COMISSÃO DE VIAÇÃO E TRANSPORTES

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning to all. I will ask, if you can't, because the Dr. Mark Lorelli gave a overview of everything that happened. But we can... I'm commenting here the pass of pass about the implementation, interpretation and with the veneer, some differences in interpretation with regards to Dr. Marco Aurélio. a And then, very much from the origin. The 11442 had a possibility of the possibility of the Thank you. or the transportor contratar the insurance. So, the beginning and the genesis start from there. o in legal security, in certain circumstances, in which there was a coverage of the seguros, especially the RCTRC and the RCDC, pelo He was a contract, he had options and there are many times there is a a DDR, which was a Carta Dispensary Direction of Regress that this would generate a insecurity for the transport. So, the big point, and different from what Dr. Mark Corelli put here, The only problem was not only the issue of the autonome. There was this problem, yes, in the contractions of companies. So, the sector wanted what? and of contract the transportors, exclusively of the transportors. And Well, I think here we have several embarcadores and transport providers, and representatives. It was a true dispute legislative, so to say, of representation, "puxa it for there, for there, for there, for there, who will be there?" Finally, with good support of the autónomos, that had a desire to have this insurance. and made a approval in Congress that made a contract with the contract of the three seguros. The truth is, the RCV was not in the radar, but he ended up entering a pauta that the autónom considered important, and that, in the legislative process and democratic republic, was one of the criteria that and In the context of the Congress, this is the thesis that would be exclusive to the legislation. I'm sorry, I'm not talking about the presentation because Dr. Marco Aurélio gave an overview. So, different from what and It was like, at the beginning, we didn't have a clear regulation. the law, in the 13th, and then they brought a little bit of the legal and also with the vene a a lei 14 599 it comes posterior to the 1442, obviously. And, in the definition, even though it's not specifically in the article of requisitos ela criou uma obrigação que ela não ressalva He said, "for all the transportors." The issue of reforcing the embarkation is obvious. It's the moment you will have the verbatim and that it will occur and will give cobertura to the embarques. It's a reforce to the necessity. but the contract It was well described there. In a first moment, the agency agreed to a regulation the CNSP Eh... It's exactly the CNSP. We've been waiting for a regulation to try to understand how it would be. At first, our interpretation about the issue of the connection to the RNTRC It was in the sense that he needed to have a RNTRC. Punt. Our first understanding was that we needed to have a RDC to contract. - Thank you. However, when we look at the CNSP, 472 There she does exactly what Dr. Marco Aurélio said, she link the question. a do RNTRC and the condition of active in the R&R C. What is the RNTRC? It's a cadastro obviously, that you know, of those who do transport to the car. the issue of status of being ativo, suspended, pendent, this to the market, including for the embarcadores that are here, means that it can have a registration but for some reason he has to return to the same register, and the register follows him. the status is related to the capacity to do transport. Thank you. When the regulation CNSP brings this issue of being ativo, linked to being at, related to the URNTRC, we said, "point". It interpretation as a whole it It makes clear that this becomes a condition for him to do a transport operation and be able to be able to be able to do it. It doesn't mean that If I have been registered for the RNDRC, for any reason, that he can do it. and if I don't have this cadastro, if I don't get to prove the contract of the insurance, he will have the RDRC, he just doesn't know how to do it. And then we bring other questions that are very related to the legislation, for the case of the autonome transport transport, It leaves very clear the subcontracting, Thank you. and of, for the RC, TRC and RCDC, it's as a preposter. So it's very clear that And for the RCV, it says that it should be contracted for travel. And there is a question of the global policy, which is another possibility that exists, but it says that it should be contracted for travel. when he is hired and directly, it's the only issue in which the autonomous transport driver will have to and to have the three seguros to prove the contract. Well, and this is very related to the characteristics of the sector. And here are public data that you can access to. by the same panel of the car, where we can see the transport profile. When we look for different categories of transport, And then we look at him ETC, TAC, and I'll say so... that are the small companies and and cooperatives When we look at the reality of the "take" or "take" "equiparado" it In fact, who are the TAC-TAC Parado? Companies that have even three vehicles, motor vehicles. and the cooperatives. When we look at this profile, and it's also very linked to the mercantil, is it's practically 80% of the operations are subcontracted. and 20% are hired directly So what we see there is, and regardless of the reasons that this happened, there was, along the time, a migration from the transport to the car, person, physical, CPF, to become a ETC. But with this also generated what? Other impacts. On the one hand, if it was what the market wanted, tax credit, tax credit, etc., or, if they were still still in the same way with the work of the work, if I understand it, On the other hand, what happened? a to be injured in a condition of ETC. with responsibility of the ETC, It... as is said, with the bonus of being a ETC. It happens that a lot of this sector is operating as a TAC. And then there are discussions of it or not, it has to be, and the legislation doesn't leave it clear. TAC the TAC has this issue of subcontracting. all the other, there is this obligation to contract in law and And then it came more or less in this line that we were talking about. of obligation etc and so on. And just to be a little clear, despite we already talked about in some moments, I disagree with the thought that we innovated. both in the resolution as well as in the portaria. What we are giving them are conditions for that operationally or to prove the contracture of the respective insurance. So that in the own portaria, one of the ways that I believe that the sector doesn't want, which is to be standing with the paper, in the car to compro a contract or to take and take comprovantes to the sindicato etc. and so and so and so and so and so we will give you a way Automatizar essa entrega and the comprovação of seguros, by the intercâmbio of information. For this, he authorizes his respective the fact that we even didn't need to be via SUSEP, but we left this path and so we can do it, so we can do it, to make a fiscalization that would not be necessary for the transportor I believe that I'm tired of walking with that lot of the car in a car and every time more, not only the federal administration, but the state also has eliminated the need to take the car. and the comproving of the electronic So we're not generating an obligation. A obligation was created in the law of comproving, of indication, that he has to say, he has to prove that there is a contract. There is no obligation without the state's capacity to fiscalize it. So there was a way to get to the middle. Yeah. and all these aspects we came to consult our procuradorian even before we did and to reinforce the aspect that we put on, and that was one of the points, We also also did the same question with regard to the RCFV, because several entities, the QNTC, the ABTI, They were asked We reforzamos the question for a SUSEP, which maintained the RCV. So they were not able to have the RCV, which is what is prevailing in law, created a a period of transition to adaptation that this period it's a bomb as a como considerando que existem após que já foram contratados esse período acaba que as novas após a partir de 1º de julho They already need to have the RCV, because the RCFV, as Dr. Marco Aurélio said, was a period of transition that was accepted, and it is real. E it's a partir do dia 1º de julho para frente o que se deve contratar é o rc the I agree with you that there is a difficulty in the adaptation of the security sector The security sector, as well said, is organized to be organized bring the product more adequate, understand the new risk, When the RCFV and it's beautiful, it's a good part of the transports not contratable, including the RC/TRC, So, a good part of the transports still don't have the contract. and And the solution, if we remain in a matter of facultative, etc., comes to the same problem, that, in the end, does not give security for the embarcador, does not give security for the transportor, does externalities, does competitiveness and disleal, which is one of the biggest aspects of the sector. If a certain transportor is a fiscalized, he cumped the norm and the other not, and this is a concorrência desleal. And this is one of the biggest problems of the sector, unfortunately. So, all the aspects that the agency is doing... It's to guarantee a fiscalization is unknown and we guarantee that we all have to be the obligations previst in law. So, this was, in general, what I wanted to say. I would like to explain a little bit of a presentation, but the Dr. Macorelli already fulfilled this mission with Maestria. Thank you. .