In August 2025, the Office of the Comptroller General (CGU) released the 2nd edition of the Sentencing Analysis Report, which compiles and examines data on 159 fines applied under Law No. 12,846/13 (“Clean Companies Act”) up to the end of 2024. The penalties analyzed stemmed from Administrative Liability Proceedings (“PAR”), and the report provides an in-depth view of how the CGU has interpreted and applied legal criteria in determining the final amounts of sanctions.

Sentencing criteria and regulatory developments

The Report presented a detailed overview of the parameters that guide the calculation of sanctions under the legislation: calculation basis, minimum and maximum limits, aggravating and mitigating factors. One of its main highlights is the recognition of compliance programs as a relevant mitigating factor in fine calculation — even though their practical application remains limited to a few analyzed cases.

In addition, it assessed the impact of Decree No. 11,129/2022, which updated fine calculation criteria and reinforced the role of certain mitigating factors — particularly the adoption of integrity programs by sanctioned companies.

The data analysis shows that, in most cases, the final fine amount is not determined by the applicable legal minimum and maximum limits, but rather by the specific application of the sentencing criteria.

Aggravating and mitigating factors: an analysis of CGU’s decisions

Among the most frequent aggravating factors in the calculation of the fine, the following stood out:

  • Tolerance by senior management, which was noted by the CGU in approximately 86% of cases and which had an average rate of 2.5% on the calculation basis (considering the maximum rate of 3%);
  • Cumulation of wrongdoings, which occurred in approximately 61% of the analyzed cases; and
  • Interruption in the provision of public services, in the execution of contracted works, or in the delivery of goods or services essential to the provision of public services, or in the event of non-compliance with regulatory requirements, a factor that, despite having a low incidence, representing around 12% of the cases, was responsible for an average increase of 2.8% in the calculation basis of the fine, (considering the maximum rate of 4%).

On the other hand, among the recurrent mitigating factors considered in fine calculation, the following stood out:

  • Absence or lack of proof of the advantage obtained and of damage resulting from the wrongdoing, which occurred in over 52% of the analyzed cases;
  • Cooperation by the legal entity, either during the investigation stage or in providing information that contributed to clarifying the facts, which occurred in approximately 38% of cases and reduced the calculation basis for the fine by an average of 1.2%, considering the maximum rate of 1.5%; and
  • Voluntary admission by the legal entity, which occurred in approximately 27% of the cases analyzed.

Compliance programs as a mitigating factor

The Report highlighted the effective impact of compliance programs as a mitigating factor on the calculation of the applicable fine. According to the Clean Companies Act, this factor may reduce by up to 5% the calculation basis of the fine.

Despite the importance granted by the legislation, the Report points out that only around 11% of the analyzed fines were mitigated due to the existence of compliance programs. This indicates that few sanctioned companies managed to prove the effective implementation of their programs to meet the CGU’s requirements.

Additionally, regarding the reduction percentage applicable to the cases under analysis, it was found that, within the possible range of 1% to 4% in cases regulated by Decree No. 8,420/2015 and 1% to 5% in cases regulated by Decree No. 11,129/2022, even when admission occurred, the average rate applied was 1.7% in cases regulated by Decree No. 8,420/2015 and 2.2% in cases regulated by Decree No. 11,129/2022 — both below half of the permitted reduction potential. This reduced average reinforces the Report’s conclusion that there is significant room for improvement in the integrity programs presented by companies.

The Report also detailed a study on the impact of adopting compliance programs on effectively reducing fines in light of their significance compared to other mitigating factors used in the cases under review. Thus, the study also revealed that, in cases where a compliance program was accepted as a mitigating factor, the actual reduction in the final fine amount was significant, reaching an average of 39%. In other words, although still not widely used, this factor has high potential impact when properly structured and evidenced.

The Report presents a challenging scenario by demonstrating that there is significant room for improvement in existing compliance programs. On the one hand, it highlights companies’ difficulty in fully meeting CGU’s criteria for recognizing compliance programs as effective. On the other hand, it reinforces the role of corporate integrity as a strategic element not only for prevention but also for risk mitigation in liability proceedings.

Notwithstanding, the recognition of compliance programs as a mitigating factor of great significance reinforces the rationale of regulatory incentives, which is based on the idea that companies that invest in prevention and control mechanisms receive, even in situations in which the liability is required, a different response from the State due to the efforts they have undertaken. This incentive-based approach underscores the importance of turning formal programs into effective structures, with active governance, ethical culture, and control mechanisms truly applicable to company operations. If you would like to understand more deeply the criteria adopted by CGU or assess the maturity of your compliance program considering the required standards, please contact.