A&C
← Library

Advanced Studies

Compendium of International Family Law

Doctrine and practice for families living between Brazil and the United States

Book · 45 min read · October 2026 · English

Read now

Compendium of International Family Law

Oct 22, 2026 · @Dr. João

Doctrine and practice for families living between Brazil and the United States

Biblioteca Andrade & Cintra · Advanced Studies Collection

João Guilherme de Andrade Cintra · Brazilian Bar, São Paulo Section (OAB/SP 220.915)

Preface

Between May and August 2026, the firm published a series of six texts on international family law: recognition of foreign judgments, the 1980 Hague Convention, international child support, global succession planning, the Hague Apostille, and the international principles of the field. At the same time, the subject appeared in our Insights and Chronicles: the divorce of a couple who married in São Paulo and live in Los Angeles, the consular registration of children born in the United States, inheritances left abroad, heirs who live outside Brazil, child support collected across borders.

This Compendium gathers that material and reorganizes it. The texts were written one at a time, each prompted by a concrete question. Here they become chapters of a single line of reasoning, moving from principles to tools, from tools to crises, and from crises to prevention.

Three choices guided the work.

To organize, not merely to collect. The chapters follow the life of a binational family: first, the rules that decide which law applies and which court decides; then, the instruments that allow documents and decisions to cross the border; next, the crises (divorce, children, support); and finally, wealth and succession.

To update and correct. Every statement was checked again against official sources. Where legislation or case law changed after the original publication, or where the original text needed adjustment, the Compendium gives the correct version and records it in the Update notes at the end. The most important case is the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court's judgment of ADIs 4,245 and 7,686 in August 2025, which changed how the 1980 Hague Convention is read in cases of domestic violence.

To diagnose before prescribing. The book opens with a diagnosis of the Brazilian binational family and closes with a reflection on legal practice in this field. In between, each chapter ends with an "In practice" box setting out the points that matter most in real life.

The focus is the Brazil–United States axis, which accounts for most of the cases handled by the firm and by Sintra Legal & Partners in Long Beach, California. The rules, however, apply to a large extent to any other country that is party to the same conventions.

Reference date: October 22, 2026. Informational and academic content. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship; each concrete case requires its own analysis, in both jurisdictions. Matters under U.S. law are handled by attorneys licensed in the relevant jurisdiction.

Preliminary diagnosis: the Brazilian binational family

A phenomenon that is no longer the exception

The family with one foot in each country is no longer a rare case in Brazilian legal practice. Two figures help measure the trend. Requests to register births at Brazilian consulates in the United States rose from 5,660 in 2021 to about 21,000 in 2025, an increase of 271%. And more than 46,000 Brazilians formally declared their tax departure from the country in 2026, according to a survey published in September — growth of about 80% in five years.

Behind these numbers are familiar situations: the couple formed abroad, the child born in Boston or Miami, the business owner who moves abroad while keeping real estate and a company in Brazil, the elderly parents who stay in São Paulo while their children live in California. Each of these families comes to live under two legal systems at once.

The five structural problems

Reading the published texts together shows that the cases change, but the underlying problems repeat. There are five.

1. Nothing is automatically valid on the other side. Divorce decrees, property divisions, custody orders, certificates, powers of attorney, wills: almost no act performed in one country has full effect in the other without a recognition procedure. A U.S. judgment needs recognition by Brazil's Superior Court of Justice (STJ); a consular birth record needs transcription at a Brazilian registry office; a Brazilian will needs recognition by the probate court; a document needs an apostille and a sworn translation.

2. The problem arrives late. The texts repeat the same observation: families seek advice when the conflict already exists, the probate is already open, the child has already failed to return from vacation, the support payments are already months overdue. By then, solutions are more expensive, slower and less favorable.

3. Two systems that do not talk to each other. Brazilian and U.S. law start from different premises: partial community of property versus community property or equitable distribution; Brazilian probate (inventário) versus U.S. probate; the forced share reserved to necessary heirs (legítima) versus freedom of testation; the holding company versus the trust. When each side is handled by a professional unaware of the other, the solutions contradict each other.

4. The documentary bottleneck. Many international proceedings stall over a document: a certificate of finality that the U.S. court does not issue on its own, an apostille in the wrong place, a translation by someone who is not a Brazilian sworn translator, a power of attorney executed abroad without the formalities required in Brazil.

5. Taxation on two fronts. Inheritances, gifts, property divisions and changes of residence can trigger tax in both countries: the state inheritance and gift tax (ITCMD) and income tax in Brazil; estate tax, gift tax and even the exit tax in the United States. Brazilian Law 14,754/2023 changed the taxation of investments, companies and trusts abroad, and many structures set up before 2024 have not been reviewed.

What the diagnosis shows

The five problems point to the same conclusion: in international family law, timing and coordination matter more than legal theory. A well-drafted prenuptial agreement avoids the conflict between property regimes; a written travel authorization avoids a dispute over wrongful retention; a support judgment with objective criteria speeds up recognition abroad; a timely registry transcription avoids surprises in probate. The following chapters examine each of these points.

Part I — Foundations

Chapter 1 — The principles that cross borders

There is no universal family law. There is, however, a set of principles enshrined in international treaties that guides any judge, Brazilian or foreign, facing a case with a foreign element. For the binational family, knowing them means knowing in advance what will weigh in the decision, even under a law it does not know, in a distant forum and in another language.

1. Best interests of the child. Set out in Article 3(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), heir to the Declarations of 1924 and 1959, and incorporated into Article 227 of the Brazilian Constitution. Every decision involving children must treat it as a primary consideration. It is the principle that allowed Brazil's Supreme Federal Court, in 2025, to read the 1980 Hague Convention so as to protect children exposed to domestic violence (Chapter 7).

2. Human dignity. The core of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and of contemporary constitutions. It works as a limit: a property division that leaves a spouse without means of subsistence, or a decision that ignores transnational domestic violence, is unlikely to be recognized.

3. Special protection of the family. The family is "the natural and fundamental group unit of society" (Universal Declaration, Art. 16(3); International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 23; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Art. 10). It supports protective intervention by the State in situations of risk and family reunification policies.

4. Family solidarity. The reciprocal duty of assistance among spouses, partners, ascendants and descendants, which the New York Convention (1956) and the Hague Convention (2007) turned into a mechanism for the international recovery of support (Chapter 8).

5. Minimal intervention. The State intervenes to protect rights, not to impose a model of family. That is why prenuptial agreements, consensual joint custody, family mediation and consensual divorce play such a large role in international practice.

6. Equality. Between spouses, regardless of gender; among children, biological or adopted, born within or outside marriage (Universal Declaration, Art. 16(1); Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 3; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women). A foreign judgment that discriminates among children or spouses runs up against Brazilian public policy.

7. Freedom in family relationships. The autonomy to form and dissolve family ties, choose the property regime, the domicile and the children's education. It is the basis for the cross-border validity of prenuptial agreements and for the recognition of consular marriages and of stable unions formed in another country.

In practice, these principles operate above the technical rules. When Brazilian and U.S. law point in different directions, they are what the judge uses to choose. A case built only on statutory provisions tends to lose to one that shows which solution best fulfils these values.

Chapter 2 — Which law, which court

Every international case begins with two distinct questions that are often confused: which law applies, and which court has jurisdiction. A Brazilian judge may have to apply U.S. law, and a U.S. judge may apply Brazilian law.

The applicable law: the LINDB. Brazil's Law of Introduction to the Rules of Brazilian Law (Lei de Introdução às Normas do Direito Brasileiro) uses domicile as its central connecting factor:

  • Personal status, capacity and family rights are governed by the law of the country where the person is domiciled (Art. 7).
  • The marital property regime is governed by the law of the country where the spouses were domiciled at the time of marriage; if their domiciles differed, by the law of the first marital domicile (Art. 7, § 4). A couple who married in São Paulo, lived there for the first years and then moved to California has, under Brazilian law, the regime of partial community of property, unless there is a prenuptial agreement.
  • Succession is governed by the law of the deceased's last domicile, whatever the nature and location of the assets (Art. 10), with a protective exception: succession to assets of foreigners located in Brazil follows Brazilian law for the benefit of a Brazilian spouse or children whenever the deceased's personal law is not more favorable to them (Art. 10, § 1, and Constitution, Art. 5, XXXI).
  • Public policy is the final limit: foreign laws, acts and judgments have no effect in Brazil when they offend national sovereignty, public policy or good morals (Art. 17).

On the U.S. side there is no single rule: each state has its own family and succession law. California follows community property; New York, equitable distribution. Real estate, as a rule, follows the law of the place where it is located.

The competent court: the Code of Civil Procedure. Brazil's Code of Civil Procedure distinguishes three situations:

  • Concurrent jurisdiction (Arts. 21 and 22): Brazilian courts may decide, but so may foreign courts. This covers actions against defendants domiciled in Brazil and support claims when the creditor is domiciled or resident in Brazil or when the debtor holds assets, income or benefits there.
  • Exclusive jurisdiction (Art. 23): only Brazilian courts may decide on real estate located in Brazil, on probate and division of assets located in Brazil, and on the division of such assets in divorce, separation or dissolution of a stable union. A foreign judgment dividing Brazilian real estate will not be recognized on that point.
  • No lis pendens (Art. 24): an action filed abroad does not prevent the same case from being filed in Brazil. When there are two proceedings, in practice the one that first produces a decision effective in Brazil prevails — either the Brazilian judgment or the recognized foreign one.

In practice

  • Residence, civil domicile and tax residence are different concepts and do not always coincide. Mapping them is the first step in any case.
  • A prenuptial agreement with an express choice of property regime is the most effective way to avoid a conflict of laws.
  • The race between proceedings in the two countries is real. Deciding where and when to file is a strategic decision, not a bureaucratic one.

Part II — The instruments that cross borders

Chapter 3 — The Hague Apostille: the passport for documents

No international proceeding moves forward without documents that are valid on both sides of the border. The Hague Convention of October 5, 1961, promulgated in Brazil by Decree 8,660/2016 and in force there since August of that year, replaced the old consular legalization with a single standardized certificate: the apostille. The United States has been a party to the Convention since 1981.

What the apostille certifies. The authenticity of the signature, the capacity in which the signatory acted and, where applicable, the authenticity of the seal or stamp. It does not certify the content of the document, only its official origin.

What needs an apostille. Civil registry certificates (birth, marriage, death), judgments (divorce, custody, property division), notarial deeds and public powers of attorney, diplomas and school transcripts, criminal record certificates and company registry documents. Documents issued by diplomatic or consular agents, and administrative documents relating to commercial or customs operations, are excluded.

Where to obtain it. In Brazil, at registry offices authorized by the National Council of Justice, usually within a few days. In the United States, from the authority of the state where the document was issued, normally the Secretary of State; federal documents are apostilled by the Department of State. Timelines and fees vary from state to state and change frequently, and should be checked at the time of the request.

The sequence trap. A U.S. document intended for use in Brazil normally requires three steps, in this order: a U.S. apostille on the original; a translation by a Brazilian public sworn translator registered with a state Commercial Registry (a translation "notarized" in the United States does not replace it); and, for some uses, a Brazilian apostille on the translation. The reverse path has its own steps. The exact sequence depends on where the document will be used (registry office, court, commercial registry, probate), and it is worth confirming it with the recipient before starting.

Chapter 4 — International legal cooperation

When what needs to cross the border is not a document but a procedural act (service of process, the hearing of a witness, an urgent measure), the cooperation instruments come into play.

  • Letters rogatory. The classic route, from judge to judge, through the central authorities. Letters rogatory coming from abroad for execution in Brazil require an exequatur from the STJ (Constitution, Art. 105, I, "i").
  • Direct assistance (Code of Civil Procedure, Arts. 28 to 34). Used when the request does not require review by the STJ. It runs between central authorities — as a rule, the Department of Asset Recovery and International Legal Cooperation (DRCI) of Brazil's Ministry of Justice — and is usually faster.
  • Service abroad. Brazil and the United States are parties to the 1965 Hague Service Convention, which Brazil joined in 2019. Proper service on a defendant living in the other country is the most sensitive point of any future recognition: service by publication or newspaper notice, without exhausting cooperation channels, is the main reason foreign judgments are refused.
  • Direct enforcement of decisions, in cases provided for by treaty, such as support under the 2007 Hague Convention (Chapter 8).

Chapter 5 — Recognition of foreign judgments

A foreign court decision has no effect in Brazil until it is recognized (homologação) by the Superior Court of Justice (Constitution, Art. 105, I, "i", as amended by Constitutional Amendment 45/2004; Code of Civil Procedure, Arts. 960 to 965; STJ Internal Rules, Arts. 216-A to 216-X). Without it, a divorce granted in Los Angeles does not change civil status in the Brazilian registry, a custody order from a Florida court does not bind a parent who has returned to Brazil, and a property division made in Miami does not transfer title to a property in Cotia.

What the STJ examines. The court does not retry the case. It conducts a limited review of formal requirements and compatibility with public policy:

  1. a decision issued by a competent authority;
  2. proper service of process, even if default was entered;
  3. effectiveness in the country of origin, with proof of finality, which the STJ's Internal Rules still require;
  4. no conflict with a final Brazilian judgment;
  5. an official translation, unless waived by treaty;
  6. no manifest offense to public policy, sovereignty or human dignity.

A simple consensual divorce does not need the STJ. Since the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure (Art. 961, § 5), a foreign judgment of consensual divorce takes effect in Brazil without recognition. Provision 53/2016 of the National Council of Justice, now part of its National Code of Rules, allows it to be recorded directly at the civil registry office, provided it is a "simple or pure" divorce, with no provision on custody, support or division of property. If the judgment addresses any of these matters, or if the divorce was contested, recognition is still required.

Where recognition stalls. In order of frequency:

  • incomplete documentation: missing certificate of finality (many U.S. courts do not issue one on their own), apostille, or translation of essential attachments such as the settlement agreement or the parenting plan;
  • weak service of process: a defendant served by publication, without use of cooperation mechanisms. STJ case law has allowed recognition when the party actually took part in the foreign proceeding, because the purpose of service was achieved;
  • competing Brazilian proceedings: a divorce, custody or support action filed in Brazil by the other spouse. If there is a final Brazilian judgment on the same matter, the foreign one will not be recognized;
  • public policy: a division that violates Brazil's exclusive jurisdiction over real estate located there, or that ignores the forced share of necessary heirs in assets in Brazil.

Timeline. Consensual, well-documented cases are usually decided within a few months; contested cases or those with incomplete documentation may take more than a year.

In practice

  • Before starting, check whether the case can skip the STJ (pure consensual divorce) or requires recognition.
  • Ask the U.S. court, from the outset, for a certificate that the decision is final.
  • If the proceeding is still ongoing abroad, arrange service on the spouse living in Brazil through cooperation channels. Today's decision determines whether the judgment will be valid tomorrow.
  • Recognition resolves the past. Jurisdictional planning, done before the conflict, avoids the need for it.

Part III — Family crises

Chapter 6 — Cross-border divorce and division of property

A Brazilian woman and an American man marry in São Paulo in 2010. In 2015 they move to California. During the marriage they buy an apartment in Manhattan, a house in Los Angeles and a farm in Minas Gerais. In 2026 they decide to divorce. The case, told in International Chronicle No. 05, brings together almost every problem in the field.

Which property regime. Under the LINDB, the law of the first marital domicile applies: São Paulo, and therefore partial community of property, if there was no prenuptial agreement. Under California law, where the couple lived for most of the marriage, community property applies, which also divides property acquired during the marriage equally, but with its own characterization rules. If the case is heard in New York, equitable distribution applies, dividing property fairly but not necessarily equally. The choice of forum changes the result.

Who divides what. Brazilian courts have exclusive jurisdiction to divide the farm in Minas Gerais (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 23, III), and no U.S. court can do so with effect in Brazil. On the other hand, a Brazilian judge does not directly divide the Manhattan and Los Angeles properties. STJ case law does, however, allow assets abroad to be taken into account when calculating each spouse's share, so as to balance the division with assets located in Brazil. This equalization depends on evidence: an up-to-date valuation and documentation of title to the foreign properties. Without evidence, there is no equalization.

Tax effects. Dividing assets abroad may have tax consequences in both countries. One point often overlooked is the U.S. exit tax (Internal Revenue Code, Section 877A): anyone who renounces U.S. citizenship, or a green card held for a long period, and qualifies as a "covered expatriate" is treated as having sold all of their assets the day before expatriation. If the Brazilian spouse's share of the marital property has not been formalized beforehand, part of the common estate may be taxed as if it belonged solely to the expatriating spouse.

Custody. In the United States, jurisdiction over custody generally follows the "home state" criterion — the state where the child lived during the six months before the action (the uniform law adopted by nearly all states, the UCCJEA). In Brazil, joint custody is the rule (Civil Code, Art. 1,584, § 2). When a parent intends to move to another country with the child, the matter is also governed by the 1980 Hague Convention (Chapter 7).

Effects in Brazil. A pure consensual divorce granted in the United States can be recorded directly at a Brazilian registry office; if there is property division, custody, support or a contested proceeding, the judgment depends on recognition by the STJ (Chapter 5). Until then, the person remains married under the Brazilian registry, and a new marriage may be considered invalid in Brazil.

In practice

  • A prenuptial agreement choosing the property regime is the most effective tool for binational couples, and couples who are already married can achieve the same result through a court-approved change of regime (Civil Code, Art. 1,639, § 2).
  • Before filing for divorce, compare the likely outcome in each possible forum.
  • Gather documentation on assets abroad now: without it, equalization is not possible.

Chapter 7 — Children between two countries: the 1980 Hague Convention

A father takes his son to Brazil for the July vacation and does not return in September as agreed. A mother comes to São Paulo with the child and announces, by text message, that she will not return to Los Angeles. Situations like these are governed by the Hague Convention of October 25, 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, promulgated in Brazil by Decree 3,413/2000. The Convention applies to children up to 16 years of age.

Removal and retention. "Abduction" has no criminal meaning here. The Convention covers two forms of conduct: wrongful removal (the child is taken without the authorization of the other parent or of the court) and wrongful retention (the child travels lawfully and is not returned at the end of the agreed period). On the Brazil–U.S. axis, retention after vacation is the most common case. It is wrongful when it breaches custody rights actually exercised under the law of the country of the child's habitual residence (Art. 3).

Habitual residence. A concept of the Convention itself, distinct from nationality or civil domicile. A child born in the United States who has lived there for four years, attends school and sees a pediatrician in Long Beach has habitual residence in the United States, even if the child is Brazilian and visits Brazil every year.

The Convention does not decide custody. This is the most common misunderstanding. It decides which court will decide custody: that of the country of habitual residence. That is why the rule is the prompt return of the child (Art. 12), so that the natural judge — close to the child's school, doctors and surroundings — decides the merits.

The procedure in Brazil. The request goes to the Federal Central Administrative Authority (ACAF), which seeks an amicable solution. Failing an agreement, the Federal Union, represented by the Attorney General's Office (AGU), files an action for the search, seizure and return of the child in the Federal Courts (Constitution, Art. 109, I and III), with the participation of the Federal Prosecution Service. In the opposite direction — a child taken from Brazil to the United States — the request goes to the U.S. central authority, the Office of Children's Issues at the Department of State.

Exceptions to return. The judge may refuse return when:

  1. the request was made more than one year after the removal or retention and the child is now settled in the new environment (Art. 12);
  2. the parent seeking return was not actually exercising custody rights, or consented to or later acquiesced in the child remaining (Art. 13(a));
  3. there is a grave risk that return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation (Art. 13(b));
  4. the child, having attained an appropriate age and degree of maturity, objects to being returned (Art. 13, second paragraph);
  5. return would violate the fundamental principles of the requested State relating to the protection of human rights (Art. 20).

The 2025 turning point: domestic violence. On August 27, 2025, Brazil's Supreme Federal Court unanimously concluded the judgment of ADIs 4,245 and 7,686. The Court held the Convention compatible with the Constitution, with supra-legal status, and ruled that the grave-risk exception (Art. 13(b)) must be interpreted in light of the best interests of the child and from a gender perspective. It may be applied where there are objective and concrete indications of domestic violence, even if the child is not the direct victim. The Court also ordered structural measures: concentration of cases in specialized federal courts and panels, priority processing, a protocol for assisting mothers and children who are victims of violence at Brazilian consulates, psychosocial support units in the regional federal courts, and a working group at the National Council of Justice so that the final decision on return is issued within one year.

In practice

  • Before any international trip, put the authorization in writing: period, purpose and return date.
  • No parent should decide alone to keep a child in another country without legal advice in both jurisdictions: retention can cost custody in the country of origin.
  • Time is decisive for both sides. Those seeking return should act before one year has passed; those resisting must gather concrete evidence of the exceptions right away (especially of domestic violence).
  • International family mediation is increasingly used and, where possible, spares the child a dispute between countries.

Chapter 8 — International child support

A divorced Brazilian woman lives in São Paulo with two children. Her ex-husband moved to Miami four years ago; he paid support in the first year, then began to fall behind, reduced the amount on his own and stopped responding. The debt has not been lost. There is an international mechanism to collect it, and in most cases the creditor does not need to hire a lawyer abroad.

Two treaties, two central authorities.

  • The 1956 New York Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance (Decree 56,826/1965). In Brazil, the authority is the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Republic, through the International Cooperation Secretariat of the Federal Prosecution Service. The request begins at the Federal Prosecution Service office closest to the creditor's residence.
  • The 2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance (Decree 9,176/2017). In Brazil, the central authority is the Department of Asset Recovery and International Legal Cooperation (DRCI) of the Ministry of Justice. It has standardized procedures, cooperation deadlines and free legal assistance for child support applications for children under 21.

And when the debtor is in the United States? The United States is not a party to the 1956 New York Convention, but it is a party to the 2007 Hague Convention. Between the two countries, therefore, the route is the 2007 Hague Convention, through the DRCI. The Brazilian application is sent to the U.S. central authority, which forwards it to the state child support agency. The Brazilian decision is recognized by the competent state court and can be enforced through wage garnishment, account levies and other local measures. With countries that have joined only the New York Convention, that Convention applies; with countries that have joined neither, the options are letters rogatory, recognition of the Brazilian judgment abroad, or an action filed directly in the debtor's country.

The Brazilian judgment works, if it is well written. It is not automatically valid abroad: it must be recognized. Clear judgments with objective criteria (a percentage of income, or a fixed amount with an adjustment index) and self-executing clauses are recognized more quickly. When there is a reasonable chance that the debtor will move abroad, the agreement or the request for support should be drafted with international recognition in mind.

If there is no judgment yet, there are two routes: obtain a decision in Brazil, where jurisdiction exists when the creditor resides there (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 22, I), and then send it through the central authority; or request that support be established directly in the debtor's country, also through the 2007 Hague Convention. The choice depends on the debtor's assets, urgency and the children's ages.

Measures in Brazil. While the application proceeds abroad, enforcement in Brazil can reach the debtor's assets and income located there, and the judge may order measures such as protest of the decision, listing in debtors' registers and, depending on the case, atypical measures such as suspension of the passport (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 139, IV, upheld by the Supreme Federal Court in ADI 5,941). Civil imprisonment for the three most recent installments (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 528) may be ordered and carried out if the debtor comes to Brazil.

Beyond the former spouse. The same mechanisms apply to support between spouses, to adult children who are still studying, to support from grandparents to grandchildren, and to support owed by children to elderly parents — a possibility still little used.

In practice

  • Gather the judgment (with certificates of notice and finality, except for provisional support), proof of service on the debtor, a month-by-month table of the debt and international bank details (IBAN and SWIFT).
  • Check which convention the debtor's country belongs to before choosing the route.
  • Do not let the debt grow: delay makes it easier for the debtor to move assets and change jobs.

Part IV — Parentage, wealth and succession

Chapter 9 — The child born in the United States: consular registration and transcription

The growth in birth registrations at Brazilian consulates in the United States (from 5,660 in 2021 to about 21,000 in 2025) conceals a step many families are unaware of. The consulate registers; it is the Brazilian registry office that gives the record full effect in Brazil.

Nationality. A person born abroad to a Brazilian father or mother is a native-born Brazilian, provided the birth is registered with the competent Brazilian office, or the person comes to reside in Brazil and, at any time after reaching the age of majority, opts for Brazilian nationality (Constitution, Art. 12, I, "c"). The option is filed in the Federal Courts (Art. 109, X).

Transcription. The record made at the consulate must be transcribed (traslado) at the Brazilian civil registry: at the registry office of the family's domicile or, if the family has no domicile in Brazil, at the 1st Registry Office of the Federal District (Law 6,015/1973, Art. 32, § 1, and the National Council of Justice's National Code of Rules). Without transcription, the consular certificate is valid, but it does not circulate in Brazil like an ordinary Brazilian certificate.

Where the gap appears. Almost always in probate. Children are necessary heirs regardless of nationality (Civil Code, Art. 1,845), but an heir born abroad must prove parentage with a suitable document. Discovering the missing transcription once probate is open and the ITCMD deadlines are running is the most expensive way to solve a simple problem.

In practice

  • Check whether each child's consular certificate has already been transcribed.
  • U.S. documents used in Brazil (birth, marriage, death, power of attorney) need an apostille at origin and a sworn translation in Brazil.
  • For children over 18 who were never registered, consider the nationality option, which requires residence in Brazil.
  • Keep an up-to-date public power of attorney, apostilled and with specific powers, for acts in Brazil.

Chapter 10 — Cross-border inheritance and global succession planning

Wealth in two countries is not simply divided in two. It multiplies complexity, tax risk, the likelihood of disputes among heirs, and bureaucracy.

One inheritance, two or more probates. As a rule, succession is governed by the law of the deceased's last domicile (LINDB, Art. 10). But a Brazilian judge administers and divides only the assets located in Brazil (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 23, II), and assets in the United States go through probate in the state where they are located, under local law. In practice, almost no case follows a single law: part of the estate is governed by Brazilian law, part by U.S. law, and the points of friction (forced share, property regime, taxes) must be anticipated.

Brazilian instruments and their limits. A family holding company concentrates the assets and allows quotas to be gifted in advance, with a reserved usufruct and management powers. A will organizes the disposable portion, subject to the forced share of half of the estate reserved for necessary heirs. Neither, on its own, resolves the U.S. assets: to hold real estate in the United States, a Brazilian holding company usually needs a local structure, such as an LLC; and a Brazilian will depends on recognition by the competent probate court.

U.S. instruments and their pitfalls in Brazil. The revocable living trust, joint tenancy with right of survivorship, transfer-on-death and payable-on-death designations, and the irrevocable life insurance trust work well in the United States, but Brazilian law does not recognize the trust as an institution of its own. Assets passing to the survivor outside probate may be challenged by Brazilian necessary heirs, and taxation in Brazil follows specific rules.

Law 14,754/2023. In force since 2024, it changed the taxation of individuals resident in Brazil with assets abroad:

  • financial investments abroad: 15% on income and gains, including exchange-rate variation, charged when the amount is received or realized, with a credit for tax paid abroad under the terms of the law;
  • controlled companies abroad (offshores): for controlled entities that fall within the cases set out in the law (low-tax jurisdictions or predominantly passive income), annual taxation of 15% on profits determined on December 31, even if not distributed; for the others, an option for tax transparency;
  • trusts: they are tax-transparent. The assets remain attributed to the settlor while alive; delivery to the beneficiaries is treated as a gift, if it occurs during the settlor's lifetime, or as a transfer upon death, if it occurs afterwards — whichever comes first between distribution and death.

Structures set up before 2024 to defer taxes until the succession event need to be reviewed.

ITCMD on assets abroad. In 2021, Brazil's Supreme Federal Court held that the states could not levy ITCMD on inheritances and gifts with foreign elements without a national complementary law (Theme 825). The 2023 Tax Reform (Constitutional Amendment 132/2023) changed that framework and now defines, until the complementary law is enacted, which state may tax these situations; in the case of inheritance, as a rule, the state of the deceased's domicile, even with respect to assets located outside Brazil. Actual collection depends on each state's legislation and on rules on the timing of new taxes, which open and close planning windows.

The heir who lives abroad. An inheritance of assets located in Brazil is subject to ITCMD in Brazil, whatever the heir's country of residence. Once probate is concluded and the tax paid, the amount can be remitted abroad through an institution authorized by Brazil's Central Bank, with its nature correctly declared as an inheritance. Informal remittances lead to tax assessments and blocked transfers. The heir's country may impose its own obligations: in the United States, for example, an inheritance received from a nonresident is generally not taxed as income, but amounts above US$ 100,000 must be reported to the IRS (Form 3520). Conversely, a Brazilian who is not a U.S. resident and dies owning U.S. real estate or shares in their own name subjects those assets to the federal estate tax, with an exemption of only US$ 60,000, since there is no treaty between the two countries on the subject.

The architecture that works. There is no single model, but there is a method:

  1. cross-diagnosis: a complete inventory of assets in both countries, with the form of ownership of each;
  2. decision on the structure: a Brazilian holding company, a U.S. structure or both coordinated (for example, a Brazilian holding company owning an LLC that holds the U.S. real estate);
  3. coordinated wills: a Brazilian will for assets in Brazil and a U.S. will for assets in the United States, drafted together, without contradictions;
  4. an informed decision on the trust: used, or not, with full awareness of Brazilian taxation;
  5. ongoing compliance: Brazil's Federal Revenue Service, the Central Bank's report on Brazilian Capital Abroad (when applicable), the IRS and FinCEN (FBAR).

In practice

  • Plan both systems at the same time, not one after the other.
  • Review any structure set up before 2024 in light of Law 14,754/2023 and Constitutional Amendment 132/2023.
  • Check U.S. assets held in their own name by people who do not reside in the United States: estate tax may be the largest cost of the succession.
  • A well-resolved international succession is one that no one notices was planned.

Conclusion — Practicing international family law

Anyone who reads the ten chapters of this Compendium finds the same lesson in different settings: in international family law, the outcome depends less on the argument made in court than on decisions taken before any proceeding exists. The prenuptial agreement that chose the property regime. The travel authorization that fixed the return date. The support judgment drafted with objective criteria. The registry transcription done before probate. The wealth structure reviewed after 2024. In each case, a simple step taken at the right time replaces years of litigation.

This changes the nature of legal practice in the field. It remains adversarial when it must be, and international litigation demands refined technique: proper service, well-documented recognition, proof of the Hague Convention exceptions, coordination with central authorities. But its most valuable contribution lies elsewhere: accompanying the family over time and anticipating the points where the two systems will collide.

The moments that call for advice

The experience gathered in these texts makes it possible to identify the moments in family life when a legal conversation is usually worth more than at any other time:

  • before marrying a foreign national, or a Brazilian who lives abroad, while the property regime and the forum can still be chosen;
  • when a child is born abroad, while consular registration and transcription are simple and inexpensive;
  • before moving to another country, when deciding what stays in Brazil, in whose name and under what structure, and when formalizing the tax departure;
  • when buying property abroad, since the form of ownership defines the cost of the future succession;
  • before traveling with the children in the midst of a separation, when a written authorization avoids an accusation of wrongful retention;
  • upon receiving a foreign judgment, to confirm whether it needs recognition and to gather the documents while they are still easy to obtain;
  • when parents grow older on one side of the border and their children live on the other, to organize succession and, if needed, support.

The profile of the lawyer in this field

Three qualities distinguish those who practice international family law well.

The first is a view of both sides. The most common mistake, noted in several chapters, is to treat the assets or the proceeding in the other country as an appendix, or as a black box to be handed to another professional. The binational family needs someone who sees the whole and coordinates, from the start, the professionals licensed in each jurisdiction.

The second is command of the instruments. Apostilles, direct assistance, the Hague Conventions, central authorities, recognition of judgments: these are everyday tools that cannot be learned at the moment a client arrives with an emergency.

The third is human sensitivity. International family cases involve distance, a foreign language, different cultures and, often, children divided between two countries. The principles in Chapter 1 (best interests of the child, dignity, solidarity) are not merely legal arguments: they are the standard by which lawyers themselves should measure the solutions they propose.

A growing field

The figures in the diagnosis indicate that this demand will grow. More Brazilians live, marry, have children and invest abroad; more families come to have assets and affections in two jurisdictions. The law is keeping pace with increasingly sophisticated instruments, as shown by the Supreme Federal Court's decision on the Hague Convention, the new taxation of assets abroad and the simplified recording of consensual divorces.

It is for this landscape that the firm has organized its practice on two fronts, in Brazil and in the United States, through Sintra Legal & Partners in Long Beach, always with the participation of professionals licensed in each jurisdiction. And it is in this spirit that this Compendium is offered to the reader: as a map of the questions a binational family will encounter along the way, so that they can be addressed at the right time, with information and serenity.

The border need not divide the family. Properly understood, it is simply one more circumstance to be planned for.

Update notes

In bringing the texts together, some points were updated or corrected relative to the original publications on the firm's website.

  1. The 1980 Hague Convention and domestic violence (text of May 20, 2026). The original mentions ADI 4,245 without its outcome. The Supreme Federal Court concluded the judgment of ADIs 4,245 and 7,686 on August 27, 2025, with the holding described in Chapter 7. The estimate that "more than 80% of disputes" concern the grave-risk exception was also removed for lack of a source.
  2. Exceptions to return. The original places all five exceptions in Article 13. In the Convention they are found in Articles 12 (settlement after one year), 13 and 20.
  3. Support and the United States (text of May 30, 2026). The original describes collection against a debtor in the United States under the New York Convention, through the Prosecutor General's Office. The United States is not a party to that Convention; the route is the 2007 Hague Convention, whose central authority in Brazil is the DRCI of the Ministry of Justice.
  4. Law 14,754/2023 (text of June 10, 2026). The original states that financial investments abroad became subject to annual accrual-based taxation. Under the law, investments are taxed when income is received or realized; annual taxation applies to the profits of certain controlled entities abroad. As for trusts, the law does not distinguish between revocable and irrevocable: it treats them as transparent and attributes the assets to the settlor.
  5. Recognition of judgments (text of May 16, 2026). The original cites STJ Resolution 9/2005, which was replaced by Articles 216-A to 216-X of the STJ's Internal Rules. The pure consensual divorce, which does not require recognition (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 961, § 5), was added. The timelines given in the website texts (3 to 9 months in one, 6 to 18 months in another) were harmonized.
  6. Apostille (text of June 20, 2026). Fees and processing times were removed because they vary and change frequently.

Sources

The firm's texts from which this Compendium was compiled (andradecintra.com.br, in Portuguese)

  • Homologação de sentença estrangeira: o STJ como gargalo silencioso da família binacional (May 16, 2026)
  • Convenção de Haia de 1980: quando o "férias prolongadas" se transforma em subtração internacional de criança (May 20, 2026)
  • Alimentos internacionais: por que cobrar pensão alimentícia além da fronteira é mais simples do que se imagina (May 30, 2026)
  • Planejamento sucessório global: a arquitetura que protege famílias com bens em mais de um país (June 10, 2026)
  • Apostila de Haia e cooperação jurídica internacional: o passaporte silencioso dos documentos (June 20, 2026)
  • Os sete princípios internacionais do Direito de Família (June 27, 2026)
  • Casaram em São Paulo, vivem em Los Angeles: em qual país fica o divórcio? (International Chronicle No. 05, July 2026)
  • O consulado registra. O cartório no Brasil é que resolve (August 17, 2026)
  • Casamento ou divórcio no exterior: o que é necessário para valer no Brasil
  • Herança transnacional: como inventariar bens deixados fora do Brasil
  • Pensão alimentícia para filhos quando o pai ou a mãe mora no exterior
  • Herdeiro no exterior: ITCMD, remessa de valores e regras fiscais

Official and reference sources

Biblioteca Andrade & Cintra · Advanced Studies Collection. © 2026 João Guilherme de Andrade Cintra. Informational and academic content. It does not constitute legal advice or an offer of services, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Matters under U.S. law are handled by attorneys licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. Prepared with the assistance of artificial intelligence (Claude, Anthropic), under full human supervision and review, in accordance with Recommendation 001/2024 of the Federal Council of the Brazilian Bar Association.

Would you like to discuss this topic? Contact the firm →