paradox. The state collects fees to finance the agencies' activities, but prevents them from using these resources. The result is a reduction in oversight capacity, delays in authorizations, licenses and technical analyses, and increased legal uncertainty in strategic sectors of the economy.

The Ranking of Politicians opposes the proposal, arguing that granting an exemption from ISS (Service Tax) for events related to the organization and execution of the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup creates a selective tax benefit, reduces municipal revenue, and transfers the fiscal cost of a large-scale private event to the average taxpayer.

Although hosting the tournament may generate positive externalities, such as tourism, international visibility, and economic activity, any revenue waiver must be exceptional, transparent, justified by clear estimates of budgetary impact, and accompanied by objective counterpart measures. Without this, the measure approaches a tax privilege granted to an entity with high economic capacity, to the detriment of local public services and fiscal responsibility.

The ranking argues that international events are welcome in Brazil, but not at the expense of a system where the government forgoes revenue while the population continues to bear one of the heaviest tax burdens in the world. Economic development is not built on isolated exceptions, but on general rules, a healthy business environment, and equal treatment among taxpayers.

PLP 6/2024 establishes national rules for the division of part of a municipality's territory and its incorporation into another existing municipality. The text makes it clear that this is not about creating new cities, but about resolving existing territorial conflicts. To this end, it requires an initiative from the Legislative Assembly, a feasibility study, and approval by plebiscite with the population of the municipalities involved. On March 25, 2026, the Senate approved the proposal by 62 votes to 0, with Senator Alessandro Vieira as rapporteur, and the text was sent for presidential approval.

Why the Politicians Ranking is favorable
The Ranking of Politicians is favorable to the matter because it organizes a situation that today often generates legal uncertainty, administrative disputes, and direct harm to the population. There are cases in which communities live in municipal border areas without clarity about who they belong to, which hinders the provision of public services, urban planning, revenue collection, and the definition of public authorities' responsibilities. By establishing an objective procedure, with technical studies and public consultation, the project brings greater institutional security and more administrative rationality.

Furthermore, the project is correct in prohibiting the creation of new municipalities in this process. This is important because it prevents the expansion of the public sector, the increase in administrative structures, and new permanent costs for the taxpayer. The proposal does not create room for multiplying city halls, councils, and positions; it merely creates a legal pathway to correct existing territorial distortions.

From the Ranking's perspective, this is a favorable measure because it combines three important elements: federal order, technical criteria, and respect for the popular will . The project improves local governance, reduces conflicts between public entities, and brings transparency to a sensitive decision that cannot be subject solely to informal political agreements.

The proposed amendment to the Constitution seeks to strengthen coordination between the federal government, states, and municipalities in the formulation and execution of public security policies. The initiative establishes mechanisms for institutional integration, improves cooperation instruments between security forces, and aims to bring greater rationality to the national security system.

The measure is considered positive because it promotes greater efficiency in public security management, reduces fragmentation among different agencies, and encourages coordinated action in the fight against crime. By improving the governance of the system and strengthening federal cooperation, the proposal tends to improve the State's capacity to respond to the rise in crime, contributing to more effective policies and better use of public resources.

The proposal addresses the creation of new permanent positions, commissioned positions, and commissioned functions within the staff of the National Council of Justice (CNJ). In practice, the project expands the administrative structure of the body by opening new paid positions, including freely appointed functions.

From a public interest perspective, the measure is considered negative because it increases permanent expenses of the public sector without presenting clear justifications of operational necessity or proven efficiency gains. In a scenario of fiscal constraints and debate about the rationalization of the State, the expansion of the administrative structure tends to increase personnel costs and reinforce the logic of growth of the bureaucratic apparatus, instead of prioritizing the improvement of management and the optimization of existing resources.

The proposal authorizes the installation and operation of pharmacies within supermarkets, allowing medications to be sold in these establishments, provided that sanitary requirements are met and a responsible pharmaceutical professional is present.

The measure is considered positive because it expands public access to medicines and increases competition in the sector, which can contribute to lower prices and greater convenience for consumers. By allowing the integration of pharmacy services in supermarkets, the proposal also stimulates a more competitive environment in pharmaceutical retail, promoting economic efficiency and facilitating public access to essential health products.

PLP 14/2026 addresses the reduction of PIS/Cofins tax rates applied to the chemical and petrochemical industry, with the aim of adjusting and organizing the transition of tax benefits in light of the new tax structure foreseen in the reform. The text, approved by the Senate in February 2026, also corrects previous vetoes and establishes a limit of up to R$ 2 billion for tax waivers in 2026, creating a clearer framework for granting these incentives.

The Ranking of Politicians supports the project, understanding that it combines economic stimulus with fiscal responsibility. By reducing the tax burden on a strategic sector, the proposal contributes to the competitiveness of industry and the preservation of investments and jobs. At the same time, by setting a ceiling for benefits, it avoids excesses and reinforces the predictability of public accounts. It is a measure that corrects distortions, brings greater rationality to the tax system, and aligns with the principles of state efficiency and improvement of the business environment advocated by the Ranking.

The Politicians' Ranking is favorable to the matter because it strengthens the State's capacity to react to the advance of organized crime in a firmer, more modern way, and more compatible with the gravity of the problem. Factions and militias do not act merely as common criminal groups. In many cases, they control territories, intimidate communities, interfere in the local economy, impose their own rules, and directly challenge the authority of public power. Given this, it makes sense that legislation should stop treating this phenomenon with insufficient or outdated instruments.

The proposal is positive because it attacks not only the armed wing of these organizations, but also their support structure. By providing for measures of financial strangulation, seizure of assets, and harsher punishments for leaders, the law increases the operating cost of organized crime and reduces its capacity for expansion. This is relevant because factions and militias are maintained not only by violence, but also by money, logistics, and the occupation of spaces where the State has failed to assert itself.

Another positive aspect is that the legislation seeks to provide greater legal clarity in addressing these criminal structures, with new classifications and procedural instruments geared towards the current reality of public security. This tends to provide greater security for the actions of police forces, the Public Prosecutor's Office, and the Judiciary, as well as reduce loopholes that currently hinder the effective accountability of members of these organizations.

From the Ranking's perspective, this is a favorable measure because it reinforces public order, protects the population subjected to the dominion of crime, and improves the institutional capacity of the Brazilian State to confront organizations that erode freedom, security, and the very regular functioning of life in society.

In the analysis of Proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 3/2021, which deals with the expansion of parliamentary prerogatives, the NOVO party presented a separate voting motion (DTQ 8), with the objective of removing from the final text the expression "the National Presidents of political parties with representation in the National Congress" , which had been included to extend the typical prerogatives of parliamentarians (such as privileged jurisdiction and immunity) also to these party leaders.

Including this category among those entitled to constitutional prerogatives represents an unacceptable institutional distortion that unjustifiably expands legal and political protection within the Brazilian party system.

Why the Ranking of Politicians opposes the inclusion of party presidents in parliamentary prerogatives:

Improper and disproportionate protection

Party presidents are not elected representatives with a direct popular mandate. Extending prerogatives to them such as privileged jurisdiction or protection against precautionary measures violates the republican principle of equality before the law and creates a disproportionately protected ruling caste.

Worsening disconnect between voters and the political system.

The Brazilian political system already faces high levels of distrust and disconnect between voters and parties. Creating new privileges for party leaders reinforces the perception that politics functions to benefit the few, undermining the legitimacy of institutions.

Risk of misuse of party structures

Party presidents control election nominations, TV time, campaign funds, and coalitions. Granting them extra immunities could encourage the use of the party machine as a shield for private interests or protection against investigations.

Misuse of constitutional power

Parliamentary prerogatives exist to protect the free exercise of the popular mandate, not to shield party bureaucracies. Their undue extension distorts the original constitutional logic and unjustifiably expands spaces for impunity.

In the analysis of Proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 3/2021, which deals with the expansion of parliamentary prerogatives, the NOVO party presented a separate voting motion (DTQ 8), with the objective of removing from the final text the expression "the National Presidents of political parties with representation in the National Congress" , which had been included to extend the typical prerogatives of parliamentarians (such as privileged jurisdiction and immunity) also to these party leaders.

Including this category among those entitled to constitutional prerogatives represents an unacceptable institutional distortion that unjustifiably expands legal and political protection within the Brazilian party system.

Why the Ranking of Politicians opposes the inclusion of party presidents in parliamentary prerogatives:

Improper and disproportionate protection

Party presidents are not elected representatives with a direct popular mandate. Extending prerogatives to them such as privileged jurisdiction or protection against precautionary measures violates the republican principle of equality before the law and creates a disproportionately protected ruling caste.

Worsening disconnect between voters and the political system.

The Brazilian political system already faces high levels of distrust and disconnect between voters and parties. Creating new privileges for party leaders reinforces the perception that politics functions to benefit the few, undermining the legitimacy of institutions.

Risk of misuse of party structures

Party presidents control election nominations, TV time, campaign funds, and coalitions. Granting them extra immunities could encourage the use of the party machine as a shield for private interests or protection against investigations.

Misuse of constitutional power

Parliamentary prerogatives exist to protect the free exercise of the popular mandate, not to shield party bureaucracies. Their undue extension distorts the original constitutional logic and unjustifiably expands spaces for impunity.

On July 8, 2025, the House of Representatives approved the main text of a bill authorizing the creation of 160 commissioned positions at the FC-6 level in the Supreme Federal Court (STF) , in addition to an appendix that provides for the creation of 40 more judicial technician positions to act as judicial police agents .

According to the project, the estimated cost of the 160 commissioned positions is at least R$ 7.78 million in 2025 , a figure that rises to R$ 7.81 million in 2026 , with the inclusion of charges such as the 13th-month salary and vacation pay . The proposal does not detail the additional costs of the 40 new permanent positions , which compromises transparency and prevents a realistic estimate of the total fiscal impact.

Why the Politicians' Ranking opposes the project:

• Disregard for fiscal responsibility
  Amid a scenario of strong pressure on public finances, the creation of positions without robust technical justification represents a setback in the policy of austerity and rationalization of state spending. The project permanently expands mandatory expenses, compromising fiscal balance.

• Lack of transparency in total costs
  The project presents partial estimates and omits the total financial impact by not considering the costs of the 40 permanent judicial technician positions. The absence of this information compromises a proper analysis of the merits and budgetary consequences.

• An increase in appointed positions within a branch of government that already enjoys a broad administrative structure.
  The Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) is one of the most well-structured constitutional courts in the world, with significant material and human resources. The expansion of appointed positions, which do not require public competitive examinations and are filled by free appointment, is inconsistent with the pursuit of a more efficient, technical, and impartial judiciary.

• Bad institutional example
  The approval of the bill sends a negative signal to society and the other branches of government. While the country faces difficulties in securing public investments and meeting fiscal targets, it creates space for the growth of internal power structures with unclear criteria.

The contested decree, issued by the Executive Branch, significantly increased the tax burden on credit, foreign exchange, insurance, and securities transactions, directly impacting the cost of credit and economic activity. According to the authors of the draft legislation, the measure was taken without proper technical justification, without dialogue with the National Congress, and with serious consequences for the business environment in the country.

A request for urgency was presented in the plenary session of the House of Representatives for the processing of the Draft Legislative Decree (PDL) aimed at suspending the effects of the presidential decree that increased the rates of the Tax on Financial Operations (IOF). The objective of the request is to accelerate the consideration of the matter, preventing the economic effects of the measure from continuing to penalize citizens, companies, and investors.

The contested decree, issued by the Executive Branch, significantly increased the tax burden on credit, foreign exchange, insurance, and securities transactions, directly impacting the cost of credit and economic activity. According to the authors of the draft legislation, the measure was taken without proper technical justification, without dialogue with the National Congress, and with serious consequences for the business environment in the country.

In requesting the expedited procedure, parliamentarians argue that it is necessary to ensure legal certainty and tax predictability, especially in a scenario of economic recovery. Furthermore, they emphasize that increasing the IOF (Tax on Financial Operations) by decree escapes regular legislative control, constituting a tax increase without democratic debate.

If the request is approved, the draft bill could be voted on directly in plenary session, without needing to go through the thematic committees, which could accelerate its analysis and eventual approval. The initiative is supported by parliamentarians from different parties, who see the project as a legitimate instrument for Congress to control unilateral acts of the Executive branch that affect revenue collection and the taxpayer.

Bill No. 1,466 of 2025 proposes a salary adjustment for various categories of federal public servants. The measure was presented amidst the government's administrative restructuring process and discussions about the fiscal space available in the Union's budget.

The project has generated debate in the National Congress and among public finance experts. It is argued that, in a scenario of high fiscal deficit and pressure for budgetary responsibility, the increase in personnel expenses could compromise the balance of public accounts and limit investments in other essential areas.

Furthermore, there are questions regarding the lack of meritocracy and performance criteria in granting salary adjustments, which could reinforce internal inequalities within the public service and discourage the pursuit of efficiency and administrative modernization.

Bill No. 1,466 of 2025 proposes a salary adjustment for various categories of federal public servants. The measure was presented amidst the government's administrative restructuring process and discussions about the fiscal space available in the Union's budget.

The project has generated debate in the National Congress and among public finance experts. It is argued that, in a scenario of high fiscal deficit and pressure for budgetary responsibility, the increase in personnel expenses could compromise the balance of public accounts and limit investments in other essential areas.

Furthermore, there are questions regarding the lack of meritocracy and performance criteria in granting salary adjustments, which could reinforce internal inequalities within the public service and discourage the pursuit of efficiency and administrative modernization.

Change the method of calculating the population to determine the number of federal deputies per state, increasing it from 513 to 531 federal deputies.

The proposal loosens control over budget execution , opening the door to the indiscriminate use of outstanding payments as a way to "push" expenses from one fiscal year to another, compromising fiscal transparency. Furthermore, it reduces the incentive for efficient planning , favoring the artificial postponement of public spending and hindering the assessment of the government's real efforts to contain expenses.

Politically, the project benefits public managers who seek greater leeway to fulfill promises or release funds in election years , without the proper backing of timely budget execution, which weakens the fiscal framework and the credibility of public accounts .

Amends Complementary Law No. 123, of December 14, 2006, to allow for the calculation of credits for micro-enterprises and small businesses opting for the Simples Nacional (Simplified National Tax Regime), in the event of total or partial refund of residual tax remaining in the production chain of exported goods.

The amendment creates a Wealth Tax (IGF) that will apply to assets exceeding R$10 million, encompassing the possession, ownership, or control of goods and rights. The tax rate will be progressive, ranging from 0.5% to 1.5%, depending on the asset value. The proposal aims to ensure that large fortunes contribute to the socioeconomic development of the country, in line with the "Tax the Super-Rich" campaign, supported by more than 60 organizations.