What to Expect from Brazil on Tech Policy in 2026

Laís Martins is a fellow at Tech Policy Press.

Brazilians will head to the polls this year in what is set to be a heated general election race that could shape the tenor of discussions on tech.

Much has changed since 2022, when leftist president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva won back power in his face-off with former president Jair Bolsonaro, now serving a prison sentence for plotting a coup d’etat and attempting to overthrow the rule of law in Brazil.

The country has been further rocked by the Brazilian Supreme Court’s conviction of a number of allies who took part in the plot — which included a plan to assassinate Lula and a Supreme Court justice — and by trials against Bolsonaro supporters who stormed the Brazilian capital on January 8, 2023.

In June, the high court also voted to overturn the country's platform liability regime, which had been in place since 2014. The new regime, which had its rules published just recently in November, increases platforms’ responsibility, opening them to liability even in cases where there has been no court decision requiring them to take certain moderation actions.

The court’s decision to review Brazil's Internet Bill of Rights, a landmark legislation from 2014, was driven by a multitude of factors, including platforms’ inaction around the events of January 8. But another factor that may have played a role was the renewed hostility from the United States government and allied technology companies towards the court earlier in the year.

In July, the US announced 50% tariffs on Brazilian products, with President Donald Trump attributing his decision “in part to Brazil's insidious attacks on Free Elections, and the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans.” On the same day, the US Trade Representative (USTR) announced it was launching a Section 301 investigation into “Brazil's attacks on American social media companies.”

Additionally, in August, the US imposed sanctions against Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes under the Magnitsky Act, which was devised to penalize human rights offenders, though they have since been lifted.

Although much of that heated rhetoric has calmed down and the tariffs have been rolled back, some of the tension remains, particularly as Brazil appears keen on advancing legislation to curb Big Tech's economic power in the coming year.

It’s been a topic of discussion in Washington. In mid-December, the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee held a hearing on “Anti-American Antitrust: How Foreign Governments Target U.S. Businesses,” with Brazil among the countries mentioned.

It is against this backdrop that Brazil heads into the new year with an ambitious digital agenda led by Lula’s government. From advancing a competition-focused bill to enforcing the Child Online Safety Act, approved in August, there is much to be done. What remains to be seen, according to experts, is how many of these priorities will be affected and potentially halted by the election calendar.

Here are the three big topics around tech and democracy to watch in Brazil in 2026:

New platform liability regime

In June, when the Supreme Court decided that the current platform liability regime was unconstitutional, it said that a ruling with clearer definitions of what would replace it would come at a later date.

The ruling was finally published in early November, but some questions remain, according to Bruna Santos, policy and advocacy manager at Witness. One of the points that needs further clarification is where users have due process and what they should do to appeal wrong moderation decisions.

Another important gray area is the criteria for holding platforms accountable. “It mentions some accountability hypothesis, but it leaves [open] questions,” said Santos, such as when to hold platforms liable for any inaction.

As a result of the new regime, Santos said she expects platforms to err on the side of over-removing content to avoid liability, which could also lead to more moderation mistakes.

Santos said she sees the new ruling providing a legal basis for preventative interventions by both the Supreme Court and electoral courts in cases of relevant disinformation, hate speech and attacks against the integrity of the voting process. Up until now, without a solid legal backing, Brazil’s separate Electoral Supreme Court had a more narrow ability to intervene by passing resolutions specific to the election period.

“These could be even more challenging elections in respect to how to handle digital content,” Santos said. “We’ll see a scenario where platforms might become more active in terms of moderation, but at the same time become more evasive in terms of meeting Brazilian authorities’ and electoral authorities’ requests, precisely because of this anti-regulation narrative they have been pushing around the world.”

Digital markets bill

In September, the Brazilian government submitted to Congress an ambitious digital markets bill that marks the country’s first attempt at passing a policy designed to tackle the economic power of Big Tech.

It proposes giving Brazil’s competition authority, CADE, new ways to bring challenges in digital markets. The bill would impose new obligations designed to guarantee transparency, interoperability and non-discrimination by major tech companies.

According to Gabrielle Graça, a researcher in competition law and human rights at Fundação Getúlio Vargas Rio, there is little expectation that the bill will be approved in 2026 given the election period.

“In 2025, it became completely clear how much influence corporate power, and North-American foreign policy have over Latin America and Brazil,” she said. “We have this tech oligarchy and unfortunately our legislative processes are tied to it.”

Graça recalls the process around Brazil’s Fake News Bill, which was ultimately shelved in 2024 after years of debate. “It was an important black mark in our democracy, unfortunately, and an experience we need to dive deep into and learn how Big Tech does politics.” She said she has no doubt that companies will stay on top of any type of economic regulation that has the potential to substantially impact their operations and profits.

The bill’s lead sponsor has been signaling the need for more debate, which Graça agrees with to a certain extent. Some points that need further clarification, she said, are the timeline for designating which companies will be affected and other process deadlines.

“There’s a side of it that is part of the democratic [process] and is important, but we also need to remain vigilant because this type of mechanism can be employed as a strategy by Big Tech to win by exhaustion and end up burying points that are important,” she said.

Regarding the preparedness of Brazil’s competition authority, CADE, to take on the role of regulator when the bill is approved, Graça expressed some confidence in its preparedness, citing their work in the cases against Apple and Google related to their app stores. Some commissioners have been more forward-looking than others, she said, but the creation of a new system within CADE is likely to impact the institution’s overall dynamics.

Artificial intelligence regulation

Another important item on Brazil’s digital agenda this year is its AI regulation proposal. Initially scheduled to be voted on before the end of 2025, the decision was postponed to February amid a lack of political consensus and disagreement over the text.

Two points have become particularly contentious: the application of copyright law for content used to train AI systems and the designation of high-risk systems, which would be subject to stricter rules and transparency obligations. Discussions have also been delayed by topics that became relevant after the bill began its proceedings, such as data centers.

The electoral period could have an especially profound effect on the bill, Picolo said. Because the second part of the year is dedicated to campaigning, it leaves a tight window for the bill to move forward. But the fact that the executive branch has been proposing regulations of its own, such as the data centers measure and the digital markets’ bill, puts some pressure on Congress to pass its own legislation.

“There’s also a legitimate interest that this regulation moves forward before elections given that the unregulated use of AI could directly affect the electoral process. The Electoral Court’s resolutions, although relevant, are insufficient to cover all risks to information integrity and rights protection, which reinforces the need for a national bill,” Picolo said.