Circular Letter CVM/SSE 01/26

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF BRAZIL
Rua Sete de Setembro, 111/2-5º e 23-34º Andares, Centro, Rio de Janeiro/RJ – CEP: 20050-901 – Brasil - Tel.: (21) 3554-8686 Rua Cincinato Braga, 340/2º, 3º e 4º Andares, Bela Vista, São Paulo/ SP – CEP: 01333-010 – Brasil - Tel.: (11) 2146-2000 SCN Q.02 – Bl. A – Ed. Corporate Financial Center, S.404/4º Andar, Brasília/DF – CEP: 70712-900 – Brasil -Tel.: (61) 3327-2030/2031 www.cvm.gov.br

Circular Letter No. 1/2026/CVM/SSE
São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, February 6, 2026.
(content updated on the date of electronic signatures)

To Administrators of FIDC, FIAGRO, and FII

Subject: Submission of periodic information and ordinary coercive fines for delays.

Dear Sir/Madam,

This SSE has received a significant volume of appeals filed by administrators against the ordinary coercive fines applied for the delay or non-submission of periodic information provided for in Normative Annexes II, III, and VI to CVM Resolution No. 175.
In this context, this Circular Letter aims to clarify the main doubts raised by administrators regarding the criteria and procedures adopted by the SSE in applying fines and analyzing appeals. This Circular Letter considers the provisions contained in CVM Resolution No. 175/22 and CVM Resolution No. 47/21 or norms revoked by them, but which were in force at the time of the facts.
The submission of periodic information established in Normative Annexes II, III, and VI to CVM Resolution No. 175/22 (“RCVM 175”) constitutes an obligation of an ordinary and periodic nature, in accordance with art. 2, item I, and the sole paragraph, item I, of CVM Resolution No. 47/21 (“RCVM 47”), therefore not falling under an obligation of an eventual nature. Thus, non-compliance with these obligations subjects the Administrator to the objective application of the corresponding coercive fines, applied automatically per day of delay.
This SSE understands that the ordinary coercive fines applied by the CVM, due to non-compliance with the mentioned obligations, have the main purpose of ensuring compliance with regulations and discouraging delays or non-submissions of this information. Their application occurs objectively and automatically, requiring only the non-observance of the established deadlines, regardless of the reasons alleged, unless due to system failures or other CVM issues that demonstrably prevent the SSE from receiving the information.
Consequently, each coercive fine refers to a specific and individualized delay of a specific document and on a specific date. Therefore, different fines may be issued for the same document and fund on different dates, which does not characterize a sanction by the CVM, as alleged in many appeals, given that these fines do not have a punitive character.
Thus, there is no connection with infractions or that there is a continuing infraction by the administrator. These are, therefore, independent fines with distinct generating facts, such as, for example, different dates.
It should be noted that an administrator with several investment funds under its management is subject to receiving a significant number of ordinary coercive fines if it does not comply with the deadlines established for the submission of periodic documents, according to the relevant regulations.
It is also important to highlight that, in cases of delay or absence of disclosure of mandatory information, the possible damages caused to the market by the absence of information are considered separately, in the evaluation within a sanctioning context, which does not confuse with the ordinary coercive fine applied for the delay.
In summary, in accordance with RCVM 47, the untimely submission of the aforementioned mandatory reports entails the application of objective ordinary coercive fines, due for each day of delay in sending the information required for each investment fund and on specific dates. These fines accrue until the effective fulfillment of the obligation or until the maximum limit of 60 (sixty) consecutive days of non-compliance, and the fine amount may reach, depending on the case, up to R$ 60,000.00 per document, according to the provision in Annex A of said Resolution.
To avoid fines, it is up to the regulated entities to monitor the submission calendar for this information, available on the CVM website, at: https://www.gov.br/cvm/pt-br/assuntos/regulados/envio-de-informacoes-a-cvmcalendario. However, it should be noted that, in accordance with art. 3, § 4º of RCVM 47, communications made by the CVM have an exclusively informative character, not replacing or exempting participants from the obligation to comply with the deadlines and procedures provided for in the applicable regulations.
In this sense, it is worth mentioning that, by analogy to the clarifications provided in Circular Letter/CVM/SIN No. 10/21, it is incumbent upon the administrator of investment funds to maintain robust and effective internal controls, capable of ensuring the timely fulfillment of regulatory obligations provided for in CVM norms. These controls are essential to guarantee transparency to investors and the market, as well as to preserve the effectiveness of the supervision work of this technical area.
Thus, it is understood that the administering institution must possess and maintain staff and systems compatible with its size, as well as with the quantity and diversity of funds under its administration. Moreover, it must have adequate planning and expertise, including contingency plans, reporting lines, and internal governance capable of identifying and mitigating potential failures, ensuring that the submission of documents remains continuous and intact, in compliance with CVM regulations.
Internal controls should include, for example, double-check mechanisms regarding document submission, allowing for the timely identification of errors and correction with the least possible delay. The public consultation of the submitted document on the CVM website itself, to confirm its effective processing, constitutes a recommended routine for this purpose.
As part of internal controls, it is the responsibility of the administrator who delayed the information to recognize in its liabilities, in a timely manner, the provision and the corresponding expense of the fine value for the delay, given that, due to the volume, fines are usually issued and sent in subsequent fiscal years by the SSE.
Sometimes administrators allege in their appeals that they were surprised by the volume of fines applied and that this will impact their assets. However, such allegations reinforce that internal controls are not adequate, including to identify the delays that occurred and to account, in a timely manner, for provisions and expenses for the future payment of fines.
In the event that the administrator faces system problems in sending a specific document, it must formalize the occurrence through a request to the CVM External Support (suporteexterno@cvm.gov.br). It is emphasized that intermittencies in the Autarchy's systems justify delays only for the days effectively affected, and the participant must proceed with the submission as soon as the systems are restored. The dealings maintained with support must be archived, in order to enable the justification of any potential fine cancellation by the SSE, if applicable.
It is also worth highlighting that the person responsible for submitting the documents of an investment fund is the administrator in office on the due date of the obligation. Thus, for example, if a fund has the date 11/17/2025 as the deadline for submitting the Oct/2025 Monthly Report, the responsible administrator is the one holding the position on that submission date and not on the report's reference date. In cases of administrator substitution, the new administrator must ensure it has the conditions to fulfill the obligation in a timely manner, including with possible support from the previous administrator, avoiding delays and the consequent application of coercive fines.
Cadastre operations performed in the CVM systems may, in certain situations, temporarily prevent the submission of periodic documents. This unavailability, however, justifies any delay only for the period of inoperability. It is recommended that administrators maintain adequate controls to identify these circumstances and submit pending documents as soon as the fund is made available again in the system.
The obligation to submit documentation provided for the fulfillment of regulatory obligations set forth in RCVM 175 begins with the first capitalization of the fund, when its status changes to “normal operation”, and ends on the date of fund cancellation. In this context, a fund “in liquidation” remains obligated to submit the periodic documentation required by RCVM 175 until the moment of its effective closure.
This Superintendence also clarifies that in the case of a fund being closed with pending submissions of periodic reports, coercive fines will be issued regarding the periods of delay, the responsibility of the respective administrators from the date when the obligation was not fulfilled.
In the case of the transformation of a fund from one category to another, the obligation to submit periodic reports set forth in the annexes of RCVM 175, regarding the original fund, ends on the date when the transformation was operationalized by the CVM, and the new obligations contained in the respective annex of the new type of fund begin on this same date.
Thus, for example, if a certain fund was transformed from Credit Rights Investment Fund (FIDC) to Real Estate Investment Fund (FII) on 9/5/2025, but the operation was only finalized at the CVM on 11/18/2025, the monthly FIDC documents for the months of September and October 2025 must be submitted by the deadline for submission, as provided for in the regulation. Likewise, the FII obligations will begin on 11/18/2025, to be fulfilled already in the following month.
Another recurring doubt concerns CVM Deliberation No. 848/20, which extended certain deadlines for submitting mandatory reports due in the 2020 fiscal year. It is emphasized that said Deliberation had the legal nature of a temporary validity normative act, issued due to exceptional circumstances resulting from the public calamity state recognized by Legislative Decree No. 6/20. It is therefore highlighted that the norm had its efficacy automatically terminated with the end of the public calamity period.
In the understanding of the Specialized Federal Prosecutor’s Office at the CVM, “even if the pandemic had persisted beyond 2020, with the passage of time people had to (re)organize and came to live with the difficulties inherent to that unexpected and atypical situation, in what was then conventionally called the 'new normal'. Thus, as time had already been granted to the regulated entities to establish new routines or ways of acting, the grounds that had led to the extension of deadlines were no longer present in subsequent years”.
Thus, the effects of deadline extensions provided for in CVM Deliberation No. 848/2020 were limited to the 2020 fiscal year, not extending to subsequent fiscal years. Thus, it was not possible to apply or extrapolate the extensions provided for in this Deliberation to obligations due after 2020.
In summary, appeals containing the allegations addressed above will be denied.
Specifically regarding documents CADOC 3040, which consolidate monthly information on credit operations, and CADOC 3044, which record events that alter the outstanding balance of these operations, they are of an individual and mandatory nature, to be sent monthly by FIDC trustees, in accordance with current legislation, to the Credit Information System of the Central Bank of Brazil - SCR, as provided for in art. 4 of CMN Resolution No. 5.037/2022 and art. 31 of Annex II of RCVM 175.
Institutions exempted from sending the CADOC 3040 document are equally exempt from sending the CADOC 3044. It is emphasized, however, that the request and monitoring of exemptions must be carried out directly with the Central Bank of Brazil (“Bacen”), according to guidelines contained in the manuals available on the Bacen page accessible via the link: https://www.bcb.gov.br/estabilidadefinanceira/scrdoc3040. The documents proving the granted exemption must be properly archived, in order to enable the justification of any potential fine cancellation by the SSE, when applicable.
It is worth highlighting that the submission of CADOC 3040 and CADOC 3044 documents is mandatory and does not constitute a mere option of the trustee, whose function is to allow the Autarchies access to the information available in the SCR, in order to “improve the supervision of structured operations facilitated through receivables funds, given the cross-referencing of information from the debtors of the funds' portfolios with the information of these clients provided by other participants of the National Financial System” (Public Hearing Notice SDM No. 02/11).
In July 2022, CVM Resolution No. 159/22 (“RCVM 159”) was issued, which promoted relevant changes in the fine application procedure. In this sense, art. 2 of RCVM 159, which amended RCVM 47, established new wording for arts. 16 and 18, providing that an appeal to the Area Superintendent against decisions applying coercive fines would be in the second and last instance and without suspensive effect.
Thus, since August 1, 2022, when said resolution entered into force, the last appeal instance for fines is the Area Superintendent who issued the fine.
It is also worth clarifying that the receipt process for fines cannot occur by any other means than physical mail. As previously stated in Circular Letter No. 10/2024/CVM/SSE/SIN, “physical mail is necessary in light of the tax legislation to which the collection procedure for ordinary and extraordinary coercive fines is subject”. Thus, since there is a legal issue that prevents notification via electronic means in cases of fines, there is no way to cease proceeding with the sending of notifications via physical mail with AR (Acknowledgment of Receipt).
Finally, it is worth recalling the guidelines contained on the Autarchy's website regarding the correct procedures for administrators or managers to request cadastre changes for their funds (FIDC, FII, and FIAGRO) for those that cannot be performed directly in the SGF system.
In these terms, as guided on the site, the request must be sent directly to the Securitization and Agribusiness Division - DSEC, the SSE division responsible for cadastre records and updates.
In case of doubts about the content of this Circular Letter, please contact DSEC via email dsec@cvm.gov.br.

Sincerely,

Marcelo Firmino dos Santos
Head - Securitization and Agribusiness Division - DSEC

Bruno de Freitas Gomes
Superintendent of Securitization and Agribusiness - SSE

Document electronically signed by Bruno de Freitas Gomes Condeixa Rodrigues, Superintendent, on 03/03/2026, at 08:39, with basis in art. 6 of Decree No. 8.539, of October 8, 2015.
Document electronically signed by Marcelo Firmino dos Santos, Division Head, on 05/03/2026, at 12:03, with basis in art. 6 of Decree No. 8.539, of October 8, 2015.
The authenticity of the document can be checked on the site https://sei.cvm.gov.br/conferir_autenticidade, informing the verification code 2599942 and the CRC Code D2E9C3D2.
This document's authenticity can be verified by accessing https://sei.cvm.gov.br/conferir_autenticidade, and typing the "Verification Code" 2599942 and the "CRC Code" D2E9C3D2.
Reference: Process No. 19957.009383/2021-43 SEI Document No. 2599942

Circular Letter CVM/SSE 01/26

Lineage: In force