Brazil’s 2026 presidential election presents two fundamentally different economic visions. One favors a larger role for the state, public spending, subsidies and government-led development. The other advocates fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, economic freedom, private investment, privatization and a smaller regulatory burden on those who produce and create jobs.
My analysis of Brazilian aviation starts from the second perspective: the market economy.
Government platforms registered with Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court, known by its Portuguese acronym TSE, show that market-oriented candidates defend deregulation, legal certainty, fiscal discipline, private investment and a stronger role for entrepreneurship.
Flávio Bolsonaro’s presidential platform, for example, proposes expanding the principles of Brazil’s Economic Freedom Act, reducing barriers to entrepreneurship and reviewing unnecessary regulations. Ronaldo Caiado’s platform describes private enterprise as the economy’s primary engine and associates growth with investment, productivity, professional management and fiscal responsibility. Flávio Bolsonaro’s government platform — TSE and Ronaldo Caiado’s government platform — TSE
These documents do not necessarily contain every aviation policy proposed in this article. What follows is my application of their broader market-oriented principles to Brazil’s air transport system.
The central argument is straightforward: sustainable access to air travel will not come from fare controls, new state-owned airlines or politically managed subsidies. It will come from lower operating costs, freedom to invest, increased supply and genuine competition.
Governments do not produce cheap airline tickets
Governments do not produce airline seats, purchase commercial aircraft, refuel fleets or operate routes with the efficiency required in a competitive market.
Airlines, employees, investors, maintenance providers, airports and suppliers perform those functions. The state still has essential responsibilities: regulating safety, overseeing compliance, protecting competition, managing the airspace, enforcing contracts and defending legitimate passenger rights.
Problems begin when the government moves beyond those responsibilities and tries to determine prices, choose which companies should succeed or replace commercial decisions with political planning.
A government may temporarily force an airline to charge less, but it cannot force an unprofitable flight to operate indefinitely. If revenue fails to cover costs, the predictable results are fewer frequencies, abandoned destinations, job losses, insolvency or the airline’s complete withdrawal from the market.
There is no such thing as an artificially cheap ticket without someone paying the difference. The cost is eventually transferred to taxpayers, other passengers or future generations through public debt.
Traffic growth does not necessarily mean democratization
Brazilian airlines carried approximately 101 million domestic passengers in 2025, an 8.4% increase over 2024. This is an important result, but it requires careful interpretation. The statistic counts passenger journeys, not individual Brazilians. A frequent traveler may appear several times in the total. Brazilian Civil Aviation Agency — 2025 Air Transport Yearbook
Consequently, traffic growth does not prove that air transportation has reached lower-income families.
Millions of Brazilians have never flown or can only afford a flight under exceptional circumstances. Limited regional connectivity, the distance to an airport and the total cost of the journey remain significant barriers.
Democratizing aviation does not mean distributing a subsidized ticket to a selected group for a limited period. It means creating economic conditions that allow more people to purchase tickets with their own income and choose among different airlines, departure times and airports.
That is inclusion through market expansion.
Airfares begin with the cost of producing a flight
An airfare is not determined solely by distance. It must finance an extensive chain of operating expenses:
- fuel;
- aircraft financing and leasing;
- maintenance;
- engines and components;
- insurance;
- crew training;
- salaries;
- technology and reservation systems;
- ground handling;
- air navigation services;
- airport charges;
- taxes;
- administrative expenses;
- operational disruptions and litigation.
A significant share of these expenses is denominated in or influenced by the U.S. dollar. Aircraft, engines, spare parts, insurance, leasing agreements and specialized maintenance services follow international prices.
Brazil’s National Civil Aviation Agency, known as ANAC, recognizes that airline costs are strongly affected by oil prices and the exchange rate. ANAC — Factors affecting airfares
Brazilian carriers collect most of their revenue in reais while paying a substantial portion of their expenses in foreign currency. When the real depreciates, costs rise even if the airline makes no change to its operation.
A country seeking more affordable air travel must therefore protect monetary stability, control public debt and maintain fiscal credibility. Fiscal imbalances affect interest rates and exchange rates, and both eventually reach the passenger.
Fiscal responsibility is also an aviation policy.
Lower taxes can increase supply
Reducing aviation taxes should be central to any market-oriented economic program.
Jet fuel must not be treated merely as an opportunity for government revenue. It is a critical productive input. The higher its taxation, the more expensive it becomes to maintain a flight and the less viable it is to open thin regional routes.
Brazil also needs a simpler and more predictable tax structure. Differences among state tax systems influence where airlines refuel, base aircraft and schedule services.
A serious economic freedom agenda should consider:
- structurally lower taxation on jet fuel;
- greater tax harmonization among Brazilian states;
- simplified tax collection;
- elimination of duplicated reporting obligations;
- long-term regulatory predictability;
- review of charges that do not correspond to services actually provided.
Lower taxes, however, should not be presented as a guarantee that every ticket will immediately become cheaper.
In a market economy, competition is the mechanism that transfers efficiency gains to consumers. When several airlines compete for the same passenger, a carrier that lowers its costs can offer better fares and expand market share. Competitors must respond by improving productivity or reducing their own prices.
Without sufficient competition, part of a tax reduction may be used to rebuild airline margins. That can be economically legitimate, particularly in a financially fragile industry, but it does not automatically democratize air travel.
Tax reduction must therefore be combined with new entrants, more seats and lower barriers to investment.
Affordable fares are created by competition
The passenger’s strongest economic protection is not a government price table. It is the power to choose.
When only a few airlines operate a route with limited capacity, consumers have fewer alternatives. When new operators enter, add frequencies and compete for the same passengers, prices face greater competitive pressure.
Air transportation has high fixed costs. Before selling the first ticket, an airline needs aircraft, trained crews, insurance, operational systems, maintenance agreements and regulatory approvals.
Once a flight is scheduled, the cost of carrying one additional passenger is comparatively small, provided that an empty seat remains. Airlines therefore use revenue-management systems to balance fares, demand and expected load factors.
A seat that departs empty can never be sold again. It is a perishable asset.
Greater scale and network density allow fixed costs to be spread across more passengers. This can produce a positive cycle:
Lower taxes and regulatory costs → lower risk → more investment → more airlines and aircraft → greater seat capacity → stronger competition → more affordable fares → more passengers.
The correct policy is to expand the market, not control its final price by decree.
Economic freedom must reach new airlines
A market can be legally open while remaining economically difficult to enter.
A new airline faces substantial costs involving certification, aircraft, capital, insurance, maintenance, training, personnel and distribution. It must also compete for airport capacity, slots and ground infrastructure.
Regulation should be proportionate to operational risk and complexity. This does not mean weakening safety requirements. It means eliminating procedures that add expense without producing a measurable safety benefit.
Brazil should pursue:
- fully digital regulatory processes;
- objective administrative deadlines;
- risk-based oversight;
- recognition of compatible international certifications;
- elimination of repetitive documentation;
- better coordination among government agencies;
- stable operating rules;
- transparent allocation of airport capacity;
- freedom to develop different business models.
Regional airlines, on-demand operators and companies using smaller aircraft should not face an economic structure designed exclusively around large nationwide carriers.
Safety standards must remain rigorous. Administrative costs, however, should be proportionate to the operation.
Safety oversight is not unnecessary bureaucracy
A clear boundary must be established.
Pilot licensing, aircraft certification, maintenance control, training, operational supervision and occurrence investigation are not disposable obstacles. They are essential defenses within the aviation safety system.
Economic freedom does not mean freedom to operate poorly maintained aircraft, employ unqualified personnel or disregard operational limitations.
The bureaucracy that should be eliminated is the unproductive kind: duplicated requirements, contradictory interpretations, unjustified delays, paperwork without a clear technical purpose and procedures that could be completed digitally.
An efficient aviation authority should regulate better, not simply regulate more. It should concentrate resources where risk is greater and stop consuming time on controls that exist primarily to sustain the administrative structure itself.
Private and foreign capital should be welcomed
Aviation requires billions in investment. A country seeking a larger fleet and wider route network cannot treat capital as an adversary.
Brazil should provide a secure environment for domestic and international investors to participate in airlines, airports, maintenance organizations, training centers, technology companies and ground-service providers.
Additional investment can produce:
- newer aircraft;
- fleet modernization;
- additional routes;
- expanded maintenance capacity;
- professional training;
- stronger competition;
- job creation;
- lower financing costs.
Capital is not required to remain in a country where contracts are unreliable, regulations change without warning and legitimate returns are treated as morally unacceptable.
Profit is not the passenger’s enemy. In a competitive market, profit indicates that a company has found an efficient way to meet a public demand. It also finances fleet renewal, network growth and resilience during crises.
Permanently unprofitable airlines do not democratize aviation. They accumulate debt until they interrupt services and leave passengers, employees and suppliers to absorb the losses.
Airports must support development
Private investment should play a central role in constructing, operating and modernizing airport infrastructure.
Concessions and public-private partnerships can increase investment, efficiency and innovation. But transferring a public monopoly to a private operator does not automatically create competition.
Airport contracts should promote:
- reasonable airport charges;
- operational productivity;
- investment aligned with actual demand;
- service quality;
- capacity expansion;
- competition between airports;
- commercial revenue development;
- integration with ground transportation.
A well-designed concession turns an airport into a regional development platform. A poorly designed concession merely changes the address of the inefficiency.
There is little economic justification for maintaining airports under direct government control when private operators can manage them more effectively. Public resources should be concentrated where the private sector cannot reasonably provide essential infrastructure.
Regional aviation: market first, subsidies second
Brazil’s regional aviation sector needs an economic model adapted to thin routes, but it should not depend indefinitely on political favors.
Before creating subsidies, the government should lower taxes, simplify regulation, improve infrastructure and permit different operational models. Only then can policymakers identify routes that remain commercially unviable despite having genuine social or strategic importance.
When an air connection is essential and the market cannot sustain it, the government may purchase connectivity through a transparent contract.
Such a program should define:
- the community to be served;
- minimum frequency;
- required seat capacity;
- operational reliability;
- maximum contract value;
- contract duration;
- performance indicators;
- periodic competition for the route.
A subsidy should finance public connectivity, not private inefficiency. It must remain a justified exception rather than the economic foundation of the entire sector.
Excessive litigation also increases fares
Passengers must be protected against genuine abuse, negligence and failure to provide contracted services.
However, treating every delay or cancellation as grounds for automatic compensation creates a collective cost. Adverse weather, airport closures, air traffic control restrictions and safety-related decisions cannot be treated as if they were deliberate commercial choices by the airline.
Legal uncertainty forces companies to establish financial provisions, raises insurance costs and encourages settlements even when liability is questionable. These costs are eventually incorporated into airfares.
A market-oriented aviation policy must distinguish among:
- contractual noncompliance;
- preventable operational failure;
- required passenger assistance;
- demonstrable damage;
- extraordinary circumstances;
- decisions made to protect flight safety.
Legal balance does not mean eliminating passenger rights. It means preventing an excessive compensation industry from transferring unnecessary costs to every traveler.
A market-oriented aviation agenda
Applied to air transportation, an economic freedom platform should include the following commitments:
- Reduce and harmonize taxation on jet fuel.
- Preserve airline pricing freedom.
- Reject government fare controls.
- Expand private airport investment and concessions.
- Facilitate the entry of new airlines.
- Attract domestic and international capital.
- Simplify regulation without weakening safety.
- Develop proportionate rules for regional operators.
- Make airport capacity and slot allocation more transparent.
- Reduce legal and regulatory uncertainty.
- Maintain fiscal discipline to support currency and interest-rate stability.
- Limit subsidies to routes with demonstrated public value.
- Eliminate unproductive taxes, charges and administrative structures.
- Encourage competition among both airlines and airports.
- Measure success by capacity, connectivity and consumer choice—not by the number of government programs.
Conclusion
Brazilian aviation does not need more state control. It needs more freedom, investment, competition and predictability.
The state should not decide which airline succeeds, determine the price of every ticket or replace commercial planning with political intervention. It should guarantee safety, protect competition, enforce contracts and maintain clear rules.
The market-oriented current participating in Brazil’s 2026 election offers principles capable of changing the sector: fiscal responsibility, deregulation, private initiative, investment and freedom to build new businesses.
Those principles, however, must move beyond campaign language. They must reach fuel taxation, airport contracts, certification procedures, litigation rules and the conditions faced by new airlines.
Affordable air travel is not created by a presidential decree. It results from economic stability, lower production costs and several companies competing for the passenger.
The greater the freedom to invest and compete, the greater the potential supply. As supply increases, fares face stronger downward pressure. As travel becomes more affordable, more Brazilians can fly.
The true democratization of aviation will not occur when the government distributes tickets. It will occur when citizens have sufficient income and can choose among competing airlines how, when and at what price they wish to travel.
Editorial note: This is an opinion article about aviation economics. References to Brazil’s 2026 presidential election are intended to compare development models, not to request votes or express unconditional support for any candidate.
Marcuss Silva Reis
Economist | Commercial fixed-wing pilot | Former civil aviation flight instructor | Former university professor of Aeronautical Sciences | Aviation expert witness | Postgraduate qualifications in Aeronautical Sciences, Civil Aviation Safety and Higher Education Teaching | Founder of Instituto do Ar
