Bruno Salzano

The reform of the electricity sector consolidated by Law No. 15.269/2025 reshaped the self-production of electricity by equivalence, that is, where the consumer is equated to a self-producer of energy by holding a shareholding with voting rights in the generating company that supplies them with energy. In the last weeks of June, this reshaping gained two important new chapters: (i) the decision of the Board of Directors of ANEEL (National Electric Energy Agency), which defined how the new rules will be operationalized by CCEE (Electric Energy Trading Chamber); and (ii) the ruling of the TCU (Federal Court of Accounts), which recommended to the MME (Ministry of Mines and Energy) and to the agency itself ANEEL A review of the exemption from certain sector charges for the equivalent self-producer... Added to this context is the emergence of new large-scale energy-intensive loads, such as data centers and green hydrogen plants, whose economic viability largely depends on access to self-production arrangements for the supply of electricity. Context: Electricity Sector Reform Law No. 15.269/2025 inserted Article 16-B into Law No. 9.074/1995 and, with this, promoted the most profound change in the self-production regime by equivalence since the creation of the figure of the equivalent consumer in 2007. Under the new law, new requirements were established for the self-production regime by equivalence to be configured. In this sense, the consumer must have an aggregate contracted demand of at least 30.000 kW, composed of consumption units with at least 3.000 kW each. Additionally, the law also innovated by including stricter rules for participation in the share capital of the company holding the concession by the agent equated to a self-producer. If the company has issued non-voting shares with superior economic rights (which was a structure widely used until the new law came into effect), the consumer must hold a minimum stake of 30% of the total share capital weighted by the shares with voting rights. At the same time, in a seemingly opposite sense, the concept of an equivalent self-producer was broadened. The classification may now include companies under common corporate control, as well as the controlling, controlled or affiliated company, directly or indirectly, of the concessionaire company, observing the shareholding with voting rights held by the energy consumer. The message was clear: an attempt was made to limit access to self-production structures by equivalence, reserving it, in practice, for large loads, requiring a significant participation of the equivalent self-producer in the share capital of the generating company. It is worth noting that the bill initially approved by the National Congress included a provision restricting new arrangements to plants that were not yet operational – in other words, there seemed to be an intention to apply the benefit only to new projects. However, this provision was vetoed during the conversion into law, but, to date, the veto has not been reviewed by the National Congress. At this time, the window for self-production structures with assets already in operation remains open. Definition of operationalization by ANEEL On June 30, 2026, following a postponement of the June 16 meeting due to internal disagreement, the Board of Directors of ANEEL The agency deliberated on the application of Article 16-B of Law No. 9.074/1995, as amended by Law No. 15.269/2025. The Agency's guidelines were formalized in Dispatch No. 2.414/2026 (pending publication at the time of submission of this article). In general, the decision of ANEEL It confirms the self-executing nature of the law, dispensing with the need for a specific regulatory resolution, but nevertheless, relevant guidelines were issued to CCEE on points considered sensitive. Through the aforementioned Dispatch, the Board of Directors of ANEEL It established that CCEE (Brazilian Chamber of Electric Energy Commercialization) must keep active, for up to 3 years, the self-producer models backed by power plants without authorization (low-capacity plants, up to 5 MW, holding registration in the...). ANEEL), provided that they were already completed before the publication of the new law. Although there is no such provision in the aforementioned legal instrument, the Board of Directors of ANEEL It was deemed legally appropriate to provide transitional treatment for such concretely consolidated situations, in observance of the principle of legal certainty. For context, it is worth noting that, prior to Law No. 15.269/2025, as clarified in Opinion No. 55/2026/PFANEEL/PGF/AGU and in Legal Note No. 12/2026/PFANEEL/PGF/AGU, a ANEEL It was understood that it was possible to justify, based on a systematic interpretation of sector legislation and the fungibility admitted between the regimes of independent power production (IPP) and self-production, that small-capacity plants, operating through simple registration, could be modeled in the CCEE (Brazilian Chamber of Electric Energy Commercialization) as self-producers, via allocation of own generation, even though Decree No. 2.003/1996 already stipulated that the self-producer should hold a concession or authorization. However, after the publication of Law No. 15.269/2025, this hypothesis will no longer be admitted. Also in relation to the new law, the Agency determined that, for the purposes of defining corporate terms, the CCEE must adopt the concepts established in the Normative Resolution. ANEEL No. 948/2021, in Law No. 6.404/1976 (the Corporations Law) and in Joint Technical Note No. 7/2026-SGM-SCE-SFF/ANEELThe CCEE will also be responsible for verifying economic groups and coalitions, examining, on a case-by-case basis, whether the official corporate documentation of the arrangements presented is clear and qualifies the consumer to be considered a self-producer. Furthermore, within the administrative process that gave rise to the aforementioned Dispatch, there was a question regarding the minimum individual demand of the consumption units – notably, whether the 30.000 kW required by law could be aggregated by loads of any size, provided that one had a contracted demand equal to or greater than 3.000 kW. The Board of Directors of ANEEL It was determined that no – in line with the literal interpretation of the law, each consumption unit must have an individual demand equal to or greater than 3.000 kW. As next steps, CCEE may adjust the Trading Procedures and Rules to operationalize the new provisions of the Law. The TCU broadens the scope of the discussion. A few days before the decision... ANEELOn June 24, 2026, the TCU (Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts) Plenary issued Ruling 1631/2026, following an operational audit dedicated specifically to evaluating the self-generation policy. The audit found that this modality has grown significantly in recent years and that the charges for ESS (System Services Charge) and EER (Reserve Energy Charge) not fully collected by self-producers represent billions of dollars in costs redistributed to other consumers. According to the TCU, the self-producer benefits from the stability of the electrical system without a proportional contribution to the costs that sustain it, and the self-generation policy lacks formalized objectives and monitoring mechanisms. The TCU's recommendations go beyond what the law and the... ANEEL They have already addressed this. The Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME) was recommended to evaluate the possibility of altering the calculation basis for the ESS (Energy Settlement System) of an electrical nature, replacing net consumption with measured consumption, a change that, if implemented, would increase the financial participation of self-producers in covering systemic charges. It was also recommended that the Ministry formalize a strategy for the self-production policy, with explicit objectives, targets, and performance indicators, and that it establish a mechanism for the permanent monitoring of new waves of migration to self-production structures. ANEELThe TCU (Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts) recommended that the Agency promote studies regarding the possible maintenance or alteration of the current criteria for calculating the tax base for ESS (Solid Energy Sector) and EER (Energy Efficiency Rate). The new energy-intensive loads and the dilemma of incentives. The decisions of... ANEEL The decisions of the TCU (Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts) and other relevant sources must be contextualized within a strategic moment, in which Brazil is competing for global investments in digital infrastructure and low-carbon hydrogen. Both data centers and green hydrogen (H2V) plants share a common economic equation that is extremely sensitive to energy costs, which can represent more than half of the operational cost in the first case and is the dominant input in the levelized cost of H2V. For these projects, self-generation structures are not a regulatory detail, but are frequently what determines the final investment decision (FID). In this context, dissent is natural, considering that these loads will seek self-generation structures, essentially due to the non-contribution of these projects to certain systemic costs. It is worth noting that Law No. 15.269/2025 did not alter the calculation basis for ESS (Energy Service Charge) and ERR (Energy Risk Reduction) for self-producers, nor did it impose any limitations on other self-generation structures, such as self-generation via consortium through leasing. The review of sectoral subsidies is legitimate; however, any new rules and limitations on the benefits of self-generation must be defined in accordance with the principles of legality and legal certainty, respecting the legally binding act and contracts already entered into. The slowness in defining new rules and this regulatory uncertainty negatively impact investments in the expansion of both generation and demand, at a time when increased demand for electricity would allow for the resumption of investments in renewable generation and reduce curtailment (generation cuts) due to energy reasons (lack of demand). This article was written in collaboration with: Débora Yanasse: Partner of the Global Energy Group at Tauil & Chequer Advogados associated with Mayer Brown. Luisa Tortolano: Senior Associate of the Global Energy Group at Tauil & Chequer Advogados associated with Mayer Brown. Guilherme Galiazzi: Associate of the Global Energy Group at Tauil & Chequer Advogados associated with Mayer Brown. Carolina Nunes: Associate in the Global Energy Group at Tauil & Chequer Advogados associated with Mayer Brown.

Bruno Salzano

Published articles

Self-production under review: new limitations to the benefits?