The National Policy on Minimum Freight Rates for Road Cargo Transport (Law No. 13.703/2018) has returned to the forefront of legal debates due to intensified electronic monitoring by the National Land Transportation Agency (ANTT) and the creation of new regulatory enforcement mechanisms linked to minimum freight rates. The issue has evolved from a mere sectoral discussion on transport pricing into a source of significant operational and financial concerns for companies relying on road cargo transport within their production and distribution chains.
In recent months, companies across various sectors have faced large-scale enforcement actions resulting from automated data cross-referencing, alongside the prospect of increasingly severe sanctions—including high-impact fines, restrictions on generating the Transport Operation Identifier Code (CIOT), and barriers to contracting new freight services. In certain instances, the regulatory impact may extend beyond mere financial consequences, potentially threatening the continuity of business operations.
This scenario has driven an increase in litigation regarding the matter. Numerous companies have turned to the courts to challenge the legality and scope of the current regulatory framework, particularly given the absence of a definitive ruling from the Supreme Federal Court (STF) on the constitutionality of the minimum freight rate policy—the subject of Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) No. 5.956.
Legal challenges have focused on key public and regulatory law issues, including the limits of state intervention in economic activity; the protection of free enterprise and freedom of contract; compliance with legal requirements for the issuance of ANTT normative acts; adherence to due process, the adversarial principle, and the right to a full defense; and the proportionality of measures adopted by the public administration. The use of mass electronic monitoring mechanisms based on automated data cross-referencing has also been called into question, particularly when such tools can lead to severe consequences without adequate transparency regarding the criteria applied or without the necessary analysis of the specific circumstances of each operation.
In various instances, the Judiciary has recognized the need for greater caution in applying the minimum freight rate policy, curbing abusive actions by the ANTT and setting aside or suspending potentially damaging effects—such as the imposition of specific sanctions, the classification of repeat offenses, operational restrictions (like the blocking of the CIOT), and other measures capable of significantly impacting business operations.
In this context, the proactive assessment of regulatory risks is of particular importance. Taking appropriate legal action in a timely manner can be crucial to mitigating substantial losses, reducing exposure to sanctions with major economic consequences, and preventing the entrenchment of operational restrictions that are difficult to reverse.
