After nearly four years of stop-start debate, Brazil's PL 2331/2022 — the bill that would finally extend the country's audiovisual regulatory perimeter to video-on-demand services — is once again moving in Congress. Backed by ANCINE, the national film agency, the proposal would impose a CONDECINE levy on streaming revenues, mandate a minimum share of Brazilian works in platform catalogues, and require global streamers to invest a percentage of their local turnover in domestic productions. Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Disney+, Apple TV+ and the domestic incumbent Globoplay would all be in scope.
The goal — ensuring that Brazilian audiences, languages and stories remain visible in a market increasingly dominated by foreign platforms — is legitimate. The risk is that, in trying to fix a real cultural-policy problem, Brazil imports the worst features of European regulation without the structural advantages that made those rules workable in Paris, Madrid or Berlin.
What PL 2331/2022 Actually Does
The bill consolidates several long-standing proposals into a single VOD framework. Three obligations sit at its core:
- CONDECINE-VOD: a levy on gross revenue earned by streaming services in Brazil, channelled to the Fundo Setorial do Audiovisual (FSA) to co-finance national productions. Rates discussed in committee hearings have ranged broadly, with ANCINE advocating a graduated structure indexed to platform size.
- Catalogue quota: a minimum proportion of Brazilian audiovisual works in each platform's on-demand catalogue, with sub-quotas for independent producers.
- Investment obligation: a requirement that a share of local revenue be reinvested directly in Brazilian content — either through commissioning or licensing — as an alternative or complement to the CONDECINE levy.
The framework draws clearly from the European Union's revised Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), which obliges Member States to ensure at least a 30% European-works share in on-demand catalogues and authorises financial contributions from non-domestic streamers.
The Case for Doing Something
There is a genuine policy gap. Linear broadcasters in Brazil already pay CONDECINE and observe local-content rules under the Lei da TV Paga (Law 12.485/2011), which since 2012 has imposed channel-packaging and Brazilian-content quotas on pay-TV. As audiences migrate to streaming, that regulatory base erodes — the same audiovisual market, but with asymmetric obligations between incumbents and global platforms.
Closing that asymmetry is reasonable. So is supporting the independent production sector, which has historically depended on the FSA and has seen funding volatility in recent years. A modest, well-targeted contribution from large streamers to a transparent, producer-accessible fund is, in principle, defensible regulation.
Where the Bill Risks Going Wrong
The danger lies in the parameters. Three design choices will determine whether PL 2331/2022 becomes a sensible modernisation of Brazilian audiovisual policy or a deterrent to the very investment it seeks to channel.
1. Quota levels disconnected from supply
Catalogue quotas only work where there is enough quality local content to fill them. The EU's 30% threshold was calibrated around decades of public-broadcaster output across 27 Member States. Brazil's production ecosystem is dynamic but smaller. Setting a quota above what the independent sector can credibly supply forces platforms either to pad catalogues with low-engagement titles or to commission rapidly at inflated prices — neither of which helps audiences or producers in the long run.
2. Stacking levies on top of investment obligations
If a platform is already required to invest, say, a meaningful share of Brazilian revenue in local productions, layering a separate CONDECINE-VOD percentage on top risks double-charging the same activity. France's system — often cited as a model — explicitly allows direct investment to count against the broader contribution. PL 2331/2022 should do the same, with a clear netting mechanism, or it will tax investment that is already happening.
3. Discretionary enforcement
ANCINE has been an effective regulator in its core remit, but the bill grants substantial rule-making latitude — including on quota percentages and definitions of "Brazilian work". Regulatory uncertainty is itself a tax on investment. Codifying the headline numbers in primary legislation, and limiting ANCINE's discretion to technical implementation, would materially improve the bill.
The aim should be to channel additional investment into Brazilian stories, not to punish the platforms that have already brought series like 3%, Cidade Invisível and Senna to global audiences.
A Better Path: Light, Convertible, Predictable
A proportionate version of PL 2331/2022 would: (i) set a low, single-digit CONDECINE-VOD rate; (ii) allow direct local investment to be fully credited against it; (iii) anchor catalogue quotas at a level the independent sector can realistically supply, with phased increases tied to supply growth; and (iv) write the headline numbers into statute rather than leaving them to regulation.
Brazil has a real comparative advantage in audiovisual production: language reach across Lusophone markets, world-class talent and increasingly global IP. Streaming platforms have, on balance, amplified that advantage. The job of legislators now is to update the rules without breaking the model — to make global streamers contribute, fairly and predictably, to a sector that is already growing on the back of their investment.