The Attorney General's Office (AGU) appealed this Thursday (12) against the decision of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) that mandates the adoption of tools to prevent beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família program from using funds received from the program to gamble on bets. In the request, the AGU states that the Executive does not have the technical means to prohibit this type of expenditure, since it is not possible to distinguish the money from the benefit from other incomes received in a given bank account.
Furthermore, the technical areas emphasized that, once the benefit is transferred to the registered family's account, the money becomes the property of the account holder, and the public power loses any influence over its allocation.
The petition was presented in the form of a declaration of clarification, an instrument used to request clarifications regarding points of a judicial decision. In it, the AGU asks the STF to indicate how the government should comply with the court's determination, given the listed obstacles, and grant a "reasonable period" for the implementation of these measures.
The AGU based its arguments on technical inputs from two executive bodies, the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA) of the Ministry of Finance and the Senarc (National Secretariat of Citizenship Income) of the Ministry of Social Development.
Senarc pointed out that the bank account for payment of Bolsa Família benefits, used by 99% of the beneficiary families, is not exclusively used for the program and can move values from other sources, such as work. Only 1% of the families make the full withdrawal through the program's card.
"Regarding the payment accounts of Bolsa Família, only 9.67 million family heads regularly make Pix transfers from the benefit account and, on average, made only 2.5 transactions, with a value of R$ 355 each (data from August/2024). Moreover, the more than 9.67 million families that made Pix transfers moved about R$ 8.5 billion, but only received R$ 6.5 billion from the program, therefore, it is essential to understand that a potential account blockage invades the private sphere, where the citizen moves other incomes", says the document.
In the document, the AGU states that it does not intend to reconsider the decision or express disagreement with it, but to clarify doubts about its content. The vote of the rapporteur, Minister Luiz Fux, was unanimously endorsed by the court.
"While the concern for the economic situation of vulnerable individuals and families is commendable and necessary, the adoption of ‘immediate measures’ encounters practical barriers that are difficult to overcome, which is why it is essential to clarify the appealed judgment", says the AGU.
The legal body also requests clarifications on other points of the judicial decision that, in the government's assessment, generated confusion. One of them is the expression "congêneres", in the section where the Supreme Court mandates the adoption of immediate measures to prevent spending on bets with resources from social and welfare programs; "such as Bolsa Família, the Continued Provision Benefit and similar".
The AGU questions whether this means that the decision goes beyond Bolsa Família and BPC to reach other federal benefits and also the income transfer programs maintained by the states —especially given the fact that they are also authorized to explore the betting modality.
The government also asked the STF to indicate whether, by the decision, the states are equally obliged to observe the regulations of the Ministry of Finance regarding the commercial exploitation of the fixed quota betting lottery modality, which includes rules of operation, supervision, and advertising.
In the decision, Fux had determined the immediate entry into force of measures that prohibit the advertising and propaganda of bets targeting children and adolescents. The decision was submitted for consideration by the collegiate on November 14 and was endorsed by the other ten magistrates.
"It is evident that the current scenario of insufficient protection, with immediate deleterious effects, especially on children, adolescents, and the family budgets of beneficiaries of welfare programs, constitutes a manifest 'periculum in mora' (danger in delay), which must be immediately removed", said the minister at the time.
The issue is discussed in an action by the National Confederation of Commerce (CNC). The entity questions the constitutionality of the law approved by the National Congress in 2023 that regulates sports betting houses, arguing that the legislation does not protect families from the financial risks of betting.
Financial education
Considered one of the fathers of Bolsa Família, economist Ricardo Paes de Barros tells Folha that the greater penetration of sports bets, called bets, is not just a problem for the poorest families, but for the entire Brazilian society.
According to him, tutoring the beneficiaries of the social program and their consumption choices will not solve the problem, which will only be resolved with more robust regulation of bets to limit their advertising and financial education actions for the population.
"We are giving poor Brazilians the freedom to choose what they want to spend their money on. And I think that should be the correct way to do things", says Paes de Barros.
"Instead of restricting the alternatives of the poor and focusing on what the guy can or cannot do with his money, I would deal with this [regulation of bets]. Brazil needs to know whether this can or cannot be done, or what are the limits of this thing", he adds.
The economist suggests that financial education become a conditionality for beneficiaries of government social programs.
Source: Folha
