In a development placed under the segregated estate regime (patrimônio de afetação), the buyers' representative committee receives every 3 months a trial balance for the project and a report on the state of the works, signed by a licensed professional.
5The rule is in Law 4,591/1964, art. 31-D, IV and VI, and the person who fronts the company before those numbers is the CEO. In Brazil the seat also goes by diretor-presidente, executive president or simply administrator. The name changes; the weight of the seat does not.
This text describes the seat as IncorpBuilding sees it, from the developer's side: whoever buys the land, approves the design, sells the units, raises the money and accounts to buyers and lenders. The reading is IncorpBuilding's, and it is marked as such. The rules cited appear in the references, at the end.
Three figures are often confused in a development company. The partner owns the capital: decides who manages, approves the accounts and receives the result. The technical lead is the engineer or architect who signs the design and the works before the professional council.
The CEO runs the company day to day on behalf of the partners, within the course already set, and answers for carrying out the whole: for what is bought, what is promised, what is delivered and what is reported. The CEO answers for the present and for the short and medium term; the long-term course, in structures that have a CVO seat, belongs to that seat.
Sometimes the three figures live in the same person. Even so, the law keeps them apart. The Civil Code says a legal entity "is not to be confused with its partners, associates, founders or administrators" (art. 49-A).
A limited liability company, for instance, "is managed by one or more persons appointed in the articles of association or in a separate instrument" (art. 1,060). Whoever is appointed administrator takes on duties that a partner, as a partner, does not have.
The laws cited here do not use the acronym: they speak of administrators and officers. The closest reference is in Law 6,404/1976, the corporations law, which forbids listed companies from combining the chair of the board of directors with the post of "chief executive officer or principal executive of the company" (art. 138, § 3).
The rule does not reach limited companies or closely held corporations, but it shows the logic: whoever oversees management should not be the same person who carries it out.
In IncorpBuilding's reading, the work of a development company's CEO fits into five fronts, all of them about execution. The first is carrying out the portfolio: within the course set for the long term, leading the study of land and products, proposing what to launch and at what pace, and making the approved launches happen. Which markets to be in, what kind of product to pursue in the coming years and when to stop launching are decisions about course, which in structures with a CVO seat belong to it.
The second is the capital of each project: making the money arrive in the right order among partner contributions, construction financing and off-plan sales, and keeping the relationship with lenders and buyers up to date. How much capital the business puts at risk, and on how many fronts at once, is a long-term question: the CEO brings the numbers, and the decision goes up to the instance that holds the course.
The third is day-to-day governance and compliance: written approval limits, accounts presented, rules obeyed, risks known. The fourth is people, above all the key seats that hold the operation up; the CEO chooses who sits in each one and holds them to results. The fifth is reputation: what the company promises in advertising and contracts must be what it delivers.
None of these fronts runs through the site as a daily task. The CEO does not check concrete, does not approve a contractor's progress measurement, does not haggle over the price of steel.
The CEO decides with the information that comes up from the sites and answers for the outcome of those decisions. When a CEO goes down to operate, it is almost always because information stopped coming up.
Two questions tend to land together on the CEO's desk. The first is where the company is going: which markets to be in ten years from now, what kind of project to pursue, how much capital to put at risk and what not to do. The second is how to get there this year: buy the approved land, launch, sell, build, deliver and report. Some structures, especially groups with more than one company, split the two questions between different seats.
The seat that answers the first is the CVO, the chief visionary officer. It looks after what affects the long term and holds the helm of the business: it sets the course, chooses the bets that take years to pay off and makes sure that present decisions do not compromise the future. It is not day-to-day operation. The CVO does not approve purchases, does not run the executive board and does not follow this week's site.
In IncorpBuilding's reading, the split is one of horizon. The CEO turns the course into execution, delivers the results of the present and of the short and medium term, and brings the CVO the information needed to decide: the real margin of each project, sales velocity, cost and schedule of the works, the behaviour of credit. The CVO decides the course; the CEO answers for making it happen. When the numbers of the present contradict the course, it is up to the CEO to say so early, with data.
The title does not change the law. The legal liability described below comes from the position of administrator, appointed in the articles of association, the bylaws or a separate instrument, and it reaches whoever holds that position, whatever the seat is called: CEO, CVO, chief executive (diretor-presidente) or managing partner.
The Civil Code sets the standard of conduct in one sentence: the administrator must show "the care and diligence that every active and upright person usually employs in the management of their own affairs" (art. 1,011).
Law 6,404 repeats the same formula for corporations (art. 153) and adds that powers must be exercised "in the interest of the company, meeting the demands of the public good and the social function of the enterprise" (art. 154).
Loyalty is the second duty. An administrator may not use for personal benefit the business opportunities learned through the post (Law 6,404, art. 155), nor take part in a decision in which they have an interest contrary to the company's; they must record in the minutes the nature and extent of that interest (art. 156).
In real estate development, the classic example is land: whoever runs the company does not buy for themselves the plot the company was studying.
The third duty is rendering accounts. The administrators of a limited company must give the partners "justified accounts of their management" and present the inventory, the balance sheet and the income statement every year (Civil Code, art. 1,020). The partners' meeting reviews those accounts within the four months after the end of the financial year (art. 1,078).
The standard also carries protection. The administrator is not personally liable for obligations taken on in the company's name "by virtue of a regular act of management" (Law 6,404, art. 158).
And a judge may exclude the liability of one who "acted in good faith and in the interest of the company" (art. 159, § 6). Deciding with information, recording the reason and following what was approved is, at the same time, good management and good defence.
The segregated estate is the developer's choice to separate the land, the building and the funds of one project from the rest of the company.
That estate answers only for the debts of that development (Law 4,591, art. 31-A, § 1) and stays outside the bankruptcy estate if the developer fails (art. 31-F). For the buyer, it is a layer of protection. For the CEO, it is a list of duties with deadlines.
The developer must keep the assets of each development apart, move its funds through an account opened for that purpose and keep complete accounting records, "even if exempted by tax legislation" (art. 31-D, II, V and VIII).
The developer must also "make efforts to raise the funds needed for the development" and preserve the funds needed to finish the works (item III). And the developer "is liable for the losses it causes to the segregated estate" (art. 31-A, § 2).
Oversight comes from outside. The representative committee and the institution financing the construction may appoint someone to monitor the segregated estate, with free access to the site, the books, the contracts and the account (arts. 31-C and 31-D, VII).
For the bank, it is the assurance that the financing goes to that building; for the buyer, that their building is not paying for someone else's.
In IncorpBuilding's reading, this is where the CEO's seat differs from that of an ordinary manager. The CEO must be able to explain, at any moment and project by project, where each real came from and where it went. It is not a task done with one's own hands. It is a task the CEO demands, receives and signs.
The general rule protects the administrator, but it has exceptions every CEO needs to know before signing the first contract. The table gathers those that weigh most in a development company, with what each one requires of whoever holds the seat.
| Sphere | What the law says | What the CEO must ensure |
|---|---|---|
| Civil | Administrators are jointly liable for fault in performing their duties (Civil Code, art. 1,016); in abuse of the legal entity, a judge can reach administrators' assets (art. 50) | Decisions on record, no mixing of company and partner cash |
| Tax | Officers are personally liable for taxes arising from acts in excess of powers or in breach of law, articles or bylaws (CTN, art. 135, III) | Clear powers in the articles and taxes paid on time |
| Development | An officer of a development company who makes a false statement about the construction in a contract, advertisement, report or balance sheet commits a crime against the popular economy (Law 4,591, art. 65, § 1, I) | Advertising, specifications and reports checked against the real works |
| Anti-corruption | The company is strictly liable; officers answer to the extent of their fault (Law 12,846/2013, arts. 2 and 3) | An integrity programme with visible support from the top |
| Environmental | An officer who knows of another's criminal conduct and does not stop it, when able to, incurs the penalties (Law 9,605/1998, art. 2) | Licences up to date and a channel for whoever sees the problem to speak up |
| Personal data | A fine of up to 2% of revenue, capped at R$ 50 million per infringement (LGPD, art. 52, II); the law requires appointing a data protection officer (art. 41) | Officer appointed and buyers' data protected |
The list is less frightening than it looks. Almost every exception has the same trigger: excess of power, breach of the law, or omission in the face of something known. So the defence is also the same: know what is happening, act within written powers, and keep a record of what was decided.
Anti-corruption deserves one more line. Developing requires licences, permits and the occupancy certificate (habite-se), and each passes through a public official. Promising or giving an undue advantage to that official is a harmful act (Law 12,846, art. 5, I), with a fine of 0.1% to 20% of the previous year's gross revenue (art. 6, I).
The decree regulating the law puts first, among the criteria for assessing an integrity programme, the "commitment of senior management" (Decree 11,129/2022, art. 57, I). Senior management starts with the CEO.
A development company does not always build, but it does not get rid of the works either. Law 8,212/1991 makes the developer jointly liable with the builder for Social Security contributions, "whatever the form of contracting the construction", with no benefit of order (art. 30, VI).
In plain words: the tax authority can collect from the developer what the builder failed to pay, without having to pursue the builder first.
Workplace safety follows the same top-down logic. The CLT, Brazil's consolidated labour code, requires companies to "comply with and enforce the rules of occupational safety and medicine" (art. 157, I). NR-1, the general safety regulation, requires the organisation to implement occupational risk management in its establishments (item 1.5.3.1) and requires the contracting party's programme to include measures for contractors working on its premises, or to use the contractors' programmes (item 1.5.8.1).
And Law 8,213/1991 provides for a recovery action by Social Security against those responsible when safety rules are neglected (art. 120, I).
The CEO does not carry out the risk analysis of an excavation. But the CEO decides whether the company contracts with those who follow the rule, whether there is budget for collective protection, and whether a serious accident reaches the board on the same day. Those three decisions cannot be delegated.
A common arrangement, in companies that have grown, splits the executive board into three seats. The CFO, the finance officer, looks after cash, financing, accounting and the relationship with banks.
The COO, the operations officer, looks after execution: sites, procurement, deadlines and quality. The CEO looks after the whole and answers for it before the partners, the board when there is one, the lenders and the buyers. The executive board runs the present; the long-term course, where there is a CVO seat, stays with the CVO.
The arrangement is neither mandatory nor universal. Law 6,404 allows an executive board of "one or more members" and requires the bylaws to state the duties and powers of each officer (art. 143).
In a limited company, the articles of association or the appointment instrument play that role. What matters is not the title, but that each power is written down somewhere and that each decision has an owner.
When there is a board of directors, the division moves up one step. The board sets the general direction of the business, elects and removes the officers and oversees management (Law 6,404, art. 142, I to III). The CEO carries out that direction, reports to the board and brings it the decisions that exceed the CEO's own limits. Where there is also a CVO seat, it looks after the long-term course, within the limits that the law and the articles give to the partners and the board.
The executive board does not see the site; it sees what comes from it. In the structure IncorpBuilding describes, four seats support the board through lines of information, each with its own slice. The table shows what rises from each one and which CEO decision it feeds.
| Support seat | What rises to the board | Decision it feeds |
|---|---|---|
| General coordinator | Schedule, physical progress and risks of all sites, in a single view | Priority between projects, pace of launches |
| Site administrator | Documents, contracts, payroll and obligations of each site, compared with one another | Compliance, labour and Social Security exposure |
| Supply management | Price, lead time and purchase terms per project | Budget, renegotiation, choice of key supplier |
| Storekeeper | Stock, consumption and material losses, through supply management | Actual cost against budget, provision for losses |
None of these seats needs the CEO in order to work. The CEO needs all of them in order to decide. When a line fails, the decision is still made, only in the dark, and the wrong number shows up only in the quarterly trial balance, in front of the representative committee.
An approval limit sets who decides what, up to what amount and with whose signature. Without it, two opposite defects appear. In the first, everything rises: the CEO approves the purchase of screws and has no time for the land. In the second, nothing rises: a significant contract amendment is signed on site and the board finds out at the month-end close.
The law draws the edges. The Civil Code allows administrators, when the articles are silent, every act of management, but reserves to the partners the sale or encumbrance of real estate when that is not the company's object (art. 1,015).
In a development company, selling real estate is the object itself; that is why the articles usually say more. The rest is settled in an internal table, approved by the partners or the board, stating what each seat signs alone and what needs two signatures.
In IncorpBuilding's reading, a good approval limit has three marks: amounts in reais, not adjectives; an exception for safety emergencies, which needs no waiting; and a record of every decision taken above the limit, with the reason.
The example is hypothetical. The assumptions are the author's, chosen to keep the arithmetic simple, and do not describe a real project. A development under the segregated estate regime has a construction budget of R$ 40 million and a 30-month schedule.
In the third month, one service starts costing R$ 150 thousand a month above budget. The question is when the board sees that overrun.
| Assumption or result | With a monthly board report | With the quarterly trial balance only |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly overrun (assumption) | R$ 150 thousand | R$ 150 thousand |
| When the board sees the overrun | At the end of the 1st month of overrun | In the 4th month of overrun, after the quarter closes |
| Months of exposure until correction | 2 | 5 |
| Cost of the overrun | R$ 300 thousand | R$ 750 thousand |
| Cost of the report over 30 months (assumption: 16 hours a month at R$ 150 an hour) | R$ 72 thousand | zero |
The difference between the two scenarios is R$ 450 thousand, from a single overrun. That is 6.25 times the cost of 30 months of monthly reporting. In a segregated project, those R$ 450 thousand come precisely out of the funds the law requires to be preserved to finish the works (art. 31-D, III).
The quarterly trial balance remains mandatory and remains useful: it is the account rendered to those who bought. It is simply not a management tool. Whoever decides with a three-month-old number decides about a site that has already changed.
No. None of the laws cited requires technical training to manage the company. What requires a licence is the design and the works, which have their own technical lead before the professional council. The CEO does need to understand enough about construction to ask the right questions and to notice when an answer does not add up.
Yes, as administrator. The Civil Code imposes the same duties on whoever manages, partner or not: care and diligence (art. 1,011), joint liability for fault (art. 1,016) and rendering of accounts (art. 1,020). Being a partner adds other rights and duties; it does not remove those of an administrator.
As a rule, no: the administrator is not liable for obligations taken on in the company's name through a regular act of management (Law 6,404, art. 158). Liability arises when acting with fault or wilful misconduct, breaching the law or the articles, exceeding powers (CTN, art. 135) or abusing the legal entity (Civil Code, art. 50).
Reporting changes. Each project gets segregated assets, an exclusive account, complete accounting records and a quarterly trial balance for the representative committee (Law 4,591, art. 31-D). The bank and the committee may appoint a monitor with access to the books and the account. The CEO must be able to show each project's accounts on their own.
The board deliberates collectively: it sets the general direction of the business, elects and removes officers and oversees management (Law 6,404, art. 142). The CVO, where the seat exists, looks after the long-term course. The CEO executes, represents the company and answers for the results of the present. In listed companies, the law forbids the same person from chairing the board and being the principal executive (art. 138, § 3).
By IncorpBuilding
← Articles