The Federal Supreme Court (STF) postponed until this Thursday (9) the resumption of the judgment on the legality of using the Reference Rate (TR) to correct the accounts of the Service Time Guarantee Fund (FGTS). The analysis of the case was scheduled for this afternoon’s session, but other cases had priority for judgment.
The trial was suspended in April this year due to a request for review presented by Minister Nunes Marques.
So far, the voting score is 2-0 due to the unconstitutionality of using the TR to correct the fund’s accounts. By understanding, the correction cannot be lower than the savings remuneration.
The judgment draws attention to the consequences of a possible change in the calculation of the fund’s remuneration. According to the Attorney General’s Office (AGU), any decision in favor of the correction could lead to an increase in interest on loans to finance home ownership and the Union’s contribution of around R$5 billion to the fund.
The case began to be judged by the Supreme Court following an action filed in 2014 by the Solidariedade party. The party maintains that the TR correction, with a return close to zero per year, does not adequately remunerate account holders, losing out to real inflation.
Created in 1966 to replace the guarantee of job stability, the Service Time Guarantee Fund functions as compulsory savings and financial protection against unemployment. In the case of dismissal without just cause, the employee receives the FGTS balance, plus a fine of 40% of the amount.
After the action was filed with the STF, laws began to come into force, and the accounts began to be corrected with interest of 3% per year, the increase in the distribution of profits from the fund, in addition to the correction by the TR.
For the federal government, AGU defends the extinction of the action. In the body’s understanding, laws 13,446/2017 and 13,932/2019 established the distribution of profits to shareholders. Therefore, according to the agency, it is no longer possible to state that the use of TR generates lower remuneration than real inflation.