No. While the interim order remains in force, Vasco and Palmeiras cannot negotiate players with each other. The restriction is broader than a simple ban on buying and selling: it covers permanent or temporary transfers, free loans, swaps, the assignment or sharing of economic or federative rights, and partnership agreements involving players, including academy players.
At the same time, the measure does not mean that ANRESF has already concluded that there is multi-club ownership, cross-influence or an irregularity in the acquisition of Vasco's SAF. In Communiqué No. 011, dated August 27, 2026, Brazil's National Agency for Football Regulation and Sustainability states expressly that opening Conflict Verification Procedure No. 001/2026 is not a judgment and that the interim measures are preventive.
Short answer: what is allowed, what is not, and what is still under review
| Status | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Not allowed while the interim order is in force | Vasco and Palmeiras may not negotiate players with each other, conduct financial transactions between the two clubs, share facilities, certain professionals, services, databases or sensitive information, or grant reciprocal rights of first refusal or purchase options over players. |
| Also blocked | Vasco may not enter into new credit relationships with legal entities that guarantee the Investment Agreement or with companies and financial institutions in those guarantors' economic groups. The communiqué identifies Crefipar and Banco Crefisa among the notified interested third parties. |
| May continue | The SAF acquisition process, acts required to complete the transaction and, according to the communiqué, contributions and financial assistance provided for in the Investment Agreement by the investor or companies it controls. Transactions formalized before notification were also not unwound by the interim order. |
| Still under review | Whether the structure of the Vasco da Gama SAF acquisition creates direct or indirect control or significant influence over more than one club competing in the same competition and therefore breaches the rules against multi-club ownership and cross-influence. |
What ANRESF prohibited between Vasco and Palmeiras
The key point for the transfer market is Article 130 of ANRESF's Internal Rules, used as the basis for the interim order. The public communiqué lists four groups of relationships that are temporarily prohibited between Vasco da Gama SAF, Club de Regatas Vasco da Gama and Sociedade Esportiva Palmeiras.
1. Player transactions and financial operations between the clubs
The wording is broad. Permanent or temporary transfers “under any title” are prohibited, including free loans, as well as assignments, swaps or sharing of economic or federative rights and partnership agreements involving players. Academy players are covered too.
On the financial side, Vasco and Palmeiras may not conduct credit operations, loans, capital contributions, advances, revenue advances or assignments of receivables with each other. The interim order therefore goes beyond stopping a direct signing: it seeks to separate the two clubs economically while the potential conflict is examined.
2. Sponsorships, facilities and services
Cross-sponsorships, shared use of training centers and other facilities, management systems, performance-analysis platforms, player-scouting databases and reciprocal provision of services are also prohibited.
This helps explain why headlines such as “CBF banned the deal” are incomplete. The decision is not only about a possible player sale. Its stated purpose is to prevent sporting, financial or operational links that could create effects that would be difficult to reverse later.
3. Football professionals
The interim order prohibits simultaneous work, assignment or loan of executives and staff involved in coaching, conditioning, performance analysis, recruitment, scouting or football management between Vasco and Palmeiras.
4. Sensitive information and preferential rights over players
Vasco and Palmeiras also may not share scouting and player-evaluation reports, squad contract terms, recruitment plans, medical and performance data, budgets and financial projections. Reciprocal rights of first refusal or purchase options over players are likewise blocked.
So is Palmeiras barred from buying any Vasco player?
A transfer negotiated between the clubs is barred while the interim order remains in force. The text includes purchases, loans, assignments, swaps and other transfer structures, including no-fee arrangements.
The public communiqué, however, was drafted to govern relationships between clubs and does not spell out every edge case that may arise in the transfer market. It does not, for example, specifically address every scenario in which a player ceases to be under contract and later negotiates independently. In such borderline cases, silence in the communiqué should not be treated as automatic authorization. The concrete interpretation depends on ANRESF and the facts of the specific transaction.
Does the interim order stop Vasco from signing players from other clubs?
The communiqué contains no general ban on Vasco signing players. The player restriction is directed at relationships between Vasco and Palmeiras. Saying that ANRESF “stopped Vasco from signing players” would therefore overstate the measure.
Coverage by ge and UOL highlighted precisely this distinction: the restriction targets specific relationships; it is not a general transfer ban against the Rio club.
What was prohibited in dealings with Crefisa, Crefipar and guarantors
The second arm of the interim order is financial. ANRESF prohibited new credit relationships between Vasco da Gama SAF or Club de Regatas Vasco da Gama and the legal entities that act as guarantors under the Investment Agreement, as well as companies and financial institutions in those guarantors' economic groups.
The restriction covers loans, financing, revenue advances and guarantees granted in favor of Vasco, regardless of the label used for the transaction. The communiqué says Crefipar Participações and Banco Crefisa were notified as interested third parties, alongside Palmeiras and Almirante Participações e Empreendimentos.
This is different from saying that “all Lamacchia money was banned.” The document itself makes an important exception: the credit restriction does not apply to the investor or companies it controls. Contributions and financial assistance provided for in the Investment Agreement remain in place. The interim order also does not unwind transactions that had already been formalized before notification.
Was the sale of Vasco's SAF suspended?
No. ANRESF states that the interim measures do not suspend the transaction, do not prevent it from proceeding before the Judicial Reorganization Court and do not bar the parties from carrying out acts necessary to complete the deal.
There is, however, another preventive restriction: until the transaction is completed and approved by the agency, people directly or indirectly linked to the investor may not be appointed to administrative, management or strategic decision-making positions at Vasco da Gama SAF or at the regulated entity that may succeed it.
The accurate formulation is therefore: the SAF acquisition remains under review and may continue to move forward, but certain relationships between the parties have been frozen to prevent effects that could be difficult to reverse before the merits are decided.
Why ANRESF opened the conflict procedure
According to the agency, its Technical Unit identified in June 2026 indications that the transaction and its related corporate, contractual and financing arrangements could amount to cross-influence between clubs competing in the same competition. After a preliminary inquiry and receipt of documents from Vasco, the technical area recommended opening the procedure, and the Second Adjudication Panel accepted that recommendation.
The central standard is Article 86 of the Financial Sustainability System Regulation, which prohibits the same person from exercising or potentially exercising, directly or indirectly, control or significant influence over more than one club in the same competition. ANRESF's regulations page provides the Financial Sustainability System Regulation and the agency's Internal Rules used in this type of review.
The procedure was opened because there is a hypothesis to be tested. ANRESF itself emphasizes that a potential violation is sufficient to start the proceeding; full proof that the rule has already been breached is not required at this stage.
An interim order is not a final ruling on multi-club ownership
This distinction changes how the whole case should be read. The interim order answers a temporary question: which relationships should be frozen to preserve competition integrity while the facts are examined? The decision on the merits will answer a different one: does the transaction structure actually create prohibited control or cross-influence?
At the end of the evidence phase, according to the communiqué, the Adjudication Panel may close the procedure if no violation is found. If it concludes that a prohibited situation exists, it may require a Remediation Plan designed to eliminate it. The outcome therefore does not have to be reduced to a binary “deal approved” or “deal prohibited”: the regulatory framework itself allows structural remedies.
What changes for Palmeiras and Vasco now
- Player deal between Palmeiras and Vasco: blocked while the interim order remains in force, including free loans and academy-player arrangements.
- Financial operations between the two clubs: blocked.
- Sharing training centers, systems, professionals, scouting or data: blocked.
- New credit from guarantors and their economic groups to Vasco: blocked under the terms of the communiqué.
- Contributions provided for from the investor and controlled companies: not reached by the credit restriction described by ANRESF.
- SAF acquisition: not suspended by the interim order; it remains subject to regulatory review and the other applicable proceedings.
- Whether multi-club ownership or cross-influence exists: not yet decided.
That last point prevents the main misunderstanding. ANRESF has already imposed concrete restrictions, but it has not yet declared that the transaction definitively violates Brazil's financial fair play rules. Until a decision on the merits, what exists is a preventive freeze on relationships considered capable of affecting the independence of Vasco and Palmeiras.
