Brazil that Does Not Go Back

On the side of retirees: an end to fraud

Proposes reissuing an anti-fraud package for social security along the lines of 2019 and changing the governance of INSS payroll-deducted loans, with more transparency, control and double-checking of deductions.

In the program: [p. 72, 73] · Translated by Flaviopédia from the official Portuguese text; the Portuguese quote is authoritative. Read the original in Portuguese

What the program says

Our place has always been alongside those who worked their whole lives. In January 2019, the first measure of our government, right after the reduction of ministries, was the Anti-Fraud Provisional Measure (MP nº 871/2019), which required the annual revalidation of association-fee deductions from retirement benefits, canceling any deduction made without the retiree’s consent. It was the first government in almost thirty years to confront this mockery of the elderly. The measure landed like a bomb among unions and left-wing parties, which mobilized and managed to strip out this and other anti-fraud barriers. The result was the “Farra do INSS” (literally “INSS spree”; INSS is the federal social-security agency): the explosion of improper deductions that tripled the amounts stolen from the elderly, pensioners and beneficiaries of social programs in 2023 and 2024. And we did not stop there. Even after leaving government, we kept up the fight for retirees from Congress: it was through the opposition’s mobilization, after the CPMI (joint congressional committee of inquiry) on the INSS and against the resistance of the Lula government, that we managed to pass the definitive end of association-fee deductions, in November 2025. We will resume this fight as a top priority. We will reissue an anti-fraud package for the social-security system, along the lines of what we did in 2019, and we will spare no effort to curb any new attempt to steal the money of those who have already made their contribution to the country. We cannot let payroll-deducted loans (consignado) to INSS beneficiaries become the next chapter of this story. What was seen with association-fee deductions shows the damage that a lack of control can cause. We will change the governance of payroll-deducted loans so that the fraud is not repeated, reviewing who operates these deductions and how they are authorized, with more transparency and more control, including a double check that prevents what was not authorized from being taken out of the benefit. No more treating those who depend on the INSS as easy prey. And the fight against the wait that still punishes retirees, with the INSS queue that reached three million applications, is detailed in “Brasil sem Fila” (“Brazil without Queues”), with the digitalization of processes and the professionalization of the agency’s management. [p. 72, 73]

In plain language

  • The program proposes reissuing an anti-fraud package for the social-security system, along the lines of what the text says was done in 2019, when the Anti-Fraud Provisional Measure (MP nº 871/2019) required the annual revalidation of association-fee deductions from retirement benefits.
  • It provides for changing the governance of payroll-deducted loans to INSS beneficiaries, reviewing who operates these deductions and how they are authorized, with more transparency, more control and a double check to prevent unauthorized deductions.
  • The text states that the removal of these anti-fraud barriers led to an explosion of improper deductions, which tripled the amounts taken from the elderly, pensioners and beneficiaries of social programs in 2023 and 2024. It also cites the passage of the definitive end of association-fee deductions in November 2025.
  • For the INSS queue, which the text says reached three million applications, it refers to the Brazil without Queues theme, citing the digitalization of processes and the professionalization of the agency’s management.

What is not in the program

  • It does not detail which measures would make up the new anti-fraud package or the legal instrument (provisional measure, law or other).
  • It does not explain how the double check would work or who would take over operating the payroll-loan deductions.
  • It does not address reimbursement for those who had improper deductions.
  • It gives no targets, timeline or agency responsible for carrying it out.