Brazil's Senacon Ordinance: Creator Ad Disclosure Is Now a Government Rule
Brazil's Joint Ordinance No. 3/2026 from Senacon requires anyone posting paid content to disclose their relationship with the brand in a prominent way, for as long as the post stays up, including on livestreams. Here is what already applies, what arrives on December 22, and what I would change today in contracts, clips, and profiles.
Brazil's Senacon Ordinance: Creator Ad Disclosure Is Now a Government Rule
Since the end of October, by the count of the lawyers who have read the text, disclosing sponsored content in Brazil is no longer just a CONAR recommendation (Brazil's advertising self-regulation body) and good manners toward your audience. Joint Ordinance Senacon/Sedigi/SPDigi No. 3, dated September 22, 2026, requires anyone who posts content because of a commercial relationship with a brand to say so prominently, for as long as the post stays up. My read is that most creators have not changed anything yet, and the first thing to feel it will be the contract, not a fine.
The topic came back today because the lawyer Patricia Peck wrote in Meio & Mensagem that, with this ordinance, transparency in digital advertising becomes a regulatory requirement, not just good practice. She is right, and it is worth looking at what that means for anyone who lives off sponsorships, affiliate deals, and paid clips.
What does the ordinance say, in one sentence?
Platforms that sell ads to the Brazilian public must track and show who pays for each ad, and creators who promote something because of a relationship with a brand must say so clearly.
The rule was signed by the National Consumer Secretariat (Senacon), the National Secretariat of Digital Rights, and the Secretariat of Digital Policies of Secom, and was announced by the Ministry of Justice on September 23, with the official text as a PDF. It is based on Brazil's Consumer Protection Code.
It applies across Brazil and to platforms based abroad that sell ads here. Marketplaces, services with their own editorial control, and licensed content are excluded.
When does each part start to apply?
Most of it already applies; the platform tool arrives on December 22.
The Ministry said the remaining provisions take effect in 30 days and the requirement for transparency tools (article 3) in 90 days. The government has not published a calendar with dates, but counting from the September 23 publication, the law firms Cescon Barrieu and Ceni de Oliveira arrive at:
| What | Who complies | Since when |
|---|---|---|
| Disclose the relationship with the brand (article 9) | Creator and brand | Around 10/23/2026 |
| Keep each ad's data for 1 year, including the CPF or CNPJ (Brazilian tax ID) of whoever paid | Platform | Around 10/23/2026 |
| Public, searchable ad repository | Platform with more than 1 million monthly active users in Brazil | Around 10/23/2026 |
| Check identity and authorization before financial product ads | Platform | Around 10/23/2026 |
| Tool for creators to declare their relationship with the brand (article 3) | Platform | Around 12/22/2026 |
Note that the creator's duty does not wait for the platform's tool. Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube already have a paid partnership or branded content label; what article 3 does is force every covered platform to have its own.
What counts as a "material relationship"?
Any compensation, not just a fee.
According to Patricia Peck's own summary in Meio & Mensagem, article 2 defines a material relationship as payment, indirect compensation, supply of a product or service, equity, or a financial agreement. In practice, this covers:
- sponsored posts with a fee, obviously;
- barter (the hotel that hosts you, the sneakers that arrived as a gift with a brief);
- affiliate commission, even without a fixed amount, as the Ceni de Oliveira analysis points out;
- the product of a company you are a partner in;
- paid clips priced per view inside a brand campaign. That last one is my reading, it is not written in those words, but it is hard to argue that money per view is not payment tied to the promotion.
What does the disclosure have to look like?
Prominent, in plain language, and visible for as long as the content exists, including on livestreams.
Article 9 asks for the notice to be easy to understand. The example from the law firm Schiefler is a good one: an influencer hired by a gym chain, who receives a fee and a free year of membership, says in the video itself "advertising paid for by Gym X". A stray hashtag at the end of the post description is not enough.
Two points look new to me for anyone who works with brands:
- Ongoing partnerships go on the profile. If the relationship is not limited to one specific post (ambassador, six-month contract, business partner), the information also has to appear on the profile for as long as the relationship lasts. The criterion, in the words of Ceni de Oliveira, is "the breadth of the relationship, not the number of posts".
- The notice applies for the whole life of the post. A 2024 sponsored post that is still up and was edited to remove the "ad" label is a problem. A sponsored livestream has to show the notice during the whole broadcast, not just at the start.
Schiefler also draws a useful distinction: a video posted only on the brand's profile has the brand as its source. If it is a collab or you repost it on your profile, the duty to disclose becomes yours too.
What about clips, reposts, and affiliates?
Paid content carries the obligation into the clip.
The Ceni de Oliveira analysis recommends checking edited and republished versions, so the clip keeps the disclosure. For anyone who clips a sponsored livestream or takes part in a brand's clipping campaign, this is concrete: if the excerpt you posted shows the sponsor's product and you got paid for it, the notice goes on the clip. If you received nothing and just clipped the excerpt, the material relationship belongs to whoever recorded it, and my reading is that the original's disclosure does not bind you, but it does not hurt to keep it.
I already wrote here about the 2026 CONAR guide and the audience's distrust of hidden sponsorships. The difference now is weight: CONAR is self-regulation, while the ordinance is a government act backed by the Consumer Protection Code. Anyone who already followed the CONAR guide is almost entirely covered.
Who wins and who loses?
Those who already disclosed win; those who sold sponsorships as opinion lose.
On the platform side, the public ad repository leaves a trail for whoever ran scam ads, which is the rule's stated target. On the creator side, the effect I expect is different: with responsibility shared between whoever pays and whoever posts, brands and agencies will put disclosure in the contract and charge for it. Anyone negotiating a sponsorship will receive a clause for a "visible notice for the whole display period, including stories and lives", and a creator who refuses becomes a risk for the brand's legal department.
That has a good side. Well-disclosed sponsorships become comparable, and the conversation with the brand moves from "will it look organic?" to results. We have already seen brand money move to micro and nano creators precisely because of trust; the ordinance just removes the option of pretending.
Anyone selling financial products through sponsorships also loses. The identity and authorization check applies to paid ads on the platform, but after the betting ad ban, I would treat any sponsorship for investments, credit, or "extra income" as a high-risk zone.
Does the customer service decree affect creators?
Little, unless you sell a subscription or service directly to consumers.
The same Meio & Mensagem article covers Decree No. 13,135/2026, which reworks Brazil's customer service rules (SAC) and guarantees real-time human support when the consumer asks for it, even where there is AI support. If you sell a course, a paid community, or your own product, check whether your support has that path.
What I would do starting today
- Review the sponsored posts that are still up. Start with pinned ones and the ones with the most reach. If the relationship is not clear in the video or in the first line of the post description, edit it or turn on the paid partnership label.
- Ongoing partnership? Put it on the profile. One line in the bio ("Paid partnership with Brand X") for as long as the contract lasts.
- Say it in the video. Say "sponsored by Brand X" in the first few seconds. It works on any network, including those that do not have their own tool yet.
- Sponsored livestream: keep the notice fixed on screen for the whole broadcast, not just the opening.
- Put it in the contract. Who discloses, where, for how long, and who approves the text. If the brand asks you to hide it, refuse in writing.
- Affiliates and barter too. An affiliate link in the post description is advertising; so is a product received with a brief.
If you run a clipping campaign for a brand, the disclosure rule goes into the rules before you open registration. On Cut.Pro, the clipping championship has a rules step during creation, and that is where I would write how each clipper has to identify the brand in the clip. The cost comparison against ads is in clipping campaigns for brands.
So far there is no news of Senacon enforcing the ordinance against a specific creator, and the platforms have not yet said how they will deliver the article 3 tool. The date to watch is December 22. Until then, the cost of adjusting is an afternoon reviewing old posts.
