Maitê Proença goes to court to recover BRL 254,000 from the government of São Paulo GZH

No connection

Maitê Proença is collecting amounts related to unpaid pensions from the São Paulo government. Diogo Sallaberry / Agencia RBS

The actress Maite Proenca sent to the court Sao Paulo a spreadsheet saying he is entitled to R$254,000 from the state government. The information was released by the columnist of the newspaper O Globo Ancelmo Goisreports that the artist is demanding amounts that have not been paid to her for months, referring to pensions resulting from the deaths of her parents, the teacher Margot Proença and the lawyer Carlos Eduardo Gallo.

The single daughter of civil servants regularly received transfers until they were suspended in 2010. At the time, Folha de S. Paulo reported that the amount would be around R$13,000 per month. According to the newspaper, the state assumed that the actress should no longer receive a pension due to the stable connection she had with businessman Paulo Marinho.

Continue reading

As evidence for this argument, an excerpt from Maitê’s biography was used, in which she says she has “created a beautiful family” in more than a decade of being in a relationship with her former partner.

The actress appealed, claiming that her parents paid taxes to receive the benefit and managed to overturn the decision. In an interview with O Globo in 2019, she countered the criticism:

“People talk too much. They say my father was in the military, but he never was. When I met Paulo at the age of 20, I didn’t realize the benefit, nor could I imagine my father killing himself years later.

Rumors also circulated that the artist never got married in a civil ceremony, so as not to lose the pension left by her parents. To which she replied that one should not believe in it Marriage.

“My experience has been that marriages are painful, so I didn’t get married. However, this has already been negotiated in court, it is an acquired right. Because this civil servant has paid taxes all his life so that the pension comes about. If they disagree with the law, which dates back to 1940 and may be anachronistic, they should change it from now on. “You can’t do that to people,” he said at the time.