Compliance and Corporate Ethics: the outlook for Brazil in 2026

2025 was marked by regulatory and institutional advances in the enforcement of anti-corruption and anti-money laundering legislation, the regulation of compliance programs, the negotiating and execution of leniency agreements, and the expansion of the corporate integrity agenda (please see the recently published 2025 retrospective on Único).

This article addresses the potential impacts and repercussions of these developments as we move into 2026, particularly regarding the practical impacts on corporate integrity agendas.

Continued Strengthening of the Enforcement of Brazil’s Anti‑Corruption Law

Public data indicates that in 2026, the Office of the Comptroller General (CGU) is expected to continue to ramp up enforcement of the Anti-Corruption Law (Law No. 12,846/2013) and its role within Brazil’s executive branch.

The CGU has opened a significant number of Administrative Accountability Proceedings (PARs) in recent years – 539 new cases have been opened since 2020, 126 of which were in 2025 alone. Particularly noteworthy were the 40 cases that the CGU filed against entities investigated for fraud in light of irregular deductions from social benefits linked to the National Social Security Institute (INSS). Considering the total number of proceedings initiated by entities of the federal executive branch during the same period – totaling 1,667 PARs – the CGU accounted for nearly one third of new cases, reaffirming its leading institutional role in enforcing Brazil’s anti-corruption legislation.

In terms of concluding proceedings, the CGU has maintained a stable trajectory since 2022, closing an average of 74 cases per year. This trend is expected to continue in 2026, and potentially even increase.

Beyond the CGU, other entities within Brazil’s federal direct and indirect public administration are expected to continue playing an important role in enforcing the Anti-Corruption Law. In 2025, Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras) filed 62 PARs and concluded 30, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA) filed 13 and concluded 30, the Brazilian Postal Service (Correios) filed seven and concluded 23, and the Brazilian Federal Revenue Service (RFB) filed five and concluded 27.

The rising number of administrative proceedings filed by entities other than the CGU potentially reveals an increase in the overall levels of professionalization, increased experience and improved productivity in control and accountability practices. It also signals heightened activity from Brazilian authorities and increased risks for companies.

The data for 2025 revealed that a broad, diverse range of issues were used as legal grounds to initiate PARs. For the CGU, the most frequent issue was bidding fraud, with 44 cases (also the predominant issue in cases filed by Petrobras, with 49 cases). This was followed by hindering or intervening in inspection activities (36 cases) and paying undue advantages (29 cases). These issues are likely to remain center stage in 2026.

Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office’s coordination with other authorities

In parallel with increasing enforcement, the levels of coordination between institutions also advanced in 2025 and are expected to continue rising in 2026.

In April 2025, a Technical Cooperation Agreement (ACT) between the CGU, the Attorney General’s Office (AGU) and the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) was published and was followed in November by a  guide for companies considering entering into leniency agreements with the MPF, representing a new level of institutional coordination in leniency negotiations. By providing for structured information exchanges, the creation of joint methodologies, and guidelines for coordinated action, the ACT mitigates asymmetries and reduces uncertainties, bringing greater transparency and procedural uniformity.

Implementation of the Interministerial CGU/AGU joint ordinance on M&A Transactions

Another significant milestone at the end of 2025 – whose practical effects will be observable as of this year – was the publication of Joint Ordinance No. 1/2025 by the CGU and AGU. The ordinance includes a rule encouraging companies to self-report violations identified in corporate transactions. Acquiring companies will have up to 12 months to report irregularities after the corporate transaction has been closed, and, provided certain requirements are met, they will be guaranteed a maximum two-thirds discount on the applicable fine under a leniency agreement.

In establishing this cooperation window, the ordinance also favors investors who are proactive in conducting integrity due diligence and quickly integrating their policies and internal controls into the acquired company.

Another significant new development within Joint Ordinance No. 1/2025 regards the introduction of the ‘marker’, which allows a company to demonstrate its willingness to collaborate with authorities and act in good faith even before completing its own internal investigations. Although the marker does not guarantee leniency, it signals a commitment to cooperation and allows the company to have access to the benefits of timely reporting. The marker should also make the CGU more rigorous in its view of the moment when the company decides to report misconduct, and the mitigating factors and potential discounts to be granted.

Harassment and ESG as investigative priorities

In 2026, the CGU is expected to follow recent trends in expanding the concept of corporate integrity, which in 2025 came to include themes related to sustainability and human rights protection. One of the agency’s priorities should be the inclusion of actions to prevent moral and sexual harassment in companies’ corporate integrity agendas.

One of the practical examples of this agenda regards concern from both the market and the authorities into protecting mental health at work, reflected in the recent changes to occupational health and safety regulations resulting from Ministry of Labor Ordinance No. 1,419/2024, which takes effect this year.

In addition to adopting robust prevention measures in their integrity programs, companies should assess whether their reporting channels adequately capture and process incidents of harassment, in all its forms. Moreover, internal investigations must be tailored to the specific characteristics of such incidents, ensuring structured procedures with clear protocols aimed at preserving evidence, protecting victims and whistleblowers, and applying appropriate disciplinary and legal measures.

The ESG agenda’s increasing focus on administrative, civil and criminal liability in environmental matters requires companies to not only comply with regulations, but also the ability to investigate facts in a structured manner. As such, the defensive investigation provided for in Brazilian Bar Association Provision No. 188/2018 should gain relevance as a strategic method for clarifying facts, preserving evidence, and providing a basis for the defense or negotiation of agreements with the authorities.

Integrity in large-scale public procurements

SE/CGU Ordinance No. 226/2025, which entered into force in November 2025, outlines the procedures and parameters for assessing integrity programs under Decree No. 12,304/2024. This decree regulates the requirement for integrity programs in large-scale bids, including their use as a tie-breaking factor between proposals and a condition for rehabilitating bidders or contractors, as wasintroduced by Article 25, Paragraph 4 of Law No. 14,133/2021.

The central factors considered in the assessments of these integrity programs include the level of commitment from senior management, the existence of policies and standards of conduct applicable to employees and third parties, ongoing training, effective fraud prevention and detection mechanisms, effective reporting channels, diligence in managing relationships with third parties, social and environmental transparency practices, and an overall focus on continuous monitoring and improvement.

For companies with important public contracts with government entities or that are involved in participating in large-scale bids, now is an opportune moment to assess their integrity programs in light of those criteria, with special attention to third‑party governance, effectiveness of reporting channels, and use of objective indicators to measure program performance, thereby avoiding loss of competitiveness in future tenders.

Election year in Brazil: integrity and social media

With federal and state-level elections set to take place in Brazil in the second half of 2026, authorities are expected to closely scrutinize any interactions between companies and their representatives and political parties or candidates. Clear internal protocols are required to avoid perceptions of favoritism or violations of electoral rules, with specific controls on donations, sponsorships, hospitality, and institutional events becoming especially important.

Corporate communication and the use of social media by company representatives – especially by members of senior management – also deserve attention. Brazil’s electoral courts have emphasized the importance of preventing and mitigating electoral harassment and the dissemination of false content. Regardless of sector, companies must review their protocols for using social media and managing their official communication channels.

Furthermore, preventing electoral harassment in the workplace requires explicit policies ensuring institutional neutrality, clear examples of prohibited conduct and swift, well-structured investigation and remediation procedures. Such governance not only reduces labor and regulatory risks but also reinforces organizational integrity during the election period.

Prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing

In 2026, authorities responsible for anti-money laundering (AML) and counter terrorist financing are expected to maintain strengthened enforcement, with risk-based inspections and higher fines. As such, companies regulated under Brazil’s Money Laundering Prevention Law (Law No. 9,613/1998) should improve the governance and effectiveness of their programs, with a focus on customer due diligence, verifying beneficial owners and recordkeeping for sensitive transactions, especially when they involve client representatives or politically exposed persons.

An area of growing focus – even for companies that do not operate in regulated sectors – is the risk of inadvertent relationships with companies and individuals directly or indirectly linked to criminal organizations. To mitigate this risk, it will be essential to demonstrate due diligence in proportion to the identified risks through contemporaneous, organized and traceable documentation. The ability to prove that such an analysis was conducted at the time of the transaction is usually a decisive factor in any investigations or requests from authorities for documents and information.

Internal investigations and technology

Internal fraud is also set to remain among Brazilian authorities’ top investigative priorities for 2026. As fraudulent schemes become more sophisticated, the use of analytics and artificial intelligence tools can provide significant efficiency gains, facilitating cross-checking large volumes of information, the early detection of atypical patterns, and the reduction of response times, which strengthens the credibility of the investigations.

The governance of corporate phones, messaging apps, and internal communication platforms will also be a focus in 2026. The absence of controls regarding the use of electronic equipment (especially  at companies that allow the staff to use personal devices for professional activities) can compromise the effectiveness and integrity of internal investigations, increase the risk of confidential information being leaked, and hinder the ability to trace information.

Clear and well-communicated policies, together with well-structured procedures and internal controls, help mitigate risks and ensure that any incidents can be dealt with quickly, consistently, and be backed up by documentation.

International factors: sanctions, export controls and the FCPA

On the international front, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is expected to continue prioritizing issues related to sanctions, export controls, and combating criminal organizations. As global supply and production chains become increasingly complex, companies operating internationally must strengthen counterparty due diligence processes and ensure robust measures for traceability, especially in transactions with markets or segments classified as higher risk.

Strong integration between compliance, foreign trade, operations and business areas will be essential both for preventing violations and demonstrating diligence in the face of any questions. Central to this agenda is the need to check sanctions lists, analyze chains of control to identify whether final or linked beneficiaries are subject to sanctions, and continue monitoring transactions with effective alert systems.

It is no coincidence that the first major seminar that the CGU is set to hold in 2026 will focus precisely on tackling corruption in international business transactions and integrity as a mechanism for operating in global markets.

For more information on these topics, please contact Mattos Filho’s Compliance & Corporate Ethics practice area.