The Institute for Consumer Protection (Idec) considers the Central Bank's (BC) decision not to regulate credit operations linked to Pix, popularly known as “Pix Parcelado” (Installment Pix), unacceptable. The choice to abandon the construction of rules and allow each institution to operate “as it wishes” creates an environment of regulatory disorder that tends to increase abuses, confuse consumers, and deepen over-indebtedness in the country.
Although the BC decided to veto the use of the “Pix Parcelado” brand, allowing institutions to adopt variations such as “installments via Pix” or “credit via Pix,” the change in nomenclature does not eliminate the central risk: consumers will remain exposed to highly heterogeneous credit products, without any minimum standard of transparency, without mandatory safeguards, and without predictability regarding interest rates, fees, provision of information, or collection procedures.
By retreating in the face of regulatory complexity, the BC makes it evident that it has chosen not to confront a problem that is already underway. Instead of establishing rules to protect millions of Brazilians, it transfers responsibility to the “free market,” leaving families unprotected in a scenario where banks and fintechs have complete freedom to define conditions, formats, and costs, including the most abusive ones.
This choice is especially serious in a country where over-indebtedness has already reached alarming levels. The credit modality linked to Pix, precisely because it is present at the moment of payment and associated with the most trusted brand in the Brazilian financial system, creates unique risks: impulse contracting, confusion between payment and credit, little or no understanding of fees and the consequences of non-payment. Without standards and without oversight, the risk of financial traps grows exponentially.
Idec warns that Brazil is heading towards a scenario where the same product will function in completely different ways at each bank, with its own rules, different contracts, varied forms of collection, and divergent levels of protection. This fragmentation compromises transparency, makes comparison difficult, impedes social control, and makes it almost impossible for the consumer to know, in fact, what they are contracting.
It is unacceptable that, in the face of an issue that directly affects millions of people, the regulatory body abdicates its responsibility. It is not enough to “monitor the development of solutions”; it is necessary to regulate them, oversee them, and guarantee minimum standards of financial security. Giving up on this is to abandon the consumer.
Pix was born as a public policy for the democratization of payments. Transforming it into a gateway for unregulated credit, without confronting the risks and without protecting those most in need, endangers this achievement. Idec will continue to act to demand standardization, security, and transparency.
