INSS: minister wants agreement to pay lifetime review – 02/17/2023 – Market

The Minister of Social Security, Carlos Lupi, wants an agreement with the STF (Federal Supreme Court) for the INSS (National Social Security Institute) to pay for the review of the whole life in the agencies, as was done with the review of article 29 .

According to Lupi, talks with the AGU (Attorney General of the Union) have already started so that the body, which represents the INSS in court, can take the matter to the Supreme Court.

“For those who are already registered, I want to find a way — I’ll discuss it with you — that, depending on the value, we make a schedule to put it in the account.”

The idea is to pay amounts progressively, in batches, on a pre-programmed calendar. “Judicial decision is to be fulfilled.”

In Lupi’s opinion, continuing to appeal against the issue, already defined in the Supreme Court, is something “never ending”.

The lifetime review of the INSS

Approved by STF ministers in December last year, the lifetime review includes contributions made before 1994 in the calculation of retirement benefits and pensions, benefiting those who had larger contributions before the start of the Real Plan. The judgment had 6 votes in favor of retirees against 5 against. So far, the correction would only have a way through the courts.

This Monday (13), the INSS asked the Supreme Court to suspend all lifelong review actions, until the decision becomes final, that is, until the final stage of the process, which occurs only after the publication of the judgment. and the presentation and analysis of any motion for clarification.

The request was filed by the AGU, which defends the body in court.

In the opinion of social security lawyer Rômulo Saraiva, columnist for Sheetthe INSS knows that it will not reverse the judgment, but at least intends to curb immediate increases in benefits.

In the submitted request, the AGU says that the requests for suspension have not been accepted in the courts, “including the imposition of a fine on the INSS”. Another argument is that there may still be modulation of the effects of the decision, a stage in which it is possible to limit the scope of the review, such as the period of arrears, for example.