The Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) has rescheduled a pivotal judgment concerning “penduricalhos”—irregular supplementary payments exceeding the constitutional salary cap for public servants—to March 25, 2025. This decision means that existing injunctions, which temporarily halted these disputed payouts, will remain in force for at least another month.
The adjournment prolongs the legal uncertainty surrounding significant financial benefits for a segment of the public sector. Ministers Flávio Dino and Gilmar Mendes had previously issued preliminary injunctions interrupting these payments, deemed irregular due to their nature and value.
Initially, there was an expectation that the full court would have concluded its analysis of the complex issue by late February 2025. However, the President of the Court, Minister Edson Fachin, announced that the justices would jointly consider the injunctions granted by Ministers Dino and Mendes, alongside other related cases, during the upcoming March session.
Injunctions maintained amid ongoing debate
The preliminary rulings from Ministers Gilmar Mendes and Flávio Dino target indemnity payments made above the constitutional salary ceiling for public service, which is currently set at R$ 46,366.19. Mendes’s injunction specifically suspended amounts established by state laws for members of the Judiciary and Public Prosecutor’s Office that surpass this remuneration limit.
Concurrently, Dino’s injunction mandated a nationwide halt to payments lacking legal backing and set a timeframe for the National Congress to enact legislation standardizing these controversial benefits. Although the ministers had initially stipulated differing deadlines for compliance, they later harmonized these dates, establishing a single 45-day period for adherence to the measures.
President Fachin further revealed that a technical commission, comprising senior representatives from the three branches of government, has already commenced work on developing a proposal for a transitional regulatory framework. This collaborative effort underscores the judiciary’s recognition of the systemic implications of such a broad policy shift.
Warnings against circumvention
Despite the extended deliberation period, Minister Gilmar Mendes issued a stern warning against any attempts by public bodies to manipulate payment schedules to bypass the Supreme Court’s directives. He explicitly stated that financial reprogramming aimed at concentrating, accelerating, or expanding disbursements, or including new beneficiaries not in original plans, is strictly prohibited.
Mendes also underscored the severe consequences for any organization or individual found attempting to circumvent these decisions. Such actions could lead to administrative, disciplinary, and criminal accountability, in addition to the mandatory restitution of any funds disbursed improperly. Furthermore, Minister Flávio Dino reinforced this position by prohibiting the creation of new laws that might authorize or legalize the payment of these “penduricalhos” while the matter remains under the STF’s review.
Concerns over systemic impact and legal certainty
The broad suspension of these indemnity payments has raised alarms among public service representative bodies, which advocate for a carefully managed transition. Francelino das Chagas Valença Junior, President of the Fenafisco (National Federation of State and District Tax Authorities), noted that while the court’s objective is to curb distortions, an abrupt implementation without considering existing administrative structures could have widespread systemic repercussions, potentially affecting more than just “super salaries.”
Valença Junior explained that many indemnity payments emerged over time as a response to salary compression and inadequate adjustments of the constitutional ceiling against inflation. He emphasized the challenge of distinguishing legitimate public management mechanisms from undue privileges, arguing that without clear criteria and a responsible transition, a well-intended moralizing measure could destabilize sensitive areas of public policy and increase legal insecurity.
Inside sources suggest that the joint judgment in March 2025 is seen as a move to provide greater legal certainty. The simultaneous review of the injunctions by Ministers Dino and Gilmar, along with other related cases, is expected to enable the full court to establish uniform parameters and prevent fragmented rulings on these controversial payments.
Commitment to a structured transition
On the same day as the adjournment announcement, Minister Fachin formally requested the Executive and Legislative branches to designate their representatives for the technical commission. This commission, designed to propose a transition regime for the suspended indemnity payments, will include members from all three powers.
The group has been allotted a 30-day timeframe to present its proposal, a period that closely aligns with the March 25, 2025, judgment date. Official communications were sent to key cabinet members, including the Minister of Finance, Fernando Haddad; the Minister of the Chief of Staff, Rui Costa; the Minister of Management and Innovation in Public Services, Esther Dweck; and to the Presidents of the Senate, Davi Alcolumbre, and the Chamber of Deputies, Hugo Motta. This collaborative approach aims to mitigate potential disruptions and ensure a more coherent resolution to a long-standing issue.
