{"id":137,"date":"2017-04-11T07:40:28","date_gmt":"2017-04-11T10:40:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.linuxpro.com.br\/2017\/04\/profissionais-de-ti-podem-ficar-desempregados\/"},"modified":"2026-09-08T01:34:26","modified_gmt":"2026-09-08T04:34:26","slug":"profissionais-de-ti-podem-ficar-desempregados","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.linuxpro.com.br\/en\/2017\/04\/profissionais-de-ti-podem-ficar-desempregados\/","title":{"rendered":"Can IT professionals lose their jobs? What happened next"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Mascote<\/p>\n

Note (2026):<\/strong> this post began in 2017 as news about MP 774, which would end payroll tax relief and, according to industry associations, leave 83 thousand IT professionals unemployed. Nine years later, we can tell how the story ended \u2014 and it is more interesting than the headline. The original text is preserved at the end as a record.<\/div>\n

In March 2017 the IT industry panicked over a provisional measure. In 2026 we can look back and answer three questions: did the measure pass? Did the predicted unemployment happen? And what actually changed in the technology job market since then?<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

What happened to MP 774<\/h2>\n

Provisional Measure No. 774, of 30 March 2017<\/strong> ended payroll tax relief for dozens of industries, including software and IT services. The reaction was immediate, and the government backed down: on 9 August 2017<\/strong>, MP 794<\/strong> repealed 774 in Article 1\u00ba, along with two other measures from the same package. Tax relief continued.<\/p>\n

But the issue did not go away \u2014 it only changed pace. In 2018, Law 13.670<\/strong> reduced the program from 56 to 17 industries. The outcome came on 16 September 2024<\/strong>, with Law 14.973<\/strong>, which did what MP 774 had tried to do all at once: end tax relief \u2014 this time gradually and through negotiation. Article 9\u00ba-A establishes the transition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Year<\/th>\nContribution on gross revenue<\/th>\nPayroll contribution<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
2025<\/td>\n80% of the rate<\/td>\n25% of the rate<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2026<\/td>\n60%<\/td>\n50%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2027<\/td>\n40%<\/td>\n75%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2028<\/strong><\/td>\n\u2014<\/td>\n100% (end of tax relief)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

In other words: now, in 2026, we are exactly halfway up these steps. IT companies' payroll already pays half the full rate, rising to 75% in 2027. The public-policy lesson is clear \u2014 what was attempted by decree in 2017 ultimately happened seven years later, with a deadline and a transition.<\/p>\n

And the 83 thousand jobs?<\/h2>\n

The projection of 83 thousand layoffs was a bargaining argument, not an audited forecast \u2014 and since the measure was repealed in August of the same year, the scenario was never tested. What followed was the opposite: the technology industry spent the following years complaining about a shortage<\/strong> of people, not a surplus. Brasscom even pointed to demand on the order of hundreds of thousands of professionals whom the country was not training at the required pace.<\/p>\n

Keep that contrast as a reading method: a catastrophe forecast from an interested party in the middle of negotiations deserves the same skepticism, whichever side it comes from.<\/p>\n

What really changed in the IT job market<\/h2>\n

The risk to technology jobs between 2017 and 2026 did not come from labor legislation. It came from three other directions:<\/p>\n

The pandemic and remote work.<\/strong> From 2020 onward, hiring stopped being a geographical problem. This opened international positions to people in Brazil \u2014 and, to the same extent, made Brazilian professionals compete with people worldwide for the same remote position.<\/p>\n

The 2022\u20132024 layoff cycle.<\/strong> After pandemic overhiring, major technology companies made mass cuts. These mainly hit support roles, internal recruiting, and management layers \u2014 not core engineering.<\/p>\n

Generative AI.<\/strong> This is the factor changing the nature of work, not just its volume. The visible effect so far is not replacing developers: it is shrinking the value of repetitive tasks \u2014 CRUD, boilerplate, mechanical translation between formats, first-draft tests. What has become more valuable is what the tool cannot do alone: understand the problem, decide the architecture, critically review what the machine produced, and take responsibility for the result.<\/p>\n

What this means in practice<\/h2>\n