Brazil's National Council of Justice (CNJ) unanimously approved a unified payroll system to limit magistrates' salaries to the constitutional ceiling [1, 3].

This move targets the practice of adding extra payments, known as "penduricalhos," which often allow judicial earnings to exceed legal limits. By consolidating all remuneration into a single document, the CNJ aims to increase transparency and ensure compliance with federal law.

The decision was approved on May 26, 2026 [2]. Under the new mandate, courts have a 60-day implementation period to adopt the unified payroll system [1]. This measure follows criteria established by the Supreme Federal Court (STF) to regulate payments that fall outside the standard salary structure [4].

The shift toward a unified payroll is intended to prevent the fragmentation of payments that previously obscured the total amount received by judges. While the STF had previously created a working group to monitor compliance with salary caps [4], reports indicate that some magistrates and prosecutors continued to seek payments above the ceiling shortly after those rules were established [5].

The CNJ is now moving to close these loopholes by requiring a single, transparent payroll. This administrative change is designed to contain remuneration that exceeds the constitutional limit and align judicial pay with the STF's specific criteria for extra payments [2, 4].

Despite the unanimous vote, the measure has faced pressure from within the magistracy [2]. Some judicial officials have questioned the implementation, while transparency advocates said that nothing should remain hidden regarding the compensation of public servants [2].

“The CNJ unanimously approved a unified payroll system to limit magistrates' salaries.”

The enforcement of a unified payroll represents a systemic attempt to curb judicial overpayment in Brazil. By eliminating fragmented payment streams, the CNJ is removing the primary mechanism used to bypass the constitutional salary ceiling. This indicates a tightening of administrative oversight over the judiciary to reduce public spending and address long-standing criticisms regarding the lack of transparency in judicial compensation.