6 commercial practices that Trump wants to investigate in Brazil

In a climb of commercial tensions, the United States launched on Tuesday (15) a commercial investigation against Brazil, by order of President Donald Trump, to investigate a series of commercial practices considered “irrational or discriminatory”. The investigation should cover areas such as digital trade and payment services, such as Pix, as well as combating corruption, ethanol and illegal deforestation.

This measure occurs after Trump’s announcement of imposing 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports from August 1, 2025, and after NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte warned that Brazil and other Russian business partners can be strongly hit by US secondary tariffs if no agreement is reached to stop the war in Ukraine.

The investigation announced on Tuesday is being done by the US Commercial Representative’s office (USTR), under the parameters of section 301 of the 1974 Commerce Law, which was created to respond to “discriminatory” foreign practices that affect US trade. If practices are considered unfair, the US may impose corrective measures, which include fares and non -tariff measures.

USTR’s investigation will focus on six main areas. See below.

1. Actions against social networks and pix

The US claims that Brazil adopts shares that can undermine the competitiveness of US companies in the digital trade and electronic payment services. This includes, according to them, the decision of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) to blame social networks, such as X and Instagram, by user publications, which could lead to preventive content removal and increase the economic risk to US companies.

The USTR document repeated what Trump had already said to Lula: that Brazilian courts issued secret orders for American companies to censor thousands of posts and disable dozens of profiles from political critics, including US citizens. The refusal to comply with these orders has resulted in substantial fines, suspension of platforms in Brazil and threats from prison or criminal proceedings to US executives.

There are also concerns about “excessively broad” restrictions on the transfer of personal data outside Brazil, which, according to US authorities, can prevent safe data processing on US servers.

USTR specifically points out that Brazil “seems to be involved in a series of unfair practices regarding electronic payment services, including, among others, the promotion of its electronic payment services developed by the government”, suggesting that Pix would be harming American companies such as Visa and Mastercard.

2. “Unfair” rates

The US claims that Brazil grants preferential tariff treatment to certain large business partners, such as India and Mexico, while Americans are disadvantaged by the application of higher tariffs. They claim that Brazil applies an average rate of 12.2% to exports, higher than 3.3% applied by the US.

In 2023, USTR argues, Brazil imported about US $ 5.5 billion with preferred tariffs from other commercial partners, including nearly $ 1.7 billion in motor vehicles and mexico parts with zero fare, while the same US products were subject to rates of 14% to 35%. According to the US, this prevents fair conditions for US exports.

3. Fighting corruption

The US also points out that there has been a weakening of anti -corruption efforts in Brazil, citing “opaque agreements” to grant leniency to companies involved in corruption and conflicts of interest in judicial decisions.

USTR mentions that “a notorious case of public officials and money laundering had sentences annulled by a Federal Supreme Court minister”, in reference to decisions of Minister Dias Toffoli, who nullified Lava Jato’s evidence and actions against Odebrecht and several politicians and entrepreneurs involved in the corruption scandal known as “oil”.

The US points out that the lack of anti -corruption measures and the lack of transparency in Brazil can harm American companies operating in commerce and investments in the country.

4. Intellectual property and March 25

The US says that Brazil fails to effectively combat imports, distribution, sale and widespread use of counterfeit products and illicit streaming devices. They cite 25 March Street in Sao Paulo as a large counterfeit market market.

They also complain about the delay in patent requests: almost 7 years on average, and 9.5 years for pharmaceutical patents.

5. Access to the ethanol market

The US complains of higher rates on Brazilian ethanol and a commercial imbalance, after Brazil abandoned almost tax exemption treatment that benefited both countries.

Brazil and the US are the largest worldwide producers of ethanol. Between 2010 and 2017, the countries established a bilateral ethanol trade practically tariff -free. However, from September 2017, Brazil abandoned this approach, according to USTR, imposing a tariff quota of 600 million liters per year with a rate for excess volume, which was already 20% and is currently 16%.

As a result, the US says, the ethanol exports of Americans to Brazil, which reached the $ 761 million peak in 2018, dropped dramatically to $ 140,000 by 2023. According to the US, this would have generated a significant disadvantage for American producers.

6. ILLEGAL DEFORTATION

The US claims that Brazil does not apply its environmental laws effectively and this has contributed to illegal deforestation. According to Americans, the use of illegally deforested land for agricultural production offers an unfair competitive advantage by reducing costs.

Brazil is a big US competitor in global agricultural sales sales and USTR says agricultural products produced in illegally deforested land may continue to compete with US products.

In addition, they point out that reports suggest significant levels of illegal wood extraction, with more than one third of Amazonian wood being of illegal origin. Americans say in the document that illegal wood entry into the US market at lower prices creates a unfair advantage over American products produced legally.

Next Steps

After opening the investigation, USTR listened to committees and requested conversations with the Brazilian government. A public hearing is scheduled for September 3, with a deadline for public comments until August 18.

The American office should determine whether investigated practices violate US business rules. If the determination is affirmative, the US commercial representative will determine whether and what action to take. Actions may include tariff and non-tax measures, such as cutting commercial benefits, import prohibitions and the total withdrawal of market goods.

Although section 301 has no jurisdiction to punish individuals, other laws, such as magnitsky law, can be combined in processes to sanction individuals or authorities if their conduct is considered illegal.