Retirement Simulator: Step-by-Step Tutorial

The 2019 reform created five paths to retirement, and each becomes available on a different date and provides a different amount. The website simulator tests them all at once and shows which one comes first.

What the retirement simulator solves

Anyone who was already contributing before November 13, 2019 was not limited to a single rule. Constitutional Amendment 103/2019 preserved the rights of people already in the system through transition rules, each of which combines age, contribution period, points, and additional contribution periods in its own way.

The result is a comparison issue, not an isolated calculation. The points rule may make retirement available sooner, while the 100% additional contribution period usually delivers a higher amount. Choosing the nearest date without considering the amount is a costly mistake, and the reverse is also true.

There is also the benefit calculation itself. The coefficient starts at 60% of the average salary and increases by 2% for each year of contributions beyond 20 years for men, which means that every additional year of work changes monthly income permanently.

The website simulator takes seven data points and returns, for each rule, eligibility, the projected date, and estimated monthly income, along with the corresponding legal basis.

When the tool helps in a specific case

Its most valuable use is planning. Knowing the difference between retiring in 2036 under the points rule or in 2041 under the additional contribution period rule, along with the respective amounts, allows you to decide based on numbers rather than impressions.

Other recurring situations include:

• finding out which transition rules the insured person qualifies for;
• measuring the effect of continuing to contribute for a few more years;
• comparing the estimated amount under the available rules;
• checking the situation of basic education teachers, who have their own reduction;
• understanding why a particular rule appears as ineligible.

The answer regarding affiliation before November 2019 is the field that opens or closes access to the transition rules. Those who became affiliated after that date follow only the permanent rule, without access to the transition options.

The rule that comes first is almost never the one that pays the most. Comparing the date and amount side by side is what the simulator is designed to make possible.

The example in this tutorial shows this tension in numbers, using fictional data selected for the demonstration.

Step by step through the tool screens

The simulator is in the website’s tools section, among the social security tools, and works without registration.

1. Open the tool and identify the fields

The screen contains seven fields. The first three are sex, date of birth, and total years of contributions. The fourth identifies basic education teachers, who receive a reduction of five years or points.

The fifth field asks whether you were affiliated before November 13, 2019 and determines the rest of the simulation. The last two are optional: the contribution period already accumulated on that date, which improves the accuracy of the additional contribution period calculations, and the average contribution salary, which makes it possible to estimate the amount.

2. Fill in the insured person’s information

In the example, the person is a man born on May 18, 1972, with 31 years of contributions, who is not a teacher, was already contributing before November 2019, had 24 years of contributions on that date, and reports an average salary of R$ 4.200,00.

The field for time accumulated in 2019 requires particular precision because it is used to calculate the additional contribution periods. Leaving it blank causes the tool to estimate uninterrupted contributions from that date onward, which may distort eligibility under the additional contribution period rules.

3. Run the simulation and read the comparison

The “Simulate Retirement” button opens a card highlighting the option with the shortest wait and, below it, a section for each transition rule, with its legal basis, calculation details, projection, and estimated income.

How to read each result line

In the example, the option with the shortest wait is the points rule, under art. 15 of Amendment 103/2019. The screen warns directly in the header that the shortest-wait criterion does not take the benefit amount into account.

The points-rule section shows 85.4 current points against the required 103, with a minimum contribution period of 35 years and no separate minimum age. The projection indicates November 1, 2036, with estimated monthly income of R$ 3.444,00 and a coefficient of 60% plus 2% for each year beyond 20 years.

The progressive minimum-age rule, under art. 16, appears with a current age of 54.4 years against the minimum of 64.5, a projection for 2037, and the same estimated amount. It comes one year later with no income advantage in this scenario.

The 50% additional contribution period, under art. 17, is marked as ineligible, with the reason clearly stated: in November 2019, more than two years remained before the minimum contribution period. This transparency avoids the most common question, which is not understanding why a rule was excluded.

The 100% additional contribution period, under art. 20, requires a minimum age of 60 and 35 years of contributions plus 11 additional contribution years, for a total of 46 years. The projection moves to 2041, but estimated income rises to R$ 4.200,00, the highest amount in the comparison. The five-year additional wait buys a full benefit.

Why the closest date does not always win

The example comparison highlights the central decision in social security planning. Retiring five years sooner costs, in this scenario, approximately R$ 756,00 per month, permanently, adjusted annually.

There are two sides to the calculation. On one hand, five years of benefits received sooner, which add up to a considerable amount in nominal terms. On the other, permanently lower monthly income, which also affects future survivors’ benefits for dependents.

The break-even point depends on life expectancy, the immediate need for income, and the ability to continue working. There is no universal answer, and that is exactly why the simulator presents the rules side by side instead of identifying a single one.

There is also the possibility of reaffirming the application filing date when the requirements are met after the application, a topic that the tool collection itself addresses in another calculator.

What the simulator does not do

The tool does not read the social security registry. It works with the contribution period the user provides, and the difference between estimated time and time actually recognized is the main source of discrepancies between the simulation and reality.

It also does not convert special contribution time or count rural work time, activities that require their own documentation and are subject to conversion rules with specific cutoff dates. The website maintains tools dedicated to those issues.

And estimated income is an approximation. The actual amount depends on the average of all contribution salaries since July 1994, calculated from the official registry, rather than from an average entered manually.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who can use the transition rules?

Only those who were already affiliated with the general system before November 13, 2019. Those who joined after that date follow the permanent rule, with its own minimum age and contribution period, without access to the points, progressive-age, or additional contribution period options.

Why did one of the rules appear as ineligible?

Because the cutoff requirements had not been met on the date of the reform. The 50% additional contribution period, for example, requires that no more than two years remained before the minimum contribution period in November 2019. The simulator states the reason for ineligibility in each section.

Does the 60% coefficient apply to every rule?

It applies to most of them, with an additional 2% for each year of contributions beyond 20 years for men. The 100% additional contribution period is the relevant exception because it allows the calculation without reducing the coefficient, which explains the higher amount in the comparison.

As informações deste artigo são de caráter informativo e não substituem consulta jurídica individualizada. Cada caso possui particularidades que exigem análise específica.