The Brazilian government, led by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (PT), is expected to sign a contract with a lobby office in the United States to try to negotiate and reverse or soften sanctions and tariffs that were imposed by the White House to the country. The idea is that the office also acts to overthrow Magnitsky Law against Minister Alexandre de Moraes of the Supreme Court (STF).
In the United States, lobby is a law -regulated practice and considered a legitimate form of representation of interests. Its legal base is in the first amendment of the American Constitution, which guarantees the right to “petition to the government to repair complaints”. It is this protection that allows citizens, companies and associations to hire lobbying professionals to directly influence government parliamentarians and government agencies in specific decisions.
According to the dictionary Merriam-Websterthe word lobby it was used because in the past people approached American politicians in the entrances and corridors of assemblies (called lobbyin English) to try to influence decisions. A popular legend, quoted by the dictionary, states that the term would have emerged at the Willard Hotel in Washington, where the then 18th US President Ulysses S. Grant was sought by people interested in pressing him. However, the dictionary himself notes that the use of the word already existed before this episode.
Basically lobbying works in the US as an organized activity in which interest groups, companies or associations hire specialized professionals to influence political decisions. These representatives, in turn, act directly with parliamentarians, members of the government and regulatory agencies, presenting arguments, data and proposals that benefit their customers.
According to data from the Investopedia website, by 2024 US lobby spending reached a record of $ 4.4 billion, which shows how much this activity is consolidated in the American political process. The legislation that regulates the practice of lobbying in the US is the 1995 lobbying disclosure ACT. This legislation defines who can act as a lobbyist, requires the public registration of the activity and establishes limits to prevent the practice from being confined to bribes. It is based on this regulation that lobby offices guarantee direct access to government parliamentarians and agencies.
Several sectors in the United States resort to the lobby to defend their interests. One of the best known examples, according to investment, is the National Rifle Association (NRA), which uses this practice to maintain the constitutional right to carry weapons and block bill proposals that seek to restrict it. The Association operates in Washington and several states, directly influencing parliamentarians and governments. According to Investopedia, in 2023 NRA allocated about $ 2.3 million to its activities in Congress. Another prominent case is the National Association of Realtors, linked to the real estate market, which was the largest investor in 2024, with over $ 86 million applied to lobby.
Lobby should not overthrow magnitsky sanctions, but can make dialogue possible
Leonardo Roesler, a lawyer who specializes in Business Law and partner at RCA Advogados, points out that the US lobby should be treated as an additional instrument that can be worked alongside traditional diplomacy, to try to expand communication channels with strategic sectors of the US politics and economy.
Roesler estimates that lobbying in the US may even serve to soften commercial measures such as existing commercial tariffs and barriers, mobilizing parliamentarians and business groups sensitive to the consequences of these measures. However, the jurist stressed that the practice of lobbying in cases of political or legal sanctions – such as those provided for in Magnitsky law, applied against Alexandre de Moraes – tends to be limited efficacy, as the reversal of this type of measure depends on decisions made at higher instances of the US government.
“The lobby can serve as a tool for mitigating damage and clarification of misconceptions, but does not guarantee absolute results,” he said in an interview with Gazeta do Povo.
Despite recognizing the usefulness of the lobby as a complementary instrument, Roesler points out that the Lula government faces additional challenges in the United States, especially for the resistance of conservative Trump sectors. According to him, the simple hiring of a lobby office, if not carefully articulated, will hardly have an impact on political perceptions already consolidated in the White House.
“In rooted ideological and partisan contexts, the simple hiring of a firm of influence will hardly be sufficient to change already crystallized political perceptions or positions. In such cases, lobby work needs to be carefully articulated, aimed at strategic interlocutors and performed at timely times, functioning as part of a broader effort of diplomatic and political repositioning,” Roesler said.
The lawyer also warns of image risks, as hiring a lobby office can be seen as a sign of dependence, generate internal criticism and associate Brazil with external pressure group interests.
In turn, the economist and international relations specialist, Igor Lucena, evaluates that Brazil has even taken time to resort to lobbying offices in Washington, a practice that, according to him, is already consolidated by other countries. The analyst understands that Brazil’s US lobby will hardly have the strength to soften sanctions already imposed, but may end up being useful to open some negotiation channels before new tariffs or barriers are implemented.
Lucena warned, however, that the real effectiveness of this measure will depend exclusively on the Brazilian government’s stance on Donald Trump’s government.
“President Lula’s attitudes do not favor the performance of an office or the opening of a negotiation channel, as he openly criticizes President Donald Trump. […] I believe a lobby office could only have an effect if there was an alignment, noting that the lobby involves political, technical and economic aspects, and depends on less hostile actions by the Brazilian government over the American. Otherwise it would be, among quotes, “money thrown away,” he said in an interview with Gazeta do Povo.
