Review of your entire life: understand what is being discussed at the STF

The appeal was filed by the National Confederation of Metalworkers (CNTM) and the Institute of Social Security Studies (Ieprev). These appeals are being analyzed in the virtual plenary. If, by the end of the appeal hearing, any minister requests a review or a highlight, the discussion may be taken to the physical plenary.

What is the whole life review and what is at stake?

The discussion is about the possibility of retirees using the entire period of contribution to social security for the purposes of calculating retirement and not just from the institution of the Real Plan, in July 1994.

Social security law expert Washington Barbosa provides more details on the topic discussed at the STF.

“This review of your entire life is a legal thesis that tries to make your contributions before July 1994 be considered in the calculation of your benefit. So, people who started working very early and suddenly before July 1994 these contributions were not used, when it is included in the calculation, this generally has a positive impact on the value of your benefit, it increases the value of your benefit,” he explains.

Billion-dollar cities: 92 municipalities have revenues above R$1 billion; check out the ranking

Pix Amendments: states and municipalities have until September 27 to report

This limitation prevents contributions prior to this period from being included in the calculation. In other words, with the “lifetime review”, all contributions are taken into account and the average amount paid to retirees may increase.

In 2022, the STF decided on the constitutionality of the “lifetime review” mechanism, allowing retirees the right to choose between the transitional and definitive regime.

However, in March 2024, in a twist, the Supreme Court understood, for a procedural reason, that retirees would no longer have the right to choose the most advantageous rule.

If this is maintained, retirements will be adjusted based on the social security factor, that is, the shorter the contribution period and the insured’s age, the lower the amount paid in retirement.

It is precisely this latest decision by the STF that is being questioned by the CNTM and Ieprev. The two entities claim that the ruling on the “lifetime review” was not taken into consideration. They argue that the review should be maintained for those who had legal proceedings in court. Lower courts have already guaranteed the right to review.