The government made a choice that hurt domestic production
Em maio de 2026, os maiores varejistas brasileiros levaram ao presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta, uma queixa que carrega um dilema antigo: quando o Estado favorece um lado do mercado, o outro exige equilíbrio. A extinção do imposto sobre importações de até 50 dólares abriu espaço para produtos estrangeiros sem oferecer contrapartida ao comércio nacional, e agora as empresas pedem isenção fiscal para mercadorias domésticas de até R$250. O episódio revela a dificuldade de qualquer governo em remover um tributo sem desencadear uma cadeia de demandas por compensação — especialmente quando o déficit público já bate recordes históricos.
- A extinção do 'imposto das blusinhas' em 12 de maio criou uma assimetria imediata: produtos importados entraram no país sem tarifa, enquanto os fabricados no Brasil continuaram sujeitos à carga tributária integral.
- Os varejistas alertam que 107 mil empregos sustentados pela proteção tarifária anterior estão agora em risco, transformando uma decisão fiscal em uma questão de política industrial e trabalho.
- O rombo já é profundo — R$9,72 bilhões perdidos até 2028 só com a medida de importação — e qualquer isenção adicional para produtos domésticos aprofundaria um déficit nominal que já alcançou R$1,218 trilhão, o maior da série histórica.
- Hugo Motta sinalizou simpatia e prometeu levar a proposta ao Senado, mas o Planalto resiste, e a negociação permanece aberta sem resolução à vista.
- O setor quer adiar ambos os debates — isenção fiscal e reforma da jornada 6×1 — para depois das eleições, enxergando nas duas iniciativas movimentos de natureza eleitoral mais do que econômica.
Na última quarta-feira de maio, os executivos de algumas das maiores redes varejistas do Brasil — Renner, Riachuelo, Assaí Atacadista, RD Saúde e Lojas Quero-Quero, entre outras — reuniram-se com Hugo Motta, presidente da Câmara dos Deputados, para apresentar uma demanda objetiva: isenção federal de impostos para produtos fabricados no Brasil com preço de até R$250. O argumento central era de equidade. O governo havia recém-eliminado o chamado 'imposto das blusinhas', que incidia sobre importações de até 50 dólares. Com a medida, mercadorias estrangeiras passaram a entrar no país sem tarifa. Os produtos nacionais, sem nenhuma contrapartida, ficaram em desvantagem.
O encontro, organizado pelo Instituto para Desenvolvimento do Varejo, reuniu dez líderes empresariais. Motta demonstrou receptividade e indicou que levaria a proposta ao presidente do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre. Os varejistas, por sua vez, planejam solicitar uma audiência direta com Alcolumbre para reforçar o pedido.
O contexto fiscal torna a negociação ainda mais delicada. A medida provisória que extinguiu o imposto de importação custará R$9,72 bilhões aos cofres públicos até 2028. Ampliar as isenções para o mercado doméstico agravaria um quadro já crítico: o déficit nominal acumulado em doze meses chegou a R$1,218 trilhão em março, o maior da série histórica desde 2002. O setor, no entanto, enquadra seu pedido não como subsídio, mas como resposta a uma distorção criada pelo próprio governo — e lembra que o imposto extinto havia sustentado a geração de 107 mil empregos.
A conversa também abordou a reforma da jornada 6×1. Uma proposta de emenda constitucional para acabar com o regime de seis dias de trabalho por um de descanso avança no Congresso. Os varejistas pedem um período de transição de pelo menos oito anos. O governo estuda uma janela mais curta, entre dois e cinco anos, e uma reunião entre Motta e o Palácio do Planalto estava prevista para o fim de semana. Em ambas as frentes — tributária e trabalhista —, o empresariado vê motivação eleitoral e preferiria que os debates aguardassem as urnas. O governo, até agora, não demonstrou disposição de esperar.
On a Wednesday in May, the heads of Brazil's largest retail chains walked into a meeting with Hugo Motta, the president of the Chamber of Deputies, with a straightforward complaint: the government had just made their business harder without giving them anything in return.
The retailers—Renner, Riachuelo, Assaí Atacadista, RD Saúde, and Lojas Quero-Quero among them—had come to ask Motta to push Congress toward a new law. They wanted federal tax exemptions on domestically made products priced up to R$250. The request was framed as a matter of fairness. The government, they argued, had recently eliminated what Brazilians called the "blusinhas tax," a tariff that had previously taxed imported goods under $50. Now those foreign products could enter the country duty-free. Brazilian-made goods faced no such relief. The retailers saw an imbalance that threatened their competitive position.
The meeting, organized by the Retail Development Institute, included ten business leaders. According to those present, Motta appeared sympathetic to their position. He indicated he would carry the proposal to Davi Alcolumbre, the Senate president, and the retailers themselves planned to request a separate meeting with Alcolumbre to press their case further.
The numbers behind the request reveal why the government's recent decision mattered so much. The provisional measure that eliminated the import tax—issued on May 12th—will cost the federal treasury R$9.72 billion through 2028. If the government now granted tax exemptions on domestic products as well, the fiscal hole would grow even larger. This comes at a moment when Brazil's public accounts are already under strain. The annualized nominal deficit reached R$1.218 trillion in the twelve months through March, the largest accumulated shortfall in the historical record dating back to 2002.
Yet the retailers framed their request not as a grab for subsidies but as a response to what they saw as an unequal playing field. The institute representing them noted that the now-eliminated import tax had supported the creation of 107,000 jobs across the country. Those jobs, they implied, were now at risk.
The conversation also touched on a separate but related concern: the government's push to end Brazil's 6×1 work schedule, where employees work six days and rest one. A constitutional amendment to eliminate this practice is moving through Congress. The retailers want a long transition period—at least eight years—before the change takes effect. Motta told them he had received and was reviewing studies on different implementation timelines. The government, for its part, is considering a shorter window: somewhere between two and five years. A meeting between Motta and the presidential palace was scheduled for the weekend to discuss the matter further.
Both issues—the tax exemption and the work schedule reform—are being viewed by the business community as politically motivated moves ahead of elections. The retailers have made clear they would prefer these debates to wait until after voters go to the polls. The government, however, has shown little willingness to delay. The retailers continue to negotiate directly with the presidential office, but so far the Planalto has resisted their requests. What emerges is a familiar tension: businesses seeking stability and time to adjust, a government moving forward on its agenda regardless.
Notable Quotes
Motta appeared sympathetic to the retailers' position and indicated he would bring the proposal to the Senate president— Meeting participants
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the retailers feel they needed to ask for this exemption now, specifically after the government eliminated the import tax?
Because the timing created what they saw as a sudden disadvantage. Foreign products under $50 could now come in tax-free, but Brazilian-made goods still faced the full federal tax burden. They weren't asking for something new—they were asking for parity.
But the government is already losing billions in revenue from ending that import tax. Why would they agree to lose more?
That's the real tension. The retailers argue those billions supported 107,000 jobs. They're saying the government made a choice that hurt domestic production, and now they need compensation. But the government's fiscal position is already fragile—the deficit is at a record high.
The retailers also mentioned the 6×1 work schedule. Are these two separate fights or connected?
They're connected in the retailers' minds because both feel like electoral moves—popular decisions made before an election that will cost them money or operational flexibility. They want both issues debated after the election, when there's less political pressure.
Did Motta commit to anything?
He said he was "sympathetic" and would take it to the Senate president. That's not a commitment—it's a door left open. The real negotiation is still ahead.
What happens if the government doesn't grant the exemption?
The retailers lose the competitive advantage they had before the import tax was eliminated. Some of those 107,000 jobs could be at risk. The domestic retail sector becomes less attractive compared to imported goods.