The Federal Supreme Court (STF) begins the ruling on Friday (16) on a procedure that can determine whether the savers affected by economic plans in the 1980s and 1990s, known as Bresser, and Summer and Color Plans, is entitled to pay the losses resulting from freezing, issued or restrictions in the savings account.
The procedure was raised in 2009 by the National Financial Regulations Union (Conf) and discusses the “inflationary cleansing operations” known as the SO, which correspond to the differences in the cash correction that is not applied to savings accounts during the validity of these aircraft.
The judicial dispute lasts for more than three decades and includes thousands of savers who claim to have been exposed to significant financial losses as a result of the approved economic plans at that time.
The trial takes place in the virtual plenary session of the court, where the ministers until next Friday (23) enjoy their votes. In this format, there are no discussions between judges and voices are included directly in the STF electronic system.
Originally, the introduction of the work was Minister Ricardo Lewandowski, who retired in 2023. Then I went to Minister Cristiano Zanin, who took over the course.
If the Supreme Court realizes the right to pay, the decision will have general repercussions, that is, it will be applied to all similar operations taking place in the country. This can open thousands of suspended procedures waiting for the result.
During the trial, the ministers may still ask for a view (more time for analysis) or prominent (withdrawing from the virtual plenary session of the face to the forefront), which may postpone the trial.
By 2018, the Supreme Court has already approved a collective agreement between banks and the representatives of savings, which provides for compensation for losses during Bresser plans (1987), Summer (1989) and Collor 2 (1991). However, the agreement provided discounts that could reach 85 % of the total amount due.
At that time, the Collem 1 plan (1990), responsible for confiscating savings values, was excluded.
In 2020, after the negotiations between the Union’s Prosecutor (AGU) and the civil and financial entities, an additional term was approved to include the Collor 1 plan in the agreement. The court also decided to extend the adhesion period for another 60 months – a recently closed period.
The additive also sought to expand the scope of the agreement, including savings who have accounts in the institutions covered by Proer, even taking advantage of collective procedures that are still in treatment.
Incentives were also provided, such as payment in one payment and increased law fees up to 15 % of the agreed amount.
