Most Ministers of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) voted to maintain the application of the social security factor on retirement granted by the 1998 Welfare Reform rules.
The theme has general repercussion, and the outcome of the trial should serve as guidance for all courts in the country. The trial takes place in the virtual plenary, with a session scheduled to last until 11:59 pm on Monday (18). The vote of the majority will be confirmed if there is no request for a view (more time of analysis) or prominent (referral of the case to the physical plenary).
Once confirmed, the decision avoids an impact of R $ 131.3 billion on the Union coffers, according to the estimate presented by the Attorney General of the Union (AGU). The amount corresponds to the review of benefits paid between 2016 and 2025, according to the agency.
Created in 1999, the social security factor is an applied reduction on the benefit value and that takes into account factors such as age, contribution time and life expectancy. The idea was to discourage early pensions.
Many retirees, however, began to complain in court for having the benefits submitted to rules other than those provided for in the 1998 Welfare Reform rules, which resulted in better benefits.
In the case analyzed by the Supreme Court, a retired Rio Grande do Sul who was admitted to the benefit in 2003 complained that he was subjected to two rules for reducing the benefit, those of the transition and the social security factor. She argued that she had, when retiring, the legitimate confidence that only the transition rules would be applied.
For most of the Supreme, however, the application of the social security factor was legitimate, since the transition rules do not guarantee that retirement is not submitted to subsequent norms aimed at the actuarial equilibrium of social security and guarantee the application of the contributory principle, that is, the principle that those who contribute the most earn the most.
“The creation of the social security factor is part of this context of necessary structural adjustments. By binding the value of the initial monthly income to life expectancy and the contribution time of the insured, the factor does not violate legitimate confidence, but performs an actuarial adequacy compatible with the contributory model established by the Constitution,” wrote, Minister Gilmar Mendes, in his vote.
So far, this understanding followed in full Ministers Alexandre de Moraes, Cristiano Zanin, Flávio Dino, André Mendonça and Luiz Fux, forming a majority.
