Brazilian Portuguese displays a cluster of apparently unrelated properties that set it aside within Romance. On the one hand, it has lost its third person possessive pronouns (cf. Oliveira e Silva 1985, Perini 1985, Cerqueira 1996, and Müller 1996), its third person accusative and dative clitics (cf. Omena 1978, Duarte 1986, Galves 1987, Kato 1993, Nunes 1993, Cyrino 1997, and Berlinck 2006), and its null subjects and null possessors have become severely restricted (cf. Duarte 1995, Figueiredo Silva 1996, Kato 1999, Ferreira 2000, Modesto 2000, Galves 2001, Floripi 2003, and Rodrigues 2004). On the other hand, it came to allow hyper-raising constructions (cf. Ferreira 2000 and Nunes 2020b), as well as the so-called ‘topic subject’ constructions, where a putative topic controls verbal agreement (cf. Pontes 1987, Galves 1987, Nunes 2017, and Kato and Ordóñez 2019). Moreover, it makes a pervasive use of preposition deletion in relative clauses (cf. Tarallo 1983) and its directional verbs came to select the preposition em ‘in’ instead of a ‘to’ (cf. Wiedemer 2013). In this paper, I argue that these and other seemingly independent changes can be accounted for if there is a general process of underspecification affecting phases in Brazilian Portuguese.