Countries › Brazil › Guide › 13. Regulation › Cartels and abuse of dominance in Brazil: CADE fines, leniency, settlements, criminal exposure and double damages

Cartels and abuse of dominance in Brazil: CADE fines, leniency, settlements, criminal exposure and double damages

Argentina. For full detail on Argentina, go to The Argentine Thread.

Last verified: 2026-10-27 · Status: Stable

Agreements with competitors on prices, output, market sharing or bids, and abuse of a dominant position, are infringements regardless of fault, with company fines of 0.1 to 20 percent of revenue in the affected field. Cartels are also a crime with 2 to 5 years of imprisonment, and since 2022 victims can recover double damages. Leniency for the first to report can wipe out the fine and criminal liability, and settlements (TCCs) close cases for a payment.

USD figures use the Banco Central do Brasil PTAX selling rate of R$5.3346 per US dollar for 27 October 2026. Conversions are for orientation only.

Key facts

Maximum prison term for the cartel crime	5 yearsLei nº 8.137 art. 4, as of 2011-11-30 · in force
Damages multiplier for victims of cartels	2 xLei nº 12.529 art. 47 § 1, as of 2022-11-16 · in force
Maximum fine for entities without business revenue	2000000000 BRLLei nº 12.529 art. 37 II, as of 2011-11-30 · in force
Maximum fine reduction under leniency when CADE already knew of the conduct	66.67 %Lei nº 12.529 art. 86 § 4 II, as of 2011-11-30 · in force
Limitation period for CADE punitive action	5 yearsLei nº 12.529 art. 46, as of 2011-11-30 · in force
Cease and desist commitments (TCCs) approved by CADE in 2025	77 agreementsCADE DEE Working Paper nº 002/2026, as of 2026-01-01 · in force
Fines imposed by CADE in conduct cases decided in 2025	301000000 BRLCADE DEE Working Paper nº 002/2026, as of 2026-01-01 · in force

The rule

1. Acts that aim at or may produce the effects of restricting competition, dominating a relevant market, arbitrarily increasing profits or abusing a dominant position are infringements of the economic order regardless of fault, even if the effects are not achieved. Gaining a market through greater efficiency is not an infringement. Listed conduct includes agreeing with a competitor on prices, quantities, division of markets or customers, and bids in public tenders; promoting uniform conduct among competitors; imposing resale prices or conditions on distributors; discriminating through prices; refusing to sell; and selling below cost without justification.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Art. 36 caput items I to IV, §§ 1 and 3, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

2. A company or group is presumed dominant when it can change market conditions unilaterally or in coordination, or controls 20 percent or more of the relevant market; CADE may change that percentage for specific sectors.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Art. 36 § 2, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

3. Companies are fined 0.1 to 20 percent of the gross revenue of the company, group or conglomerate in the field of activity where the infringement occurred, in the year before the proceeding opened, never below the advantage obtained when it can be estimated. CADE may use total revenue when field revenue is unavailable or not reliably shown. Non business entities and individuals are fined R$50,000 to R$2,000,000,000; officers responsible, when fault or intent is proven, 1 to 20 percent of the company's fine. Fines double for repeat offenders.
Cost to do it: Fine of 0.1 to 20 percent of revenue in the affected field; doubled on recidivism.
Example: A distributor with R$300,000,000 of revenue in the affected field faces R$300,000 to R$60,000,000; an officer found at fault faces 1 to 20 percent of the company fine. / About US$56,237 to US$11,247,329 on revenue of about US$56,236,644.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Art. 37 items I to III and §§ 1 and 2, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

4. In addition to fines, when gravity or the public interest requires, CADE may order publication of the decision at the offender's expense, a ban of at least 5 years on contracting with public financial institutions and taking part in public tenders, recommendations to deny federal tax installment plans or cancel tax incentives, a compulsory license of intellectual property used in the infringement, split up of a company, transfer of control or sale of assets, and a ban of up to 5 years on trading.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Art. 38 items I to VII, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

5. Forming an agreement among suppliers to fix prices or quantities artificially, control a market regionally, or control a distribution or supplier network to the detriment of competition, and abusing economic power to dominate a market or eliminate competition through agreements between companies, are crimes punished with 2 to 5 years of imprisonment and a fine.Lei nº 8.137 of 27 December 1990, art. 4 as worded by Lei nº 12.529 of 2011, Art. 4 items I and II, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

6. CADE's General Superintendence may sign a leniency agreement with the first company to come forward that stops its participation, confesses, cooperates fully and provides evidence identifying the other participants, when CADE does not already have enough evidence to convict. If CADE had no prior knowledge of the infringement, the Tribunal extinguishes the punitive action; otherwise it reduces the penalty by one to two thirds. A company that does not qualify can obtain a one third reduction by reporting a different infringement unknown to CADE (leniency plus). For the beneficiary, signing suspends the limitation period and bars criminal charges for cartel and related crimes, and performance extinguishes criminal liability.
Cost to do it: No fee; the cost is counsel and the duty to cooperate at the company's own expense until the end of the case.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Arts. 86 §§ 1, 4, 7 and 8 and 87, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

7. Defendants may settle through a cease and desist commitment (TCC). In cartel cases the TCC must include a payment to the Diffuse Rights Defense Fund of at least the minimum fine under art. 37. A proposal may be made only once, may be confidential, does not suspend the case unless signed, is published on CADE's site within 5 days and is an enforceable instrument. In 2025 CADE approved 77 TCCs, 50 of them with companies, raising about R$387,000,000 in contributions.
Cost to do it: Contribution negotiated with CADE, never below the art. 37 minimum in cartel cases.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law); CADE DEE Working Paper nº 002/2026, Art. 85 §§ 1, 2, 4 to 9, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

8. Victims may sue for an end to the conduct and for damages without waiting for CADE. Since Lei nº 14.470 of 16 November 2022, victims of cartels (art. 36 § 3 I and II) recover double their losses, except from leniency and TCC signatories whose compliance CADE declared, who answer only for the harm they caused and are not jointly liable for the others. Pass on of overcharges is not presumed and must be proven by the defendant. The 5 year limitation period runs from unequivocal knowledge, deemed to be publication of CADE's final decision, and does not run during the CADE proceeding.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011, arts. 46-A and 47 as added by Lei nº 14.470 of 16 November 2022, Art. 46-A §§ 1 and 2; art. 47 §§ 1 to 4, 2022-11-16 official text · verified 2026-10-27 · changed: Lei nº 14.470 of 16 November 2022 introduced double damages for cartel victims, protected leniency and TCC signatories from joint liability, rejected any presumption of pass on and fixed the start of the 5 year limitation period at publication of CADE's final decision.

9. CADE's power to punish expires 5 years from the conduct or, for continuing conduct, from the day it ceased. Any act aimed at investigating the infringement interrupts the period, and a case left without decision for more than 3 years is time barred. When the conduct is also a crime, the criminal limitation period applies.Lei nº 12.529 of 30 November 2011 (Competition Law), Art. 46 caput and §§ 1, 3 and 4, 2011-11-30 official text · verified 2026-10-27

Route	Who qualifies	Administrative effect	Criminal effect	Civil damages
Leniency	First to qualify, conduct unknown or not provable by CADE	Fine extinguished if CADE had no prior knowledge; otherwise cut by one to two thirds	Charges barred; liability extinguished on performance	Single damages, no joint liability
Leniency plus	Company reporting a second, unknown infringement	One third cut in the first case	Full leniency for the new case	Single damages in the new case
TCC settlement	Any defendant, one proposal only	Case suspended and archived on compliance; payment of at least the art. 37 minimum	Not covered by art. 87	Single damages once compliance is declared
Conviction	Defendants found liable	0.1 to 20 percent of field revenue; art. 38 sanctions	2 to 5 years under Lei nº 8.137 art. 4	Double damages for cartel victims

Ways out of a cartel case in Brazil. Sources: Lei nº 12.529 arts. 85 to 87 and 47.

Indicator	2025
Conduct cases decided	25
Cases with convictions	17
Fines imposed	About R$301,000,000
TCCs approved	77 (50 with companies)
Contributions from company TCCs	About R$387,000,000

CADE conduct enforcement in 2025. Source: CADE DEE Working Paper nº 002/2026.

Worked example

Bid rigging. Three suppliers agree who will win state hospital tenders. A supplier with R$150,000,000 (about US$28,118,322) of revenue in that field faces a CADE fine of R$150,000 to R$30,000,000 (about US$28,118 to US$5,623,664), possibly a ban of at least 5 years from public tenders (art. 38 II), prison of 2 to 5 years for the individuals (Lei nº 8.137 art. 4) and suits for double damages by the hospitals (art. 47 § 1). The first supplier to apply for leniency before CADE knows of the scheme can have its fine extinguished and its executives protected from criminal charges (arts. 86 and 87).
Resale price maintenance. A brand owner with 25 percent of a market requires distributors to sell at a fixed price. It is presumed dominant (art. 36 § 2) and the conduct is listed in art. 36 § 3 IX; on revenue of R$80,000,000 in the field, the fine range is R$80,000 to R$16,000,000 (about US$14,996 to US$2,999,288).

Step by step

1. Map where the Brazilian business meets competitors: trade associations, tenders, distribution and information exchanges.
2. Adopt a competition compliance policy that bans price, capacity, customer and bid discussions with competitors and reviews distribution terms for resale price or exclusivity issues.
3. If a problem is found, assess quickly whether to apply for leniency, since only the first to qualify gets full immunity; the agreement is signed with CADE's General Superintendence (art. 86).
4. If under investigation, decide early on a TCC proposal, which may be made only once.
5. Provision for civil exposure: double damages for cartel victims and 5 years from CADE's final decision to sue.

Common traps

Assuming intent matters. Infringements arise regardless of fault and even if effects are not achieved (art. 36 caput).
Counting only Brazilian sales in the narrow product. The fine base is revenue in the field of activity, and CADE can use total group revenue if field revenue is not reliably shown (art. 37 § 2).
Waiting to apply for leniency. A second applicant cannot get leniency for the same conduct, only a TCC or leniency plus for another infringement (art. 86 §§ 1, 7 and 8).
Treating a TCC as a shield against all damages. Signatories avoid double damages and joint liability only once CADE declares compliance (art. 47 §§ 2 and 3).
Forgetting individuals. Officers face administrative fines of 1 to 20 percent of the company fine and criminal prosecution.

Sources

← Merger control in Brazil: CADE filing tests, minority stakes, timelines and gun jumpingPersonal data protection in Brazil (LGPD): legal bases, data subject rights, officer, breaches, transfers and how ANPD fines are calculated →