Senate postpones vote on fuel bills after pressure from governors

The Federal Senate once again postponed the vote on the package of bills aimed at reducing fuel prices. The proposals were on the voting agenda this Wednesday (23), but ended up withdrawn for the second consecutive week and will be resumed only on March 8.

The decision was taken by Senate President Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), after a long discussion among congressmen. Pacheco heeded senators’ request for more time to discuss the proposals.

“The direction that the presidency makes is that we have the clarity that the project was sufficiently discussed this afternoon, the opinion was conceived and presented by the rapporteur. If there is a need for time for reflection, we will then give that time for reflection, with the commitment that in the next session of the Senate, after Carnival, we can speak, as the Senate of the Republic”, said Pacheco.

Parliamentarians pointed to pressure from the states so that the proposal was not considered. Governors called directly to senators requesting the withdrawal of the agenda, using as an argument the risk of loss of revenue.

“I receive a report of a potential reduction in revenue, in my state of Sergipe alone, of R$ 257 million. This cannot be defined in such an accelerated, hasty way, even if the issue requires our urgent work”, said the Senator Alessandro Vieira (Citizenship-SE).

The rapporteur of the proposal, Senator Jean Paul Prates (PT-RN), in turn, recognizes that there were contacts, but does not consider that it was an action to postpone the vote.

“It’s natural for a governor to pass a thread to senators, to clear up doubts, ask for clarification. But I don’t see the governors blocking (sic) anything,” he said.

States are against change. “The implementation of a uniform rate in a new regime would inevitably lead to an increase in the tax burden”, says Comsefaz (Committee of State Secretaries of Finance). According to the entity, states with a lower tax burden would have to raise their rates to ensure that other states maintain the same level of revenue.

On Tuesday night (22), the rapporteur of the proposals, Senator Jean Paul Prates, had presented new texts for the two bills, in which he retreated in some important points in the search to build an agreement for the vote.

Even so, there was no consensus. “We will be charged for this postponement, but if it is in favor of a better project and an expression of all senators, I will not place obstacles”, warned the rapporteur.

The senator dropped the idea of ​​creating a tax on oil exports to finance a stabilization account, which would be used to dampen fluctuations in fuel prices, particularly due to changes in international oil prices.

The creation of the tax was a sensitive point for its legend and it was included in the original text of the project, authored by its co-religionist, Rogério Carvalho (PT-SE), but it faced resistance from the largest party benches in the Senate.

Before the session, still in the morning, Pacheco had said that the withdrawal of the tax “facilitates the process and the appreciation well”.

As an alternative, the text maintains the stabilization account, but with revenue from oil royalties, special participations and dividends paid by Petrobras to the Union as sources of funding.

The economic team maintains its position against the project, according to sources heard by the sheet. The assessment is that the design of the account is poor and ineffective in holding fuel prices, while imposing a high cost on the federal government.

The revenues directed to the account are now used by the government to cover other expenses. In addition, transfers from the account to Petrobras or fuel importers would constitute an expense subject to the ceiling, according to the technicians. Today, there is no room in the expenditure limit for this type of measure.

For the economic team, the ideal scenario is that this project that deals with the stabilization account is left aside and only advances to the other proposal that makes up the package, which provides for the change in the rules of ICMS (Tax on the Circulation of Goods and Services) about fuels.

In the current version of the text, the rapporteur predicts that states will have the option of creating a single ICMS rate on fuels. But while this is not implemented by the governors, the tax on diesel and biodiesel will have to be levied on a defined calculation basis, obtained by the moving average of the last five years.

The rule, treated as a “transition”, would be valid until December 31, 2022. In practice, the text acts more forcefully for governors to change the tax structure.

According to data from the ANP (National Petroleum Agency), the average price of diesel in Brazil in the last five years until January 2022 is R$ 3,669. Today, average prices are over R$5. The expectation of the project’s defenders is that the change will result in relief for consumers.

The single rate, when implemented, should be applied to gasoline, diesel, ethanol and cooking gas. In the most recent change, Senator Jean Paul Prates also included aviation kerosene. Although unified among the states, the rates may be differentiated by type of fuel, according to the text.

The inclusion of kerosene complies with an amendment by Senator Oriovisto Guimarães (Podemos-PR), precisely one of those who asked for the proposals to be withdrawn from the agenda and for voting only after Carnival.

The parliamentarian even warned that he would vote against the proposal and release the Podemos bench if there was insistence on voting.

“Do you think he [Confaz] is it going to fix something that harms the states or do you think it will fix something that makes the finances of the states comfortable? Obviously, Confaz will decide in favor of the state and against the consumer, because otherwise they go bankrupt, they live on ICMS. So the solution is not good, it is not good. There are great things in your project, but his soul is not good,” he said.

“As it is, unfortunately, it will create a loss for the consumer, it will create a loss for the consumer, I’m sure of that, and, as it is, unfortunately, I have to vote against”, he added.

Prates also accepted the amendment defended by the federal government to authorize the exemption of federal taxes on diesel and cooking gas without the need for compensation, as provided for in the LRF (Fiscal Responsibility Law). The waiver could reach R$19.5 billion, if implemented.

After the closing of the session, however, the rapporteur stated that he had accepted the amendment to expedite the process, avoiding the need to vote on a separate highlight. He himself said that he was against the measure and that he will now analyze whether he will comply with the amendment.

In the name of this agreement, the economic team supports the approval of this bill, even with the forecast included by the rapporteur of expanding the public of Auxílio Gás, a benefit that transfers 50% of the value of the cylinder to beneficiary families of Auxílio Brasil.

Today, 5.5 million families in extreme poverty are covered by the program. Prates’ text provides for expansion to up to 11 million families.

The interpretation of Economics technicians is that the text is not imposing, that is, the expansion will only actually occur if there are resources in the Budget. Today, Auxílio Gás has R$ 1.9 billion, and another R$ 1.9 billion would be needed to meet the project’s forecast.

Jean Paul also said that he will analyze the possibility of increasing the transition period to two years, as the deputy leader of the government Carlos Viana (MDB-MG) had requested.