PGFN tax settlement: how to clear federal active debt in 2026

Brazil’s Office of the Attorney General of the National Treasury (PGFN) opened 2026 with a notable change in how federal debts are collected: on June 1, it took over sole management of the FGTS active debt — a R$ 66.8 billion stock previously shared with Caixa Econômica Federal — and is preparing, for July, a dedicated regularization program for the fund. In parallel, tax settlement by adhesion remains the main route to negotiate debts enrolled as active debt, with discounts on interest and fines, a reduced down payment and extended installments. This guide explains how the settlement works, what changes with the FGTS, and what to check before joining.

What the PGFN tax settlement is

Tax settlement (transação tributária) is an agreement between the taxpayer and the tax authority that allows clearing debts enrolled as active debt with discounts, a reduced down payment and extended installments. At the federal level, the instrument was created by Law 13,988/2020 and is run through PGFN ordinances and public notices (“editais”).

There are two ways to propose a settlement: by individual proposal (negotiated case by case, generally for large debtors) and by adhesion, in which the PGFN publishes a notice with the conditions and the taxpayer adheres to the rules already defined. The adhesion notices (the PGDAU series) are the main gateway for mid-sized companies and individuals; the most recent edition, Notice PGDAU No. 11/2025, covered debts of up to R$ 45 million and closed for adhesion on May 29, 2026. The PGFN renews these notices periodically, so it is worth following the Regularize portal for the current window.

The level of benefit is not uniform: it varies with the taxpayer’s presumed payment capacity (CAPAG) and the recoverability of the credit by the Treasury. The PGFN classifies credits into bands — from high recovery prospects to irrecoverable — and it is this classification, made individually and confidentially by the Regularize platform, that sets each case’s discount and term limits.

The four settlement tracks

The consolidated design of the PGDAU notices keeps four tracks, each with its own rules on down payment, installments and discount. The eligibility cut-off dates and the percentages change with each edition — the table below summarizes the typical structure; the exact figures of the current window should be checked in the notice in force on Regularize.

The benefited groups — individuals, micro-entrepreneurs (MEI), micro and small enterprises (ME/EPP), philanthropic hospitals, cooperatives, educational institutions and civil-society organizations, plus companies in judicial recovery — usually get a higher discount cap (70%) and longer installments. A practical caveat: the maximum discount is not always reached. It depends on the payment-capacity band assigned by the PGFN — taxpayers placed in higher-capacity bands tend to receive smaller reductions. Simulating the classification before joining avoids disappointment with the final figure.

Discounts, down payment and terms: what to watch

The point that raises the most doubt is the discount cap. The notice allows reductions of up to 100% on interest, fines and legal charges — but that percentage applies only to the ancillary amounts. What limits the benefit is the cap on the total value of each enrollment: as a rule 65%, reaching 70% for benefited groups and companies in judicial recovery. In practice, the principal (the tax itself) is rarely reduced; the discount falls on the accrued charges.

Before formalizing, it is worth modeling the cash-flow impact and mapping what the company has to recover in parallel. In many cases, combining the negotiation with tax credit recovery delivers a better result than a plain adhesion.

Restrictions and mandatory offsetting: the rules that catch taxpayers off guard

Two points often go unnoticed and deserve attention before joining.

This second point reinforces how important it is to map all of the company’s credits before joining. Before “spending” an accumulated credit on the settlement that would yield more under another strategy, it is worth assessing the whole picture together.

What the courts say about settlement by adhesion

In June 2025, the 1st Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) decided a practical point of settlement by adhesion (REsp 2,032,814/RS, judgment drafted by Justice Paulo Sérgio Domingues): a taxpayer who waives a lawsuit to join the settlement does not owe the Treasury’s loss-of-suit attorney’s fees. The waiver, in this case, is a condition imposed by law — not a voluntary withdrawal — and Law 13,988/2020 is silent on fees; charging them would violate legal certainty and good faith.

In the prevailing opinion, the settlement was characterized as a novation: the original tax credit is replaced by the agreement. The point still sparks debate in legal scholarship, because Article 3 of Law 13,988/2020 itself states that accepting the proposal “does not imply novation.” The practical reading is clear: the notice works as the “law of the case” — each condition, including the waiver required in any lawsuits, must be read and documented before joining. It is exactly the kind of analysis that precedes any well-conducted adhesion in tax litigation.

PGFN takes over the FGTS enrolled as active debt

On that same June 1, 2026, the PGFN began to fully manage and collect the FGTS debts enrolled as active debt — a role that until May was shared with Caixa Econômica Federal. Caixa remains responsible for non-enrolled debts and for those with an active installment plan, and continues to issue the FGTS Regularity Certificate. According to the PGFN, the fund’s enrolled debts total around R$ 66.8 billion, across roughly 500,000 enrollments; in 2025, recovery of these credits reached about R$ 1.9 billion.

The change stems from Caixa Agreement No. 01/2024, which seeks to remove operational overlaps and add efficiency to recovery. The PGFN has been responsible for enrolling the FGTS as active debt since 1994, under Article 2 of Law 8,844/1994 — but, until now, collection was carried out under an agreement with Caixa. The issuance of payment slips and the negotiation of enrolled debts leave Caixa’s Conectividade Social channel and move to the Regularize portal; services tied to non-enrolled debts and active agreements stay in Caixa’s tool.

The PGFN has stressed that any FGTS discount will fall only on the charges — interest and fines — and on amounts belonging to the Fund, never on the principal owed to the worker. The position is attributed to Theo Lucas Borges, deputy attorney general for the active debt of the Union and the FGTS, in the PGFN’s June 2026 communications.

A dedicated FGTS regularization program expected in July

The data migration from Caixa to the PGFN began on June 1. In July 2026, the Attorney General intends to launch a dedicated program to regularize the FGTS debts enrolled as active debt, with reductions in interest and fines — always preserving the amounts owed to the worker.

It is worth recalling that the FGTS credit has its own legal nature. The STJ consolidated, in Precedent (Súmula) 353, that “the provisions of the National Tax Code do not apply to FGTS contributions” — it is non-tax active debt. And the Federal Supreme Court (STF), in ARE 709,212/DF (Theme 608), cut the limitation period for collecting the FGTS from 30 to five years, with effects modulation. For employers with old liabilities, this statute-of-limitations cut can be decisive when deciding what is worth regularizing.

How TaxUp helps

Joining a settlement is not just clicking “accept” on Regularize. The effective discount depends on the payment-capacity classification, there are company credits that will be offset on a mandatory basis, and each enrollment must be analyzed before joining — otherwise the taxpayer may close a deal worse than other available strategies.

“The settlement window is not automatic: the real discount depends on the payment-capacity classification assigned by the PGFN, and each enrollment must be assessed case by case. In many situations, combining the settlement with credit recovery and a statute-of-limitations review delivers a better result than a plain adhesion.”

TaxUp Tax Practice

TaxUp supports the taxpayer at every stage: diagnosing the enrollments in active debt, simulating the classification, analyzing offsettable credits, checking the notice’s conditions and formalizing — including defense in tax foreclosure when collection is already underway. See how we structure regularization for companies across different industries.

Frequently asked questions about the PGFN settlement

Sources: Law 13,988/2020 and Law 8,844/1994 (Planalto); the Regularize portal and PGFN/Ministry of Finance communications on the management of the FGTS active debt (May–June 2026); Notice PGDAU No. 11/2025 (PGFN); STJ, 1st Panel, REsp 2,032,814/RS, judgment drafted by Justice Paulo Sérgio Domingues, June 10, 2025; STJ, Súmula 353; STF, ARE 709,212/DF (Theme 608), reporting Justice Gilmar Mendes. Informational content, updated June 1, 2026 — it does not replace an individualized analysis of each case.