Check out who should ask for a lifetime review of the INSS in court

The lifetime review enters a new phase in the STF (Federal Supreme Court) after the decision to maintain the votes of retired ministers in judgment to be redone in person. The rule changes the internal rules of the Supreme Court and brings an upheaval for INSS (National Social Security Institute) policyholders who seek correction in court.

With the change in the regiment, social security lawyers recommend that retirees with the right to review file a lawsuit in the Judiciary as soon as possible. The reason is that ministers can modulate the effects, limiting the scope of the decision only to those who have already made the judicial request.

The whole life review is a lawsuit in which retirees ask that all their contributions to the INSS, including those made before the creation of the real, in 1994, be considered in the calculation of the average salary to increase retirement.

The final decision on the correction, judged in the virtual plenary and in March, with six votes in favor and five against, was interrupted a few minutes before the end of the trial period, after a prominent request from Minister Kassio Nunes Marques who will take the case to the plenary. physicist.

“Whoever has the right to file a lawsuit, because we are afraid of modulating the effects. I don’t see any minister signaling for this, but it could happen if this review in the STF works”, says lawyer João Badari, a partner at Badari, Aith and Luchin.

Carolina Centeno, from Arraes and Centeno, gives the same guidance. “The recommendation is that the person who still does not know if he is entitled to seek a specialist lawyer to make a calculation and analysis. If he finds that he is entitled, he must file the request. If the STF modulates the effects, it can restrict the application of the review.”

Who is entitled to a lifetime review

The insured person who retired in the last ten years is entitled to review, provided that it is before the pension reform, instituted by amendment 103, in November 2019. It is also necessary that the benefit has been granted based on the rules of the law 9,876, of 1999.

The correction pays off for those who had high salaries before the start of the Real Plan. Workers who earned less will have no advantage. If they include old, low-value wages, they can reduce the pension they earn today.

It is also necessary to make the calculations and present the documentation that proves the right. The review pays arrears for the past five years.

Badari claims it is an exception fix, as not all policyholders fit it. “It doesn’t fit everyone, it’s an exceptional action. Studies show that one in ten [tem direito]”, he says.

See what documents are required to file a lawsuit

In addition to personal documents, the insured must present:

1. Cnis (National Registry of Social Information), which must include all the retiree’s wages during their working life
2. Retirement granting letter, where the benefit calculation is and which contributions were considered to arrive at the final retirement amount
3. Statement of payment of the last benefit to prove the current amount paid
4. Pay slips and work cards for those who need to prove old salaries, before 1982, when there was no Cnis or another system to consolidate payments
5. GPSs (Social Security Payment Guides) for the self-employed

UNDERSTAND THE CORRECTION

The review asks, in court, for the inclusion of old salaries in retirement to try to correct a distortion created by the 1999 Social Security reform. At the time, the transition rule applied to INSS insureds created two formulas for calculating the average salary used in the calculation of the benefits.

Those who were already insured with the INSS until November 26, 1999 would have their average salary calculated on the 80% highest contributions made from July 1994. For workers who started their contributions on November 27, 1999, the rule permanent established that the average salary would consider the 80% highest salaries of the entire time of contribution.

As a result, those who were already insured by the Social Security and concentrated their largest payments at the beginning of their professional life, before the creation of the Real Plan, were harmed.