IESET.
Hypotheses·fiscal·lula_third_term_fiscal_discipline_commitment_2023_present

Brazil's Novo Arcabouço Fiscal (Lei Complementar 200 of 2023) holds the federal primary-balance path and the real-spending growth rate within its statutory band (real primary spending growth 0.6-2.5% per year, conditional on primary-balance target attainment) through 2026, and the cumulative 2023-2026 primary- balance outcome does not diverge from target by more than one standard deviation of the historical primary-balance forecast error.

The hypothesis is testable because the framework statutorily specifies a band; the test is whether the realised fiscal path falls inside or outside that band. The null is not that Lula 3.0 is fiscally expansionary, but rather that the institutional framework it created is binding on the executive's ex-ante preferences. A positive result updates toward institutional-constraint effectiveness; a falsification updates toward the post-Keynesian and developmentalist reading that PT-era fiscal commitments erode under pressure.

REFUTEDengine/runs/lula_third_term_fiscal_discipline_commitment_2023_present

REFUTED — shape=ITS, sign - OPPOSITE claim +, mean_gap=-4.682, z=-1.9

confidence cueThis test cuts against the claim as written or misses its pre-declared threshold.

policy briefNeeds review

In ordinary language

In plain terms, this asks whether lula third term indicator is actually linked to better or worse primary balance pct income federal from 2015 to 2027.

plain answer

The data did not support the prediction. shape=ITS, sign - OPPOSITE claim +, mean_gap=-4.682, z=-1.9

why it matters

This matters because fiscal claims should change belief only when they survive a pre-declared empirical test.

how the test works

It compares 1 country or place units from 2015 to 2027, using a event study design.

what was measured
What changed
  • Lula third term indicator
  • Marco fiscal regime indicator
What we checked
  • Primary balance pct income federal
  • Real primary spending growth rate
  • Gross debt income
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

No evidence packet has been generated yet.

Results

engine/runs/lula_third_term_fiscal_discipline_commitment_2023_present
descriptive sketch · model not yet run
Loading chart…

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

2 schools list this hypothesis as a test of their position. The chips below are school-level scoreboard outcomes, not a second hypothesis verdict.

hypothesis verdict vs scoreboard outcome

The banner verdict judges this hypothesis as written. The scoreboard asks whether each school's polarity-corrected prediction was right. Raw status is not a school win: SUPPORTED supports schools that needed SUPPORTED, but refutes schools that needed REFUTED.

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-04-28T12:41:50Z
Run timestamp predates this path's first git-add commit (rebase, rename, or pre-git local run). Spec hash is still the path's first-add commit — not repository HEAD — but ordering is not a clean pre-registration proof.

Brazil's Novo Arcabouço Fiscal (Lei Complementar 200 of 2023) holds the federal primary-balance path and the real-spending growth rate within its statutory band (real primary spending growth 0.6-2.5% per year, conditional on primary-balance target attainment) through 2026, and the cumulative 2023-2026 primary- balance outcome does not diverge from target by more than one standard deviation of the historical primary-balance forecast error. The hypothesis is testable because the framework statutorily specifies a band; the test is whether the realised fiscal path falls inside or outside that band. The null is not that Lula 3.0 is fiscally expansionary, but rather that the institutional framework it created is binding on the executive's ex-ante preferences. A positive result updates toward institutional-constraint effectiveness; a falsification updates toward the post-Keynesian and developmentalist reading that PT-era fiscal commitments erode under pressure.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

Not supported if EITHER (a) in two or more of the years 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026, real primary-spending growth falls outside the 0.6-2.5% statutory band AS MEASURED IN REALISED SPENDING (not as measured in the budget ex-ante), OR (b) the cumulative 2023-2026 primary-balance outcome deviates from the cumulative pre-Lula IMF-projection baseline by more than two standard deviations of the historical (2015-2019) annual primary-balance forecast error, OR (c) the Novo Arcabouço Fiscal is statutorily replaced or suspended within the 2023-2026 window (a measurable institutional-reversal event).

formal test & threshold
test:      fiscal_framework_compliance_and_primary_balance_variance
threshold: years_in_band >= 3 of 4 (2023-2026 inclusive) AND |cumulative_primary_balance_deviation| <= 2 * SD(historical_forecast_error) AND fiscal_framework_statute_replaced = FALSE within window

Method

Template
event_study
Clustering
year
Sample
1 countries · 20152027
Evidence type
causal

Single-unit event study around the 2023 start of Lula III and the August 2023 activation of the new fiscal framework. Primary presentation: realised primary-balance path and real-spending growth vs the Lei Complementar 200 statutory band over 2023- 2026. Historical comparison: Rousseff era (2011-2015) same- window path for qualitative context. Formal statistical test uses the forecast-error variance of primary-balance IMF projections (published pre-Lula 2022 for fiscal years 2023- 2026); deviations beyond ±1SD are treated as breaches.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
primary_balance_pct_gdp_federal
outcome
imf:GGXCNL_NGDPtier 2
brazil_stn:Resultadotier 2
annual_pct_gdp
real_primary_spending_growth_rate
outcome
brazil_stn:Despesatier 2
imf:PCPIPCHtier 2
annual_real_growth_pct
gross_debt_gdp
outcome
imf:GGXWDG_NGDPtier 2
world_bank_wdi:GC.DOD.TOTL.GD.ZStier 2
level
fiscal_framework_compliance_indicator
outcome
constructed:1 if both real spending growth in band AND primary-balance within target +/- 1SD of forecast error; 0 otherwisetier 5
annual_binary
lula_third_term_indicator
treatment
constructed:indicator = 1 from 2023-01-01 onward; 0 priortier 5
binary
marco_fiscal_regime_indicator
treatment
constructed:indicator = 1 from 2023-08-30 (LC 200/2023 publication) onward; 0 priortier 5
binary
pt_prior_era_indicator
treatment
constructed:indicator for Rousseff era 2011-2016 as a historical comparatortier 5
binary
commodity_price_index
control
world_bank_wdi:TT.PRI.MRCH.XD.WDtier 2
annual_log_change
us_policy_rate
control
fred:FEDFUNDStier 1
annual_average
real_gdp_growth
control
imf:NGDP_RPCHtier 2
annual_pct
output_gap
control
oecd:OutputGaptier 2
level

ready  ·  pending  ·  reconstruct-needed

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Notes

Data-gated: Brazil STN (Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional) monthly Resultado Primário and Despesa Primária series required; IMF WEO annual general-government fiscal aggregates are the automated fallback. Historical forecast-error variance computed from IMF WEO vintage series (April 2022 vintage for 2023-2026 projections as pre-Lula baseline). Pre-registration is particularly important here because the political tendency will be to re-characterise the statutory band mid-stream if realised spending exceeds it. V1 commits to the band as published in LC 200/2023; any post-2023 statutory amendment widening the band is coded as a framework erosion, not as compliance.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.