After successive postponements, the board of directors of the Central Bank (BC) decided to abandon the creation of specific rules for Pix Parcelado. The decision was communicated this Thursday (4), in Brasília, during the meeting of the Pix Forum, a committee that brings together around 300 participants from the financial system and civil society.
In addition to giving up on regulation, the BC prohibited financial institutions from using the name Pix Parcelado. However, similar terms – such as Pix on credit or Parcele on Pix – remain permitted.
Initially scheduled for September, the mandatory Pix Installments and the standardization of rules were postponed until the end of October and later in November.
The modality, which works as an interest-bearing line of credit offered by banks, is already available on the market and would be regulated to increase transparency for users.
Lack of standardization
Pix in installments allows the consumer to make an instant payment in installments, receiving the full amount immediately, while the customer bears interest. Each bank freely defines rates, deadlines, billing methods and product presentation. The lack of uniformity, according to experts, increases the risk of debt.
Despite names that suggest similarity with traditional credit card installments, the modality is a loan that charges interest from the first day.
Rates have been around 5% per month, while the Total Effective Cost (CET) reaches approximately 8% per month. Contracting usually shows costs only in the final stage. The rules about lateness are not always clear. In many cases, payment of installments appears on the card statement, although the product is not a traditional installment plan.
Reviews
In a note, the Consumer Protection Institute (Idec), which followed the Pix Forum meeting, classified the BC’s decision not to establish standards for credit operations associated with Pix as “unacceptable”. The entity states that the absence of rules creates an environment of “regulatory disorder”, encourages abuse and increases the risk of over-indebtedness.
According to Idec, even with the ban on the name Pix Parcelado, the change is merely cosmetic. “Consumers will continue to be exposed to heterogeneous credit products, without minimum transparency, without mandatory safeguards and without predictability regarding interest or collection procedures”, states the text.
Idec assesses that the Central Bank “chose not to face a problem that is already ongoing”, delegating responsibility for self-regulation to the market. According to Idec, the lack of regulation tends to leave families even more vulnerable.
Idec highlights that, as it is associated with the most reliable brand in the Brazilian financial system, Pix in installments tends to induce impulsive decisions. The entity recalls that Brazil is already experiencing a worrying scenario of over-indebtedness and that the modality can worsen this situation by mixing payment and credit without making the risks clear.
“Pix was born to democratize payments. Transforming it into a gateway to deregulated credit puts this achievement at risk”, warns the institution, which promises to continue pushing for rules that guarantee standardization, security and transparency for consumers.
Uncertain supervision
Although the BC has vetoed the use of the Pix Parcelado and Pix Crédito brands, there is no clarity on how the regulator will monitor the application of these guidelines. During the Pix Forum, representatives of the municipality informed that they will monitor the development of solutions offered by banks, but without imposing specific standards.
For consumer protection entities, this stance opens up space for similar products to work in completely different ways between institutions, making comparison difficult and increasing the likelihood of inappropriate hiring.
Adjustments
In recent months, the expectation was that the Central Bank would publish rules to harmonize the modality’s offering, determining mandatory information – such as interest, IOF and collection criteria – and establishing minimum transparency standards. The delays in regulation reflected an impasse between the BC and the banks, which defended changes to the original proposal in the technical area.
The Brazilian Federation of Banks (Febraban) declared that it was in favor of the existence of rules, but denied having pressured the BC to suspend the regulation. The federation, however, acknowledged having requested adjustments to the text under discussion and claimed that there was no urgency.
