WASHINGTON – Today, the United States Trade Representative determined under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 that certain of Brazil’s acts, policies, and practices related to digital trade and electronic payment services; unfair, preferential tariffs; anti-corruption enforcement; intellectual property protection; ethanol market access; and illegal deforestation are unreasonable and burden or restrict U.S. commerce, and are thus actionable under Section 301(b) of the Trade Act.
As a result of this determination, the U.S. Trade Representative has proposed responsive action for public comment, while the United States continues to engage intensively with Brazil to seek resolution of U.S. concerns.
“I launched this Section 301 investigation at President Trump’s direction to address longstanding and pervasive U.S. concerns with certain of Brazil’s trade policies and practices. Over the past year, President Trump and I have had several constructive meetings with President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and his cabinet, which have accelerated in recent weeks,” said Ambassador Jamieson Greer. “However, we continue to have substantial differences in resolving the issues identified in this investigation. I look forward to continuing engagement with the Brazilian Government in advance of the July 15, 2026 statutory deadline for taking responsive action.”
To be assured of consideration, interested persons should submit requests to appear at the hearing, along with a summary of the testimony, by June 22, 2026.
Written comments are due by July 1, 2026.
USTR will hold a hearing about the proposed action on July 6, 2026.
A copy of the Federal Register notice setting out the U.S. Trade Representative’s actionability determination and proposed action is available here.
A docket for comments regarding the investigation will be available here.
A docket for requests to appear at the public hearing to be held in connection with this investigation will be available here.
Background
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (Trade Act), is designed to address unfair foreign practices affecting U.S. commerce. Section 301 may be used to respond to unjustifiable, unreasonable, or discriminatory foreign government practices that burden or restrict U.S. commerce. A Section 301(b) investigation examines whether the acts, policies, or practices are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce.
At the specific direction of the President, on July 15, 2025, the U.S. Trade Representative initiated an investigation under Section 302(b)(1)(a) of the Trade Act regarding the acts, policies, and practices of the Government of Brazil related to digital trade and electronic payment services; unfair, preferential tariffs; anti-corruption enforcement; intellectual property protection; ethanol market access; and illegal deforestation.
Pursuant to Section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Trade Act, USTR provided the public and interested persons with opportunities to present their views through a public comment process and through a public hearing. USTR received testimony of over 30 witnesses and more than 295 comments and rebuttal comments. The U.S. Trade Representative today has determined that certain of Brazil’s acts, policies, and practices are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce, and thus are actionable under Section 301(b)(1) of the Trade Act. The relevant acts, policies, and practices are:
- Digital Trade and Electronic Payment Services: Brazilian courts have issued secret orders directing U.S. social media companies to take down certain political content and to suspend the profiles of U.S. residents, sometimes globally, as well as prohibiting the platforms from disclosing these orders to profile owners. Brazilian courts have also subjected U.S. social media companies to financial liability for failing to comply with these orders by imposing significant fines for non-compliance; restricting their access to assets, accounts, and payment processing systems in Brazil; and in at least one case, by shutting down a site altogether. Brazil also has unfairly disadvantaged U.S. companies engaged in competing electronic payment services, including by policies that favor its national champion.
- Unfair, Preferential Tariffs: Pursuant to partial-scope preferential trade arrangements with Mexico and India—covering sectors in which Mexico and India are advanced, globally competitive producers—Brazil accords lower, preferential tariff treatment to hundreds of Mexican and Indian goods across multiple sectors.
- Anti-Corruption Enforcement: Brazil fails to take sufficient enforcement action to combat bribery and corruption.
- Intellectual Property Protection: Brazil fails to sufficiently enforce its criminal laws and customs regulations to address counterfeit goods; fails to address the unreasonable length of time its authorities take to examine patent applications, particularly biopharmaceutical patents; and fails to carry out consistent and continuous anti-piracy measures.
- Ethanol Market Access: In 2017, Brazil abruptly discontinued its previously balanced tariff treatment of ethanol and has since failed to provide reciprocal tariff treatment for U.S. ethanol exports.
- Illegal Deforestation: Despite having a legal framework for combatting illegal deforestation, Brazil has historically failed to effectively enforce this legal framework, and illegal deforestation persists.
The U.S. Trade Representative has also determined to propose responsive action in this investigation. As set out in the Federal Register notice, the public is invited to provide written comments by July 1, 2026, on the proposed action.
USTR will hold a hearing about the proposed action on July 6, 2026. As set out in the Federal Register notice, interested persons are invited to submit requests to appear at the hearing by June 22.
###
