What Changes for Non-Life Insurance in Brazil pursuant to Public Consultation No. 10/2025

Just days before the new Insurance Law (Law No. 15,040/2024) comes into force, SUSEP has launched a public consultation on a draft resolution intended to replace Circular SUSEP No. 621/2021. The proposal seeks to align the regulatory framework governing the operation and coverage criteria of non-life insurance with the principles introduced by the new legislation.

Below, we outline some of the key adjustments suggested in the draft, which merit close attention from the market due to their potential regulatory and operational impact.

Large Risks

The draft resolution (“Resolution”) establishes its mandatory applicability to all non-life insurance, including large-risk coverages, as provided by specific regulation. Unlike Circular SUSEP No. 621/2021, which allowed optional application to large risks, the new text does not replicate this flexibility. It would be advisable for the Resolution to clarify that its provisions apply to large risks only insofar as they do not conflict with the law or specific norms governing such risks—such as CNSP Resolution No. 407/2021, as amended to reflect the new law, or any regulation that replaces it.

Furthermore, as anticipated by the market, the Resolution introduces specific rules for claims adjustment and settlement, setting a 120-day period for adjustment and coverage determination, followed by an additional 120 days for settlement and indemnity payment, if applicable. These deadlines are significantly longer than the general 30-day rule. The actual impact of this change will depend on whether the regulator revises the definition of large risks in the forthcoming review of the specific regulation.

This would also be an opportune moment for the regulator to define how large-risk policy wordings should be “registered” with SUSEP, as required by the new law, in a manner that reasonably accommodates the particularities of this qualified coverage.

Criminal Acts

The Resolution reproduces, in full, the Insurance Law’s prohibition on coverage for fines and penalties arising from acts committed by the insured “that constitute a criminal offence.” In doing so, it misses the opportunity to distinguish between intentional wrongful acts by the insured—which are clearly incompatible with Brazilian law—and acts that merely “constitute” a criminal offence, which may occur through negligence and could, in principle, be insurable, as is common in most Western jurisdictions.

Insurance Proposal

The Resolution addresses the two types of proposals introduced by the Insurance Law: those originating from the insured (as traditionally practised in the market) and a new type—proposals originating from the insurer. The novelty in the Resolution is its restriction of insurer-originated proposals exclusively to policies sold via insurance certificates (bilhetes de seguro). This approach seems not only unlawful—by exceeding SUSEP’s regulatory authority and imposing a limitation not found in the Insurance Law—but also counterproductive, as it undermines the very concept introduced by the Law by confining it to a context that does not even require a proposal. 

The existence of these two proposal types requires adjustments in the Resolution’s terminology and related concepts, depending on whether the proposal originates from the insurer or the insured. This is evident, for example, in provisions concerning minimum elements and the date of acceptance.

Renewals

The Resolution innovates - albeit in a manner arguably beyond its remit - by effectively making automatic renewal the default rule. It requires insurers to notify their intention not to renew in advance, both for policies with automatic renewal clauses and for standard policies, under penalty of mandatory renewal.

Default (Mora)

The Resolution expressly dismisses the prior notice to the insured in case of non-payment of the insurance premium in a single instalment or of the first instalment, for purposes of terminating the insurance contract.

In cases of suspension of coverage due to non-payment of any subsequent instalment, the wording of the insurer’s notification to the insured will determine whether a new notice is required before termination, as per the proposed regulation.

In any event, when default relates to an instalment other than the first, the insurer must consider, before suspending or terminating the contract, the coverage period corresponding to the proportion of the premium actually paid.

Claims

The Resolution incorporates the new concepts and deadlines for claims adjustment and settlement introduced by the Insurance Law, distinguishing between general non-life insurance and large risks.

It also sets criteria for certain denial-of-coverage scenarios and introduces minimum elements for adjustment and settlement reports - changes that will require operational and cultural adjustments by insurers.

Aggravation of Risk

The Insurance Law regulates continuous intentional aggravation of risk but is silent on isolated intentional aggravation. The Resolution seeks to address this gap by subjecting such aggravation to loss of indemnity rights, arguing that the contrary would violate the principle of good faith governing insurance contracts.

Additionally, it introduces an option - alongside charging additional premium or terminating the contract when technical impossibility prevents coverage - for restricting the purchased coverage, as already provided in Circular SUSEP No. 621/2021 but not in the Insurance Law. This addresses concerns about misalignment between the aggravated risk and the insurer’s underwriting policy, for example.

Reduction of Risk

The Resolution sets parameters for risk reduction and prescribes procedures for communication between insured and insurer. It requires that the reduction leads to a significant and sustained decrease in the likelihood of the risk described in the risk assessment questionnaire or in the severity of its consequences. Given the open nature of these concepts, their practical scope will depend on doctrinal development and the evolution of administrative, judicial, and arbitral precedents in the coming years.

Contractual Conditions

Overall, the Resolution introduces rules aimed at greater transparency for insureds and beneficiaries, which will require changes to policy wordings - such as provisions on partial losses, criteria and formulas for determining indemnity amounts, and indemnity by service provision.

It also establishes or modifies minimum content requirements for certain clauses in non-life insurance policies, including clauses on overlapping insurance contracts, prescription, and transfer of the insured interest. The Resolution further introduces new definitions of key concepts in its Annex, which warrant careful review and adjustment to align with market practice and the new principles set forth in the Insurance Law.