Opposition raises tone of criticism of the government for changing Petrobras’ dividend rule

Opposition raises tone of criticism of the government for changing Petrobras’ dividend rule

[ad_1]

Parliamentarians opposing the Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva government increased the tone of their criticism of the change in Petrobrás’ dividend payment policy this Tuesday (12). The measure, announced on Friday (08), has caused the oil company’s shares to fall on B3 and reactions from shareholders on social media.

Senator Oriovisto Guimarães (PODE/PR), stated, through a video sent to the press, that, by not distributing profits for political purposes, Petrobras is discredited as a company.

According to him, Lula is trying to contradict the laws of the economy, thinking that Petrobras, because it is state-owned, has to sell cheap gas and fuel. “It does not benefit the people and ruins Petrobrás, which needs investors and popular savings to be competitive. There is no room for politics in the market.”

“Every citizen puts their money where it pays the most. Now I have to put money in a company that doesn’t pay dividends or whose shares are depreciated so Lula can do politics with Petrobras? It doesn’t make sense,” he said.

The senator also criticized the current president’s populism. “The Lula government is acting in the same way as the Bolsonaro government, with populism. As the president’s popularity is falling, Lula thinks that the State should be the main provider, which is a mistake. This could destroy Petrobras.”

A People’s GazetteFederal Deputy Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança (PL-SP) said that the government’s interference in dividend policy repeats a “cycle of imbecilities” of “unqualified people” interfering in the operations of important companies.

“The government doesn’t understand anything about the economic impacts. They have no idea what could happen. Only after they themselves generate a crisis. Then they start to find other ways to review the problem, which is not having interfered in the first moment. It’s always like this, always the same cycle of stupidity.”

The deputy highlights the need to pay dividends to guarantee the return of those who invested in the company. “Whoever buys Petrobras shares buys it with the expectation of receiving dividends, which is already included in the price. But, suddenly, there is such great government interference in these state-owned companies that are publicly traded and the investor is harmed”, he says.

According to the parliamentarian, the company may enter a cycle of divestment. “The investor is left with the expectation that the stock will appreciate based on the increase in consumption or the increase in population, which will affect the increase in consumption. And we know that both of these dynamics are very compressed there, looking forward. So , paying dividends is fundamental for most large and stable companies”, explains the deputy.

“To maintain market value, increasing market value and maintain liquidity of the shares, that is, to have people always interested in buying the shares, a return is necessary. Why is there no expected return? Because there is government interference, so no one buys shares If no one buys shares, the company will have to find other ways to finance”

The Chief of Staff in the Bolsonaro administration, senator Ciro Nogueira (PP-PI) told Folha de S. Paulo that he is evaluating what measures could be adopted within the Senate. On the social network

Bolsonaro’s former Minister of Agriculture, Tereza Cristina (MS), stated that Congress must investigate the damage caused by what she called the government’s new “statist robbery”.

“It was clear to the market and investors that there was government intervention in a publicly traded company. The wrong decision not to pay the quarter’s dividends brought legal uncertainty to the present and future, here and abroad,” he told Folha. .

Ricardo Salles (PL-DF) and former Minister of the Environment in the Bolsonaro government, classified Petrobras’ decision to withhold extraordinary dividends as “absurd.” “Continuing to use the company to make government public policy is a huge mistake,” he said.

[ad_2]

Source link