Understand the Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging effects and when to conduct market research to validate SINAPI and SICRO prices.
Check it out!
SINAPI or SICRO pricing is a technical cost reference, not an individual market quotation. These systems are essential for public works budgeting, but they use standardized methods, territorial databases, cost compositions and surveys that cannot reproduce every commercial condition of a specific purchase. As a result, the reference value may be above or below the price a company can negotiate for a given input, quantity, brand, package size or purchasing context.
TCU’s 2026 Public Works Cost Engineering Guide organizes five effects that help explain these differences: Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging. They do not authorize the Administration to disregard SINAPI and SICRO or apply arbitrary discounts. They help identify when an economically relevant input warrants targeted market research, scale analysis or a technically demonstrated adjustment.
SINAPI and SICRO are references, not every possible transaction
The limitations of SINAPI and SICRO must be addressed within the process of developing and justifying the reference estimate. For the full procurement context, see What TCU verifies in the procurement of engineering works and services.
SINAPI is the main national reference for the costs of engineering works and services in the situations established by federal legislation, while SICRO is structured for transportation infrastructure. Both are cost systems, not catalogs of real-time commercial offers.
SINAPI’s own methodology emphasizes that its references are broad and generic, so the estimator must assess their suitability to the specific case. In SICRO, the same logic applies to the need to evaluate specific production, transportation, equipment, logistics and market conditions.
This means that correctly using an official reference requires two different questions:
- do the code, composition and input technically represent what will be executed?
- does the reference cost economically represent the project’s purchasing and execution conditions?
The first question concerns technical equivalence. The second concerns economic fit.
Why a reference price may differ from the market
The price observed in a procurement depends on conditions that are not fully incorporated into a reference statistic. Quantity, purchasing strategy, urgency, location, available brand, distribution channel, commercial unit and buyer identification can all influence the negotiation.
TCU’s 2026 Guide summarizes these differences into five effects. They should be read as potential causes of divergence, not as fixed correction percentages.
| Effect | Mechanism | Possible direction |
| Quotation | the buyer chooses among offers and tends to contract at a competitive price | usually lowers the price, but depends on the market |
| Bargaining | volume and negotiating power change the unit price | usually lowers the price for large quantities |
| Brand | formally comparable products may have different performance, positioning and prices | may increase or decrease |
| Public Administration | the supplier may quote differently when it identifies a public-sector purchase | may increase the observed quotation |
| Packaging | the commercial unit surveyed may be incompatible with actual consumption | may increase or decrease |
The direction should not be presumed without evidence for the item being analyzed.
Quotation Effect: a company normally buys at the lowest competitive price
A reference database needs to consolidate market observations according to a statistical methodology. In an actual purchase, a company may consult several suppliers and select a competitive offer below the central value captured by the survey.
This behavior is the Quotation Effect.
Suppose a material is offered by suppliers at R$ 98, R$ 103, R$ 109 and R$ 112 per unit. A statistical reference may lie near the center of the distribution, while a company that actually negotiates the purchase will tend to seek a deal closer to the best available terms.
This does not mean that a public estimate should always adopt the lowest price found. The lowest offer may involve different payment terms, an incompatible brand, freight not included, limited inventory or a different specification.
The correct control is to compare equivalent offers and document the commercial terms.
Bargaining Effect: scale changes the unit price
The Bargaining Effect occurs when purchasing volume increases the buyer’s negotiating power. A project that purchases thousands of units may gain access to manufacturers, large distributors or commercial terms that are not available for small purchases.
TCU Plenary Decision 2,984/2013 is an important reference. The Court established that, for larger projects, the Administration should research the market for economically relevant inputs, preferably observing SINAPI’s territorial basis and considering discounts that may arise from scale.
The same understanding includes an important limit: if the market research shows that scale savings are not available, the SINAPI reference remains valid. Scale therefore cannot be converted into a presumed discount.
The question is factual: what price could a buyer obtain for the quantity actually planned?
Brand Effect: the same description may hide economic differences
Two brands may meet a similar nominal description and still differ in performance, durability, availability, technical support, application productivity or commercial positioning.
This is the Brand Effect.
In input price research, brand should not be used to unduly restrict competition. At the same time, completely ignoring the reality of the products surveyed can create a heterogeneous sample.
The estimator needs to control equivalence:
- technical specification;
- commercial unit and presentation;
- required performance;
- applicable certifications;
- characteristics that affect productivity or consumption;
- freight and regional availability.
The effect may work upward or downward. A premium brand may increase the price; a technically equivalent local brand may reduce it.
Public Administration Effect: the quotation may change when the supplier identifies the buyer
TCU’s Guide associates the Public Administration Effect with the possibility that a supplier may offer a different price when it knows the research is being conducted by a public agency.
An administrative market survey is not necessarily an immediate purchase. The supplier may factor in greater uncertainty about closing the deal, payment timing, formal requirements or an expectation of future negotiation and respond with a margin different from the one offered in a concrete commercial transaction.
TCU Plenary Decision 299/2011 is cited by the Guide as a reference for this phenomenon.
The methodological consequence is relevant: obtaining three formal quotations does not, by itself, guarantee that the survey represents the best price actually achievable. The Administration should analyze dispersion, conditions and offer comparability, especially for items with high economic impact.
Packaging Effect: an inadequate commercial unit distorts the result
An input may be sold as individual units, boxes, reels, bags, drums, pallets or in bulk. The price per equivalent unit changes according to the commercial presentation.
The Packaging Effect occurs when the surveyed unit does not represent the economically normal purchasing format for the project.
Surveying the price of a single unit for an item that will be purchased by the thousands may overstate the cost. In another case, surveying large-volume industrial packaging for a project that consumes only a small quantity may produce an artificially low reference or create unaccounted-for losses.
The effect differs from bargaining. With bargaining, the price changes because of negotiation associated with volume. With packaging, it changes because the commercial product itself is presented differently.
The five effects do not make up a “SINAPI discount”
A dangerous mistake would be to add estimated percentages for Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging and apply the result to the reference table.
These effects are neither independent components nor universal percentages. Some overlap. Others may work in opposite directions. Their intensity depends on the input and the market.
The purpose of the five effects is to guide the investigation:
Any discount, when applicable, must arise from concrete market research.
ABC Curve: where to focus market research
Researching every input with the same level of depth can be costly and inefficient. TCU recommends concentrating effort on economically relevant items.
A ABC Curve of Construction Inputs permite ordenar materiais, mão de obra e equipamentos pelo impacto no custo total. A faixa A concentra os insumos cuja validação tem maior potencial de alterar o valor global.
A targeted research strategy can follow this sequence:
- generate the ABC Curve;
- select the inputs with the greatest materiality;
- identify which of the five effects are plausible for each item;
- define comparable specifications and commercial conditions;
- research the market;
- statistically process the results;
- decide whether to retain the reference or justify an adjustment.
This approach aligns estimating effort with economic risk.
How to conduct comparable market research
A price without commercial terms is not sufficient evidence.
For each relevant quotation, record, where applicable:
- complete technical description;
- brand or equivalency standard;
- quantity;
- unit and packaging;
- delivery location;
- freight;
- included taxes;
- delivery lead time;
- payment terms;
- quotation validity;
- minimum-order requirement;
- supplier and sales channel;
- date of inquiry.
If one offer includes freight and another does not, the figures must be normalized before comparison. The same applies to packaging, taxes and minimum quantities.
A simple average may not be the best treatment
Three quotations should not automatically be converted into an arithmetic mean.
The distribution must be analyzed. A very high price may reflect a supplier with no real commercial interest. A very low value may represent clearance inventory, a specification error or a non-replicable condition.
Depending on the quantity and quality of the data, the treatment may consider:
- median;
- mean after outlier analysis;
- price range;
- coefficient of variation;
- justified exclusion of non-equivalent offers;
- prioritization of actual transactions or more representative sources.
The method should be declared before the result is used to adjust the reference.
When economies of scale should be investigated
TCU Plenary Decision 2,984/2013 specifically addresses larger projects and economically significant inputs. The rationale is to prevent a reference built from general conditions from ignoring discounts that would normally be obtained in a high-volume purchase.
Examples in which scale may justify additional investigation include large volumes of:
- steel;
- cement or concrete;
- pipes;
- cables;
- standardized equipment;
- paving materials and aggregates;
- prefabricated elements;
- materials purchased directly from manufacturers.
Scale may also fail to generate a discount when supply is concentrated, logistics are constrained, the item is scarce or project demand puts pressure on market capacity.
For that reason, the gain must be demonstrated, not presumed.
The local market may move the price away from the reference in either direction
Supplier distance, production capacity, freight, access, seasonality and regional availability affect cost.
In a region with abundant supply, competition may lower prices. In a remote location, logistics may increase them. A project that consumes a significant share of regional capacity may even alter the market itself during execution.
SINAPI’s territorial reference helps align the estimate with the local context, but it does not eliminate every local particularity.
O artigo sobre SINAPI Inputs: prices, codes, collection, state and reference date detalha como interpretar a origem e o recorte das referências antes de compará-las com cotações específicas.
Adjusting a cost composition is different from replacing a price without justification
The need for adjustment may lie in the input price, the consumption coefficient, productivity or the cost composition itself.
TCU’s 2026 Guide states that adjustments to cost compositions may involve adding or removing inputs, changing coefficients and productivity rates, and adapting unit costs, provided they are supported by the design, technical specifications and the specific conditions of the case.
This requires separating the causes.
If the issue is the purchase price, the evidence is predominantly market-based. If the issue is productivity, the execution method, crew, equipment and production conditions must be assessed. If the issue is quantity, the source lies in the design and calculation memorandum.
O conteúdo sobre SINAPI Cost Compositions: how to adjust without triggering an audit finding aprofunda essa distinção.
A cost above SINAPI can also be legitimate
The five effects are often associated with prices below the reference, but that is an incomplete reading. Brand, packaging, logistics, scarcity or a specific condition may drive the actual cost above the system reference.
Decree No. 7,983/2013 allows, under the prescribed conditions, costs above the references when the appropriateness of the adjustments is demonstrated in a technical report prepared by a qualified professional.
In this situation, attaching a higher quotation is not enough. The report must demonstrate why the official benchmark does not adequately represent the item and retain the adjustment record.
O artigo Cost above SINAPI: how to substantiate it under Article 8 of Decree 7,983/2013 detalha a documentação necessária.
The adjustment report should show the before and after
A good practice for any material adjustment is to preserve the original reference.
The report should make it possible to see:
| Stage | Evidence |
| Original reference | code, description, state, reference date and SINAPI/SICRO composition |
| Reason for revision | identified effect or specific condition |
| Data used | quotations, history, design, logistics or productivity |
| Treatment | normalization and statistical analysis |
| Adjusted reference | resulting value or composition |
| Impact | unit and overall effect on the estimate |
| Technical responsibility | professional and applicable responsibility document |
This structure reduces the risk that the final spreadsheet will conceal changes made during estimating.
How to avoid double adjustment
The five effects may overlap.
A quotation obtained directly from a manufacturer for a large volume may already incorporate the Quotation, Bargaining and Packaging effects. Applying a separate “scale discount” afterward would produce a double reduction.
The same care applies to regional prices that already include delivery to the project site: adding another freight component would duplicate the cost.
For each adjustment, ask:
- what phenomenon does the data already capture?
- is another adjustment already addressing the same effect?
- does the final price still correspond to the same specification?
The calculation record should reconcile all components.
The effects should not be used in isolation to calculate damages or overbilling
In execution-stage analysis, the situation is even more sensitive. Knowing that a company might have negotiated a given input below SINAPI does not mean that every difference represents overbilling.
The contracted price involves the cost composition, BDI, productivity, losses, logistics, risks and other conditions of the scope. TCU’s Guide itself warns that negotiation and supply-chain optimization factors require specific analysis when used to quantify concrete impacts.
A análise de overpricing and overbilling precisa preservar comparabilidade e causalidade, e não transformar um efeito comercial em percentual abstrato de dano.
Example: material with a high share in the ABC Curve
Consider a material with a reference cost of R$ 100 per unit and a quantity of 50,000 units. The reference impact is R$ 5 million.
The market research identifies:
- supplier A: R$ 97 for purchases of up to 5,000 units;
- supplier B: R$ 91 for a lot of 50,000, delivery included;
- supplier C: R$ 94 for a lot of 50,000, freight charged separately;
- supplier D: R$ 108 in small-quantity packaging.
It would not be appropriate to calculate a simple average of R$ 97, R$ 91, R$ 94 and R$ 108.
First, quantity, freight and packaging must be normalized. Then, technical equivalence and actual supply capacity must be verified. If B and C represent the project’s conditions, there will be evidence that scale produces a value different from the reference. The final adjustment should reflect this research, not a generic bargaining percentage.
Checklist for validating SINAPI or SICRO prices against the market
Before changing the reference, verify whether:
- the code or input technically corresponds to the scope;
- the state and reference date are correct;
- the item is material in the ABC Curve;
- the actual quantity was provided in the research;
- units and packaging are comparable;
- brands or standards are equivalent;
- freight and delivery location were normalized;
- payment terms are comparable;
- the research considers economies of scale when plausible;
- offers lacking genuine commercial interest were identified;
- outliers were analyzed;
- the statistical method was documented;
- there is no double adjustment between effects;
- the original reference was preserved in the calculation record;
- any higher cost is supported by a technical report;
- the overall impact of the adjustment was calculated;
- technical responsibility is defined.
How A3A Engenharia assesses the fit of reference prices
Cost Engineering should not set “reference table” and “market” against each other as mutually exclusive alternatives. The table provides a reproducible benchmark; specific research verifies whether that benchmark represents the project.
A3A Engenharia structures this process by materiality: official database → ABC Curve → distortion hypotheses → targeted research → data treatment → documented adjustment → overall impact.
O serviço de Cost Engineering for Engineering Works and Services integra quantitativos, composições, preços, BDI e memória de cálculo. Quando a contratação ainda está em planejamento, o Technical Planning for Engineering Procurement conecta a evidência de preço ao projeto, riscos, requisitos e estratégia de licitação.
Final considerations
SINAPI and SICRO are indispensable references, but they do not eliminate the estimator’s work. National systems must represent a wide diversity of scopes and markets; a specific project has its own quantities, location, specifications and purchasing strategy.
The Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging effects help explain why a reference price may differ from an actual transaction. They are not standardized discounts and should not be used as automatic factors.
The technical response is to focus the investigation on the items with the greatest economic impact. When market research does not demonstrate a material difference, the reference is retained. When it does, the adjustment must be reproducible, comparable and documented.
The objective is not to make the estimate look cheaper. It is to ensure that the reference price represents, with sufficient evidence, the conditions under which the project will actually be procured and executed.
Technical references
[1] TRIBUNAL DE CONTAS DA UNIÃO. Cost Engineering in Public Works — A guide of questions and answers. Brasília: TCU, 2026. Item 4.2.4 — Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging effects.
[2] TRIBUNAL DE CONTAS DA UNIÃO. TCU Plenary Decision No. 2,984/2013. Estimates for large-scale works, market research and economies of scale. Available at: [TCU — Decision 2,984/2013](https://pesquisa.apps.tcu.gov.br/documento/publicacao/%2528%2522an%25C3%25A1lise%2520de%2520mercado%2522%2520OU%2520%2522pesquisa%2520de%2520mercado%2522%2520OU%2520%2522prospec%25C3%25A7%25C3%25A3o%2520de%2520mercado%2522%2520OU%2520%25E2%2580%259Clevantamento%2520de%2520mercado%25E2%2580%259D%2529/%2520/DTRELEVANCIA%2520desc/17).
[3] CAIXA ECONÔMICA FEDERAL. SINAPI — National System for Construction Costs and Indices Research. Methodologies, technical documentation and reports. Available at: [CAIXA — SINAPI](https://www.caixa.gov.br/poder-publico/modernizacao-gestao/sinapi/Paginas/default.aspx).
[4] CAIXA ECONÔMICA FEDERAL. SINAPI — Methodologies and Concepts. Brasília, 2026. Available at: [CAIXA — SINAPI Methodologies and Concepts](https://www.caixa.gov.br/Downloads/sinapi-metodologia/Livro_SINAPI_Metodologias_Conceitos.pdf).
[5] BRAZIL. Decree No. 7,983, of April 8, 2013. Rules and criteria for reference estimates of engineering works and services. Available at: [Planalto — Decree No. 7,983/2013](https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2013/decreto/d7983.htm).
[6] DEPARTAMENTO NACIONAL DE INFRAESTRUTURA DE TRANSPORTES. SICRO — Reference Cost System for Works. Available at: [DNIT — SICRO](https://www.gov.br/dnit/pt-br/assuntos/planejamento-e-pesquisa/custos-referenciais/sistemas-de-custos/sicro).
Frequently asked questions
Not necessarily. SINAPI is a reference built according to its own methodology. A specific purchase may differ because of scale, negotiation, brand, packaging, logistics and other market conditions.
TCU’s 2026 Guide organizes five effects: Quotation, Bargaining, Brand, Public Administration and Packaging. They guide the research, but they do not have universal adjustment percentages.
No. Economies of scale must be demonstrated for specific inputs and quantities. TCU Plenary Decision 2,984/2013 recommends research for economically relevant items in larger projects.
Additional research is especially useful for highly material inputs, large volumes or situations where there are indications that the reference does not represent the project’s local or commercial conditions.
The understanding cited by TCU is that, when available economies of scale are not demonstrated in the market, the SINAPI reference may be retained.
Yes, under the circumstances and conditions provided by law. Decree 7,983/2013 allows technically justified adjustments, which must be demonstrated in a report prepared by a qualified professional.
Bargaining results from negotiation and purchasing power associated with volume. Packaging results from the commercial presentation of the product surveyed, such as an individual unit, box, reel or lot.
Not as automatic percentages. Quantifying overpricing or damage requires a comparable and specific analysis that considers cost composition, quantity, commercial conditions, logistics and the other elements of price.
Complementary technical materials
Related solutions
Related services
- Cost Engineering for Engineering Works and Services: quantities, cost compositions, BDI and reference database
- Technical Planning for Engineering Procurement: strategy, requirements, risks and documentation
Main content on the topic
- Reference Estimate and Price Research for Works under Law 14.133: Article 23, SINAPI and SICRO
- ABC Curve of Construction Inputs: how to build, analyze and use it in estimating
- SINAPI Inputs: prices, codes, collection, state, reference date and how to use them in estimating
