Porto Sudeste, in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro, is seen as an attractive asset, but iron ore volumes remain below capacity — Foto: Divulgação
Porto Sudeste, in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro, is seen as an attractive asset, but iron ore volumes remain below capacity — Photo: Divulgação

Vale is exploring a structure that would allow it to support a bid for Porto Sudeste, in Rio de Janeiro state, without making a direct cash investment in the acquisition, Valor has learned.

One option under consideration is a long-term take-or-pay agreement under which the Brazilian mining giant would guarantee minimum iron ore volumes for the terminal even if it did not fully use the capacity it contracted.

Such a commitment would give Porto Sudeste greater revenue visibility, helping the prospective buyer value and finance the acquisition. The arrangement could also reduce potential antitrust concerns because Vale already operates port infrastructure in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro.

Under the structure being discussed, Vale would back the bid led by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), the infrastructure manager controlled by BlackRock, and Brazilian steelmaker Gerdau, without necessarily taking an equity stake in the terminal. No final structure has been agreed, and the volumes and duration of a potential contract remain under negotiation, people familiar with the talks said.

Vale initially participated directly in the consortium with GIP and Gerdau, which submitted one of two binding bids for Porto Sudeste.

The other offer came from U.S. infrastructure investor I Squared Capital, which has sought to acquire port assets in Brazil in recent years without success. Its previous targets included Wilson Sons and CLI, or Corredor Logística e Infraestrutura. I Squared already owns energy and data-center assets in Brazil.

Antitrust concerns

Vale’s potential equity participation in Porto Sudeste has raised concerns among rivals and questions over the competition implications of the transaction, people close to the discussions said.

The Brazilian miner already controls significant port infrastructure for iron ore exports in Rio de Janeiro through the Ilha Guaíba Terminal and the Companhia Portuária Baía de Sepetiba terminal.

Against that backdrop, participants in the sale process have been assessing whether Vale’s acquisition of another terminal could draw scrutiny from Brazil’s antitrust watchdog, Cade.

Porto Sudeste serves iron ore producers in Minas Gerais, including companies without their own export infrastructure, and provides an alternative to terminals vertically integrated with large mining groups.

Replacing an equity investment with a take-or-pay contract could reduce the competition risks associated with Vale taking a direct stake in Porto Sudeste. Even that arrangement, however, could still face Cade review depending on the length of the agreement, the volumes reserved for Vale and its impact on access for other miners.

One person familiar with the matter said that if the volume guaranteed to Vale were large enough, the competitive impact could effectively be the same as if the company held an equity stake.

Itaguaí precedent

The debate echoes the controversy surrounding ITG-02, a new iron ore terminal at the Port of Itaguaí in the same region of Rio de Janeiro.

The site is known as the “Área do Meio,” or “Middle Area,” because it lies between terminals operated by Vale and CSN. Smaller miners that relied on vertically integrated infrastructure to ship their output had argued that the area should be made available to them.

Brazil’s waterways regulator, Antaq, had proposed restricting the participation of certain companies in the auction. In 2024, however, the Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) ruled that such a restriction would require a prior opinion from Cade.

The limitation was removed, and the antitrust authority ultimately did not issue a ruling on the matter. Vale and CSN did not take part in the auction, which was won by Cedro Participações, the only bidder.

Port capacity

Located in Itaguaí, Porto Sudeste can handle about 50 million tonnes a year and is licensed for a future expansion to 100 million tonnes.

The terminal handled a record 27.8 million tonnes in 2025, up from 21.9 million tonnes a year earlier. Part of its unused capacity could be filled by a future agreement with Vale.

Mubadala Capital and commodities trader Trafigura have been discussing a sale of the asset since at least 2024. The process also includes Mineração Morro do Ipê, owner of the Ipê and Tico-Tico mines in Minas Gerais. The sellers aim to complete the transaction this year.

Industry sources describe Porto Sudeste as an attractive asset, citing strong long-term demand potential and dollar-denominated revenue.

Still, they point to its current dependence on iron ore shipments, Morro do Ipê’s importance in filling the terminal and volumes that have fallen short of earlier expectations as drawbacks.

Earnings pressure

More recently, the company reported weaker-than-expected results that still require further explanation, market sources said.

Porto Sudeste do Brasil posted net revenue of R$2.7 billion in the first half of this year, down 22% from a year earlier. Its loss widened to R$1.4 billion from R$285 million in the same period last year.

Stonepeak, which had been evaluating the acquisition alongside Australia’s M Resources, has dropped out of the process and did not submit a binding bid. Its withdrawal has already been formally communicated to the sellers.

A person close to the transaction said the infrastructure manager had not been viewed as one of the leading contenders for the asset.

Asked for comment, Vale reiterated a statement released on April 30 saying it evaluates investment opportunities in the ordinary course of business in line with its strategic priorities.

The company added that capital-allocation decisions go through a rigorous assessment process and follow its policies and governance rules. Vale also said it would keep the market informed of any material developments arising from such opportunities or related to its business.

Mubadala, Trafigura and I Squared declined to comment.

*By Fernanda Guimarães and Taís Hirata — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

Caroline Freund — Foto: Divulgação
Caroline Freund — Photo: Divulgação

The inclusion of Brazil on a list of countries that the United States accuses of helping China evade tariffs imposed by the White House on the Asian giant is another move with shaky grounds in an aggressive U.S. foreign policy toward Latin American governments in general and Brasília in particular.

This month, the White House published a report on what it considers the growing challenge of “illegal transshipment,” particularly of Chinese goods, through third countries. The document lists and classifies 40 countries accused of engaging in the practice.

Brazil was placed in Tier 2, or “Scale Leaders,” defined as countries with significant economic integration with China. The group also includes Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey, and Vietnam.

According to the White House, these countries combine significant illegal transshipment volumes with deeper integration into China-linked supply chains, input sourcing, manufacturing platforms, logistics systems, or regional rerouting channels.

“These countries possess sufficient industrial scale, port capacity, supplier infrastructure, manufacturing depth, or logistics capacity to move significant volumes of China-linked goods into U.S.-bound trade flows,” the report says.

Brazil and Turkey, specifically, are described by the White House as larger regional production and logistics platforms capable of supporting rerouting or transformation operations in selected product categories. The report provides no examples.

Brazil is also cited, along with Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Peru, as part of a “Latin American corridor” for illegal transshipment.

Experts say the triangulation of Chinese goods is not a new issue. With the U.S. tariff offensive against China, they say, it is possible that Chinese companies are seeking other countries to access the U.S. market at lower cost. But the argument makes more sense for neighboring Vietnam, for example, than for Brazil.

Brazil, they point out, is the second-most heavily tariffed country by the U.S., behind China itself and tied with Turkey, making it far from an ideal location for transshipment.

Valor analysis comparing products that Brazil imports from China with those it sells to the U.S. shows that the “common trade” among the three countries accounts for a relatively small share of Brazil’s exports to the U.S., representing less than 6% of the total.

The White House report cites a series of studies estimating the cost of transshipment to the U.S. Treasury. One study, by the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), estimates potential illegal transshipment in 2025 at between $34.2 billion and $89.6 billion.

The CEA calculation uses a methodology developed by Caroline Freund, director of the University of California San Diego’s School of Global Policy and Strategy and an international trade specialist, in a study titled “The China Wash: Tracking Products to Identify Tariff Evasion Through Transshipment.”

Freund’s research, however, does not cite Brazil. She told Valor that the country makes little sense as a hub for transshipping Chinese goods to the U.S. for three reasons. One is that U.S. tariffs on goods manufactured in Brazil are high, while Brazil’s own import tariffs also tend to be high.

“It would be difficult to gain a tariff advantage through transshipment via Brazil. In other words, the purpose of transshipment is precisely to avoid tariffs, but Brazil’s high import tariffs, combined with high U.S. tariffs on Brazilian products, make that impossible,” she said.

The second reason is that Brazil is not a convenient option from a transportation and logistics standpoint. “A route that went through China and Brazil would be costly, as Brazil is not on the way,” Freund said.

Finally, she notes that Brazil is not a major exporter of manufactured goods.

“In line with that, U.S. imports from Brazil declined between 2024 and 2025,” Freund said. On the Brazilian side, exports to the U.S. fell nearly 7% year over year, according to data from Brazil’s Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade, and Services (MDIC).

However, analysts unanimously agree that President Donald Trump’s tariff policy—motivated, at least in part, by U.S. irritation over China’s presence and trade partnerships in Latin America—is in fact pushing Brazil toward Asia.

“Brazilian banks and officials will do what is needed to preserve the country’s access to the U.S. financial system. But the current trajectory raises the odds that, over time, more Brazilian firms will prefer a counterparty with nothing at stake in that system—a Chinese supplier, bank, or financier,” James Story and Ricardo Zúniga wrote for the Atlantic Council think tank.

They are referring not only to the U.S. tariff campaign against Brazil but also to the U.S. approach to security in Latin America.

Also this month, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the U.S. military is preparing to conduct operations in the territory of allied countries to combat drug-trafficking organizations in Latin America. According to him, groups designated as terrorist organizations, together with partner governments, will be legitimate targets of the United States government.

The statement sparked uncertainty in the Brazilian press, as the U.S. government has officially designated the Brazilian criminal groups Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and Comando Vermelho (CV) as terrorist organizations, but the designation has not been recognized by the Brazilian government, nor has any bilateral cooperation agreement been signed to combat the groups. The Defense Department did not respond to requests for clarification about Hegseth’s remarks and their implications for Brazil.

“Coercion is rarely successful with Brazil. Each measure meant to remedy a problem the [U.S.] administration has identified in Brazil instead reinforces the perception that the safer long-term bet is to lean less on the United States,” Story and Zúniga wrote.

Story was a U.S. Foreign Service officer in Brazil, while Zúniga served as U.S. consul general in São Paulo and as principal deputy assistant secretary in the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs. That branch of the U.S. State Department, which covers Latin America, has just received a new leader with the appointment of Republican billionaire businessman Juan Pablo Segura.

Some analysts believe that appointing a permanent head to a senior position that had remained under an acting official since 2025 could help improve communication between public- and private-sector players in Brazil and the U.S. But Segura has also previously made strong public criticisms of Brazil, particularly of Federal Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes.

“Beijing brings its own hazards and opacity, yet Washington is increasingly seen as the more erratic and unreliable partner,” Story and Zúniga wrote.

*By Anaïs Fernandes and Álvaro Fagundes — Washington and São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

Braskem is working to restructure its finances amid mounting pressures — Foto: Edilson Dantas/O Globo
Braskem is working to restructure its finances amid mounting pressures — Photo: Edilson Dantas/O Globo

Braskem, one of the world’s ten largest petrochemical companies, filed Monday (24) for court approval of an out-of-court restructuring aimed at overhauling $10.9 billion in financial debt, equivalent to R$56.5 billion at current exchange rates.

Talks between the company and creditors stretched into Sunday night as a 60-day injunction protecting Braskem from debt collection and enforcement actions approached its expiration. The filing gives the petrochemical producer more time to develop a plan capable of winning support from a majority of the claims included in the restructuring.

Braskem has secured backing from holders of 39.6% of the financial debt covered by the proceeding, although that does not mean creditors have agreed to all terms of a potential restructuring. As Valor reported, there is still no formal written plan, despite progress on some issues. The company will use the next 90 days to flesh out the proposal and seek the required support of more than 50% of the claims.

Although the out-of-court restructuring filing had been widely expected, Braskem shares fell 6.7% on B3 to R$4.73 on Monday, their lowest level in 17 years. Following the filing, B3 removed the stock from its indices.

Capital options

One of the commitments reached so far calls for controlling shareholders IG4 Capital and state-controlled oil company Petrobras to provide funding if certain milestones are not met.

In that context, one option under discussion is for Braskem to tap the capital markets in the future if its financial metrics deteriorate, people familiar with the negotiations said. A follow-on share offering, potentially open to the controlling and minority shareholders as well, is the majority shareholders’ preferred route for raising capital.

A group of creditors, however, continues to press for a direct capital injection from Petrobras and IG4, which would provide funds more quickly.

The shareholders’ agreement between the asset manager and oil giant calls for Braskem eventually to become a widely held corporation with no defined controlling shareholder, with its shares listed on B3’s Novo Mercado, a stricter corporate-governance listing segment.

Debt terms

The out-of-court restructuring gives Braskem another 90-day standstill on payments of financial obligations. During that period, the company is expected to submit its operational turnaround plan and provide further details on the financial restructuring.

The basic terms agreed with creditors call for extending debt maturities and introducing a grace period for interest payments, although the parties have yet to settle the length of the extensions, interest rates or any potential haircut. The original proposal envisaged a five-year grace period on principal payments and 2.5 years on interest.

In return, creditors have requested guardrails that could include restrictions on dividend payments and limits on mergers and acquisitions and asset sales. The terms of those restrictions and how long they would remain in force are also still being negotiated.

Court protection

Braskem turned to an out-of-court restructuring after the injunction shielding it from enforcement actions for 60 days expired Monday.

The plan covers only unsecured financial claims and excludes obligations to customers, suppliers, distributors and other commercial partners. The company said the measure is intended to ensure consistent treatment of financial liabilities and prevent individual creditors from being paid on terms different from those established under the restructuring.

The proceeding includes Braskem and five overseas entities used by the group for funding and financial management: Braskem Netherlands, Braskem Netherlands Inc., Braskem Trading & Shipping, Braskem Netherlands Finance and Braskem America Finance.

The proceeding has been assigned a value of R$187.07 billion, although most of that amount consists of obligations among companies within the group. Intercompany claims total R$130.6 billion. They will be restructured but will not count toward the approval threshold.

Braskem has also asked the court to prevent banks from setting off claims covered by the restructuring against funds the company holds in bank accounts. Contractual provisions could allow banks to seize more than R$400 million, the company said.

In its filing, Braskem said such a withdrawal would “irreversibly” undermine its restructuring efforts and deprive it of funds needed to pay employees, suppliers and other essential expenses.

Liquidity needs

Braskem’s assessment is that it does not currently need to take on new debt, but rather extend the maturities of its existing obligations, people familiar with the matter said.

The company views its financial problem as being concentrated more in the timing of debt payments than in any immediate need to add new borrowing to its capital structure.

Negotiations are being conducted with the support of Makalu and Lazard, which advise Braskem. Petrobras is advised by BR Partners and became more directly involved in the talks during the final stages. IG4 is advised by RK Partners.

Commercial support

Petrobras is also discussing ways to provide commercial support to Braskem. One possibility would be to give the petrochemical company more time to pay for naphtha and natural gas supplied by Petrobras, which Braskem currently purchases for immediate payment.

Suppliers in the Middle East, for example, accept letter-of-credit arrangements that can defer the actual cash outflow by as much as six months.

Braskem said Monday that it is negotiating with Petrobras to increase a R$2.35 billion credit limit. The facility is intended for raw-material purchases and provides 30-day payment terms.

Financial pressure

Braskem’s financial deterioration stems mainly from the combination of heavy spending to address the geological damage linked to its former rock-salt mining operations in Maceió, capital of Alagoas state, and the prolonged downturn in the global petrochemical industry.

Including funds already spent and amounts provisioned, the Maceió-related bill is around R$20 billion.

At the same time, the global petrochemical slump has persisted amid excess supply, particularly from China and the United States.

IG4 and Braskem declined to comment. Petrobras did not immediately respond to requests for an interview.

(Felipe Laurence and Adriana Peraita contributed reporting.)

*By Stella Fontes and Fernanda Guimarães — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

As famílias que recorrem ao inventário extrajudicial, aquele feito em cartório para realizar a partilha consensual de bens deixados por uma pessoa falecida, não precisarão mais recolher antecipadamente o Imposto sobre Transmissão Causa Mortis e Doação (ITCMD) para concluir a escritura pública. A decisão, adotada em sessão do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ) realizada nesta terça-feira (18), atende a requerimento feito pelo Colégio Notarial do Brasil — Conselho Federal (CNB/CF).  

 

 

 

 

 

21.08.2026

Você está visualizando atualmente Inventário extrajudicial não exigirá mais pagamento prévio de imposto sobre transmissão 

12ª Sessão Ordinária de 2026 / Foto: Pedro França/CNJ

 

A entidade representativa da categoria pretendia três alterações da Resolução CNJ n. 35/2007, que disciplina a lavratura dos atos notariais relacionados a inventário, partilha, separação consensual, divórcio consensual e extinção consensual de união estável por via administrativa. Uma foi deferida pelo Plenário e duas indeferidas.  

Por unanimidade, o colegiado do CNJ seguiu integralmente o voto do relator e corregedor nacional de justiça, ministro Mauro Campbell, que considerou pertinente, na questão do ITCMD, a solicitação realizada pelos notários. No artigo 15, a resolução dizia que “o recolhimento dos tributos incidentes deve anteceder a lavratura da escritura” — trecho revogado por ato normativo na 12ª Sessão Ordinária do CNJ.  

Foi rejeitado o pedido que pretendia uma alteração do artigo 12-B, V, da resolução pela qual estaria dispensada prévia decisão judicial para inventários extrajudiciais que incluam testamentos revogados. A alteração não aprovada valeria também para os caducos, ou seja, testamentos que perdem a eficácia de suas disposições devido a fatos supervenientes que impedem sua execução. O Colégio Notarial pretendia ainda alterar o art. 34 da resolução, para possibilitar a lavratura de Escritura Pública de Divórcio Consensual ou Dissolução de União Estável com partilha de bens, mesmo com filhos menores ou incapazes.  

Diante da não aprovação dessas duas questões, segue valendo a redação que condiciona a formalização do ato cartorário à demonstração do trânsito em julgado da sentença judicial que tiver resolvido as questões relacionadas a guarda, visita e alimentos de menores.  

Celeridade e gestão fiscal 

Pela proposta de resolução apresentada pelo relator, a lavratura de escritura de inventário e partilha extrajudicial ficou descondicionada do pagamento prévio do ITCMD. O relator considerou que o requerimento do CNB/CF vai ao encontro de decisões anteriores do Plenário em matéria tributária. 

“A solução que se impõe é a mesma já adotada por este Conselho em casos análogos, ou seja, os tabeliões de notas de todo o país devem, sim, ser orientados a não mais negar a lavratura de escrituras de inventário com base na ausência de Certidão Negativa de Débito ou prévio recolhimento de ITCMD”, comparou. 

Positivo ou negativo 

Com relação às Certidões Negativas de Débitos, continua cabendo ao tabelião a solicitação desses documentos, sendo eles negativos ou positivos, fazendo constar do ato notarial a informação sobre a existência de eventuais dívidas, para segurança das partes.  

“Esta abordagem preserva a autonomia privada dos herdeiros, cumpre o dever de informação e segurança jurídica do tabelião e, ao mesmo tempo, respeita a vedação às sanções políticas, mantendo a cobrança dos créditos tributários nos trilhos do devido processo legal, que é a execução fiscal”, explicou o corregedor.  

No caso do ITCMD, segundo a análise do ministro Campbell, a futura cobrança do imposto estará garantida mediante a consignação na escritura de declaração expressa das partes sobre a ciência da obrigação tributária, ainda a ser quitada, e a comunicação do ato notarial à Fazenda estadual.  

“Tal medida equilibra a celeridade com a responsabilidade fiscal, evitando que a desjudicialização se torne vetor de insegurança para o erário público”, considerou.  

Pedido de Providências n. 0008622-24.2025.2.00.0000. 

Texto: Mariana Mainenti 
Edição: Beatriz Borges e Waleiska Fernandes 
Revisão: Caroline Zanetti
Fonte: Agência CNJ de Notícias

 

 

 

Gol believes American Airlines and United could end up coordinating with Azul in the Brazilian market — Photo: Divulgação/Azul

Abra, the holding company for Gol and Avianca, filed an administrative appeal on Tuesday (18) with Brazil’s antitrust watchdog, the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (Cade), challenging the unconditional approval of American Airlines’s investment in Azul.

Approval had been granted on July 31 by Cade’s General Superintendence (SG). In the filing, Abra cited risk of coordination among competitors, plus a window for exchanging sensitive information and a possible loss of Azul’s independence.

Abra’s decision to challenge the deal had been reported by Valor on August 14. Abra was admitted as an interested third party in the proceeding, which gives it the right to appeal the SG’s decision to the Tribunal. In fact, the deadline for the appeal was Wednesday (19). The tribunal will now review the matter, and if the appeal is accepted, it would likely further delay American Airlines’ possible investment in the Brazilian carrier. There is also a risk that the antitrust agency could demand remedies, which could even make the deal unviable.

As part of Azul’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S., American and United decided to invest $100 million each in the Brazilian airline. United’s investment, as an airline that was already an Azul shareholder, was approved by the Cade this past February. More recently, the SG had also approved American’s investment.

Abra is among the deal’s fiercest critics, saying American will have powers similar to those of a controlling shareholder at Azul, especially given the creation of the airline’s strategic committee, which includes representatives from both American and United Airlines.

American, for its part, is a longtime partner of Gol and once held a 5% stake in the Brazilian airline before being diluted in its restructuring.

“The transaction creates a scenario in which the incentives for independent competition among American Airlines, United Airlines, and Azul may be materially reduced, raising the likelihood of coordination or competitive accommodation in scheduled air transport between Brazil and the United States. The reduction in competitive incentives can occur both directly–through diminished incentives for AA, UA, and Azul to compete aggressively with one another–and indirectly, through greater strategic interdependence between AA and UA themselves, resulting from their simultaneous participation in Azul’s governance,” Abra’s legal team said in a statement, citing two technical opinions on the matter signed by professors Carlos Emmanuel Joppert Ragazzo and Guilherme Mendes Resende.

The holding company also noted that United Airlines is already Azul’s second-largest shareholder, with roughly an 8.6% stake—the largest shareholder holds about 8.7% and is an asset manager. Abra further noted that, with the exception of United—and American Airlines, should the deal go through—all of Azul’s other individual shareholders with stakes above 5% are currently investment funds and/or institutional investors. That type of investor, the holding company argued, may have different investment horizons and incentives, and could seek to adjust or reduce their stakes over time.

“In other words, over the medium term, American Airlines’s and United Airlines’s equity stakes in Azul will tend to become even more significant and representative. In fact, American Airlines’s and United Airlines’s combined stake could reach around 19%, positioning those competitors as Azul’s principal reference shareholders,” Abra stated in the filing, signed by the law firms Alexandre Cordeiro Advocacia and Caminati Bueno Advogados.

On the 13th, the Institute for Research and Studies on Society and Consumption (IPSConsumo) asked Cade’s Tribunal to take up and deepen its review of American Airlines’ investment in Azul’s capital.

“The Tribunal has already shown that it understands the complexity of this arrangement and its possible negative effects on the Brazilian market, particularly on routes between Brazil and the U.S. We trust the panel will deepen its analysis and assess, with the necessary caution, measures capable of preserving rivalry among competing companies,” wrote IPSConsumo’s president and former National Secretary for Consumer Affairs, Juliana Pereira. IPSConsumo was denied status as an interested third party in the case by Cade’s SG.

Azul did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

*By Cristian Favaro — São Paulo
Source: Valor international
https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

Porto Sudeste, in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro, is seen as an attractive asset, but iron ore volumes remain below capacity — Foto: Divulgação
Porto Sudeste, in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro, is seen as an attractive asset, but iron ore volumes remain below capacity — Photo: Divulgação

Vale is exploring a structure that would allow it to support a bid for Porto Sudeste, in Rio de Janeiro state, without making a direct cash investment in the acquisition, Valor has learned.

One option under consideration is a long-term take-or-pay agreement under which the Brazilian mining giant would guarantee minimum iron ore volumes for the terminal even if it did not fully use the capacity it contracted.

Such a commitment would give Porto Sudeste greater revenue visibility, helping the prospective buyer value and finance the acquisition. The arrangement could also reduce potential antitrust concerns because Vale already operates port infrastructure in Itaguaí, Rio de Janeiro.

Under the structure being discussed, Vale would back the bid led by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), the infrastructure manager controlled by BlackRock, and Brazilian steelmaker Gerdau, without necessarily taking an equity stake in the terminal. No final structure has been agreed, and the volumes and duration of a potential contract remain under negotiation, people familiar with the talks said.

Vale initially participated directly in the consortium with GIP and Gerdau, which submitted one of two binding bids for Porto Sudeste.

The other offer came from U.S. infrastructure investor I Squared Capital, which has sought to acquire port assets in Brazil in recent years without success. Its previous targets included Wilson Sons and CLI, or Corredor Logística e Infraestrutura. I Squared already owns energy and data-center assets in Brazil.

Antitrust concerns

Vale’s potential equity participation in Porto Sudeste has raised concerns among rivals and questions over the competition implications of the transaction, people close to the discussions said.

The Brazilian miner already controls significant port infrastructure for iron ore exports in Rio de Janeiro through the Ilha Guaíba Terminal and the Companhia Portuária Baía de Sepetiba terminal.

Against that backdrop, participants in the sale process have been assessing whether Vale’s acquisition of another terminal could draw scrutiny from Brazil’s antitrust watchdog, Cade.

Porto Sudeste serves iron ore producers in Minas Gerais, including companies without their own export infrastructure, and provides an alternative to terminals vertically integrated with large mining groups.

Replacing an equity investment with a take-or-pay contract could reduce the competition risks associated with Vale taking a direct stake in Porto Sudeste. Even that arrangement, however, could still face Cade review depending on the length of the agreement, the volumes reserved for Vale and its impact on access for other miners.

One person familiar with the matter said that if the volume guaranteed to Vale were large enough, the competitive impact could effectively be the same as if the company held an equity stake.

Itaguaí precedent

The debate echoes the controversy surrounding ITG-02, a new iron ore terminal at the Port of Itaguaí in the same region of Rio de Janeiro.

The site is known as the “Área do Meio,” or “Middle Area,” because it lies between terminals operated by Vale and CSN. Smaller miners that relied on vertically integrated infrastructure to ship their output had argued that the area should be made available to them.

Brazil’s waterways regulator, Antaq, had proposed restricting the participation of certain companies in the auction. In 2024, however, the Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) ruled that such a restriction would require a prior opinion from Cade.

The limitation was removed, and the antitrust authority ultimately did not issue a ruling on the matter. Vale and CSN did not take part in the auction, which was won by Cedro Participações, the only bidder.

Port capacity

Located in Itaguaí, Porto Sudeste can handle about 50 million tonnes a year and is licensed for a future expansion to 100 million tonnes.

The terminal handled a record 27.8 million tonnes in 2025, up from 21.9 million tonnes a year earlier. Part of its unused capacity could be filled by a future agreement with Vale.

Mubadala Capital and commodities trader Trafigura have been discussing a sale of the asset since at least 2024. The process also includes Mineração Morro do Ipê, owner of the Ipê and Tico-Tico mines in Minas Gerais. The sellers aim to complete the transaction this year.

Industry sources describe Porto Sudeste as an attractive asset, citing strong long-term demand potential and dollar-denominated revenue.

Still, they point to its current dependence on iron ore shipments, Morro do Ipê’s importance in filling the terminal and volumes that have fallen short of earlier expectations as drawbacks.

Earnings pressure

More recently, the company reported weaker-than-expected results that still require further explanation, market sources said.

Porto Sudeste do Brasil posted net revenue of R$2.7 billion in the first half of this year, down 22% from a year earlier. Its loss widened to R$1.4 billion from R$285 million in the same period last year.

Stonepeak, which had been evaluating the acquisition alongside Australia’s M Resources, has dropped out of the process and did not submit a binding bid. Its withdrawal has already been formally communicated to the sellers.

A person close to the transaction said the infrastructure manager had not been viewed as one of the leading contenders for the asset.

Asked for comment, Vale reiterated a statement released on April 30 saying it evaluates investment opportunities in the ordinary course of business in line with its strategic priorities.

The company added that capital-allocation decisions go through a rigorous assessment process and follow its policies and governance rules. Vale also said it would keep the market informed of any material developments arising from such opportunities or related to its business.

Mubadala, Trafigura and I Squared declined to comment.

*By Fernanda Guimarães and Taís Hirata — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

Brazilian meat giant JBS said Tuesday (18) that it had submitted a nonbinding offer to the board of directors of Pilgrim’s Pride (PPC), its U.S. subsidiary, to acquire shares held by minority shareholders. The deal would result in the delisting of the chicken producer whose shares trade on the Nasdaq.

Under the proposal, each Pilgrim’s Pride minority shareholder would exchange one common share for 2.086 JBS Class A shares. The exchange ratio is based on the closing prices on Tuesday (18), when JBS shares closed at $13.66 and Pilgrim’s shares at $28.49. JBS owns nearly 82% of Pilgrim’s shares.

Jeremiah O’Callaghan, chairman of JBS’s board of directors, said in a statement that “for more than 16 years, JBS and PPC have worked together as PPC expanded its operations, strengthened its global presence and significantly grew its revenue.”

“We believe this proposal offers PPC shareholders the opportunity to continue participating in PPC’s future performance through ownership of JBS shares, with exposure to a larger and more globally diversified business,” he said. O’Callaghan added that JBS’s long-standing relationship with and familiarity with Pilgrim’s Pride’s employees and operations “should support continuity for employees, customers and business partners throughout the process.”

The company also said the move would simplify its organizational structure and reduce costs associated with PPC’s public listing.

The proposal must be reviewed by a special independent committee of the U.S. company, which is expected to be advised by financial and legal advisers.

Once approved by Pilgrim’s decision-making bodies, the proposal must also receive the approval of a majority of the U.S. company’s shareholders other than JBS. In addition, the transaction will be subject to certain closing conditions. According to the statement, advancing the proposal does not require approval from JBS shareholders.

Once the process is completed, Pilgrim’s shares could cease trading on the Nasdaq.

Citi is serving as JBS’s financial adviser, while law firm White & Case LLP is acting as its legal adviser. Collected Strategies is serving as communications adviser, according to the Brazilian company’s filing.

By Camila Souza Ramos, Globo Rural — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

 

Foreign investors pulled R$12.6 billion from stocks already listed on B3 between August 10 and 14, the largest weekly outflow since the data series began in 2008, based on Bloomberg figures. A more cautious stance ahead of Brazil’s elections and intensifying competition for global capital are among the factors behind the move, emerging-market fund managers told Valor.

After inflows peaked at R$56.4 billion in April, non-resident investors withdrew R$38.2 billion over the following four months. In just 10 trading sessions in August, outflows totaled R$18.1 billion, putting pressure on the benchmark Ibovespa stock index, which is down 6.55% this month.

On Tuesday (18), the Ibovespa fell 0.27% to 166,335 points. Against that backdrop, net foreign inflows into Brazilian equities for the year have fallen to R$18.2 billion, virtually the same amount withdrawn in August alone.

Election risk

With technical positioning in Brazilian equities already very light, Daniela da Costa-Bulthuis, an emerging-markets portfolio manager at Dutch asset manager Robeco, said foreign capital is being pulled out by tougher competition for investment flows as well as a lack of clarity over the outcome of the presidential election.

“Domestically, investors are demanding a higher risk premium as the elections approach and visibility on policies for the post-2026 period remains limited,” Costa-Bulthuis said. “Meanwhile, globally, capital is being reallocated to markets with stronger growth and technology exposure, while higher fixed-income yields in the U.S. have reduced the relative attractiveness of some emerging markets.”

While she continues to hold high-quality Brazilian companies with strong balance sheets, Costa-Bulthuis said she would need greater clarity on a “credible fiscal consolidation for 2027” before becoming more constructive on the Brazilian market as a whole.

Raphael Luescher, co-head of emerging-market equities at Switzerland’s Vontobel Asset Management, also said that while equity valuations are objectively cheap, the near-term risk-reward trade-off has been squeezed by election uncertainty, fiscal deterioration and persistently high real interest rates.

Raphael Luescher — Foto: Reprodução/Vontobel
Raphael Luescher — Photo: Reprodução/Vontobel

“The market appears to be in a holding pattern amid the political stalemate and the approaching October presidential election, whose outcome will likely be the main catalyst for a repricing of assets in either direction,” Luescher said.

Beyond the presidential race, the composition of Congress will be critical in determining fiscal credibility and the prospects for reform, in Vontobel’s view.

“A president without a functioning coalition in Congress cannot pass constitutional reforms,” Luescher said. “For now, specific and quantified fiscal commitments, especially regarding mandatory spending, remain scarce.”

Despite concerns over election-driven volatility and the sharp foreign outflows, Vontobel remains overweight Brazil in its emerging-market equity funds.

Long-term case

Luescher said the allocation to Brazilian stocks is driven primarily by a long-term view and company fundamentals. The firm focuses on sector leaders with rising returns on invested capital (ROIC) that trade at relatively attractive valuations.

“More broadly, cash-flow returns are mispriced and attractive from a historical perspective, creating an interesting opportunity for long-term investors.”

Beyond the elections, a more modest-than-expected cycle of Selic base rate cuts has also reduced foreign appetite for Brazilian assets, Costa-Bulthuis said. The Central Bank’s cautious tone suggests that “the scope for further reductions is limited and monetary policy will remain quite restrictive,” she added.

Luescher expressed a similar view, pointing to persistently high real interest rates as a key concern for equity investors.

“As long as inflation remains above target, partly driven by the expansion of fiscal stimulus by the Lula government ahead of the October elections, we do not expect the Central Bank, which continues to warn of upside risks, to act decisively on interest rates.”

High real rates remain the main structural obstacle to multiple expansion because they keep the cost of capital elevated, Luescher said. Domestic investors therefore remain underweight equities as redemptions continue and other asset classes offer more attractive returns.

Global competition

Costa-Bulthuis also pointed to portfolio reallocations toward markets with stronger earnings and growth dynamics as a headwind for Brazil.

“There are opportunities across Asia and, in developed markets such as the U.S., Europe and Japan, we are seeing rising yields and positive earnings growth. Brazil therefore faces both a domestic risk-premium adjustment and tougher competition for global capital.”

Corporate earnings in South Korea and Taiwan remain particularly strong, supported by continued investment in artificial intelligence, semiconductors and hardware. Vontobel believes the technology cycle will prove stronger and more durable than the market currently expects.

“For that reason, we see little potential for a rotation in the near term,” Luescher said.

*By Maria Fernanda Salinet and Bruna Furlani, Valor — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

St. Marche is among the companies that turned to court-supervised restructuring after an earlier out-of-court debt agreement — Foto: Divulgação
St. Marche is among the companies that turned to court-supervised restructuring after an earlier out-of-court debt agreement — Photo: Divulgação

Out-of-court restructuring has gained traction in Brazil as a faster, less costly way for companies to renegotiate debt. But a growing number of businesses are finding that the relief provided by such deals is not enough to keep them afloat.

Casas Bahia, InterCement, Unigel and St. Marche are among the companies that later turned to court-supervised restructuring in search of a broader overhaul. The companies declined to comment.

Restructuring specialists expect more cases to follow as high interest rates remain in place for an extended period.

The latest example is Casas Bahia, which filed for court-supervised restructuring on Sunday (16), with R$17.3 billion in debt, just over two years after renegotiating R$4.1 billion through an out-of-court process. That agreement extended maturities and lowered financing costs and, at a later stage, led to the conversion of about R$1.5 billion in claims held by lenders Bradesco and Banco do Brasil into shares.

Even so, continued losses and difficulty generating cash kept pressure on the electronics and furniture retailer, eventually pushing it toward the more comprehensive restructuring confirmed this week.

A growing shift

A survey prepared for Valor by the Brazilian Out-of-Court Restructuring Observatory (Obre) identified 35 cases since 2005 in which companies moved from an out-of-court restructuring to a court-supervised process, with such cases becoming more frequent in recent years. In six instances, the original proceeding itself was converted.

Juliana Biolchi, a director at Obre, said Brazil’s corporate restructuring law imposes waiting periods on successive restructuring filings but does not prevent a company from seeking court protection after an out-of-court proceeding. Because out-of-court agreements typically cover only part of a company’s liabilities, Biolchi believes more businesses could take that route if their cash position shows the first measure was not enough.

A restructuring specialist who asked not to be identified said companies have increasingly limited out-of-court proceedings to financial creditors, leaving suppliers and employees outside the deal. That reduces their ability to carry out deeper operational changes when such measures are needed to put the business back on a sustainable footing.

In cases such as Casas Bahia, where the company needs to rethink the business, close stores and cut jobs, the cost of those measures may ultimately require court-supervised restructuring. “Often, the company’s problem is not just its financial debt,” the source said.

The debate has become more relevant as out-of-court restructuring grows more popular in a corporate environment marked by persistently high interest rates, tight credit and greater difficulty refinancing debt. Financing costs erode cash generation and leave highly leveraged companies with less room to restore their investment capacity.

The figures illustrate the growing use of the tool. From January through July this year, 43 out-of-court restructuring petitions were filed, involving 163 companies and 11,737 creditors, Obre data show. The cases filed in just seven months amount to slightly more than 13% of the 328 proceedings the organization has identified since 2005, when the current Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization Law took effect.

In July alone, seven new petitions were filed, involving 63 companies, 1,016 creditors and R$9.6 billion in debt.

Narrower scope

In an out-of-court restructuring, a company negotiates directly with specific groups of creditors and then submits the agreement for court approval. Because the plan can be limited to certain portions of its liabilities, the process tends to cause less disruption to suppliers and customers and less damage to the company’s reputation. It is generally chosen when key creditors are still willing to support a negotiated solution.

A reform of Brazil’s Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization Law, approved in late 2020 and in force since January 2021, made the mechanism easier to use. Companies can now file a petition with the initial support of creditors representing at least one-third of the claims covered by the plan and are given 90 days to reach the threshold required for approval.

One expert who asked not to be identified said out-of-court restructuring offers many advantages and that attempting to resolve a crisis through the mechanism is considered worthwhile even if it ultimately proves insufficient.

Luís Caldas, a partner at restructuring consultancy Íntegra, said the initially private negotiations reduce a company’s exposure. By the time its difficulties become public, the business already has a plan approved by a majority of creditors or backed by a significant share of them.

That advantage, Caldas said, comes with a narrower reach. Out-of-court restructuring generally focuses on selected classes of creditors, does not cover tax liabilities and can include labor claims only through collective negotiations with the relevant union.

Broader protection

The move to court-supervised restructuring usually comes when the relief secured under the first agreement is no longer enough to support the financial overhaul, particularly if operating conditions continue to deteriorate, Caldas said. If a company concludes that it will be unable to honor the agreement and begins facing new enforcement actions or cash freezes, a court-supervised process provides broader protection.

The so-called “stay period” generally suspends for 180 days lawsuits and enforcement proceedings involving claims subject to the restructuring. The process also covers a wider range of liabilities, including labor claims, and allows companies to seek specific installment arrangements or settlements for tax debt.

The trade-off is a more expensive and time-consuming proceeding, with a greater impact on the company’s reputation and its commercial and financial relationships. There is also a period of uncertainty between the filing and approval of the restructuring plan.

Unlike an out-of-court proceeding, a company cannot simply choose a limited number of liability classes to restructure.

*By Fernanda Guimarães — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

 

 

Visitors to DBN’s pig-feed factory in Beijing must follow a strict safety protocol that includes putting on foot coverings and spending one minute in a disinfection chamber before entering, under the watch of local employees. The measures to prevent any type of contamination are more than justified. Since the outbreak of African swine fever that wiped out nearly half of the country’s pig herd in the late 2010s, companies in the sector have strengthened biosecurity standards to prevent the disease from returning.

“Every day we test raw materials, for diseases, the environment and disinfection,” engineer Yin (who did not disclose his full name) told a group of journalists and representatives of Brazilian companies who visited the facility this month.

Biosecurity measures were essential to the recovery of China’s pig industry, but investment in technology and management also contributed to the recovery, said the engineer, who is responsible for the feed factory. China’s pig herd currently has 39 million breeding sows, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

The African swine fever outbreak accelerated the industry’s move toward greater use of technology, with small farms being replaced by large commercial operations. “After the swine fever, production is increasingly shifting toward professional companies and large groups. There are no longer those farmers with fewer than three or five pigs,” Yin said. The shift has also boosted demand for animal feed. At DBN, it is growing by about 5% a year.

Thanks to mechanization, DBN’s feed factory has fewer than 20 employees. Only a few of them were working when the newspaper visited the facility. The health crisis helped advance the adoption of technology across China’s livestock industry, but the movement—which spans several segments—is also linked to another concern in Beijing: food security.

A key focus of the country’s 15th Five-Year Plan, China’s strategy to strengthen food security has the potential to reshape a market in which Brazil is currently one of the largest suppliers. Chinese companies are already the world’s second-largest producers of chicken meat and are recovering pork production. For beef, the USDA projects that China will produce 7.1 million tonnes this year.

Beijing’s intention is to reduce China’s vulnerability in areas considered strategic. In recent decades, Chinese diets have diversified, with meat accounting for a larger share of consumption. With a population of 1.4 billion, the country has traditionally been viewed as one of the world’s largest food importers.

The Five-Year Plan launched in March 2026 to guide China’s economic and social development lists increased grain production among its priorities, along with reducing external dependence and investing in seeds, genetics, and mechanization. It also calls for strengthening the country’s livestock industry.

According to the latest report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which provides projections for 2026 through 2035, China is expected to continue increasing self-sufficiency in pork, with imports becoming less important. Investments in biosecurity and large-scale production are identified as pillars of China’s policy.

In 2024, China was the main destination for Brazilian chicken exports, receiving 562,200 tonnes. But last year, shipments fell to 250,300 tonnes, less than half the previous volume. Increased Chinese production contributed to the decline, but the main reason was the detection in May 2025 of avian influenza at a commercial farm in Rio Grande do Sul, which led to a ban on Brazilian chicken.

For pork, China imported 159,200 tonnes from Brazil last year, making it the second-largest destination for Brazilian pork, behind only the Philippines.

In 2025, China imported 1.7 million tonnes of Brazilian beef and was Brazil’s largest customer. This year, however, it established a quota system for several supplier countries, limiting Brazilian shipments to 1.106 million tonnes. The introduction of quotas, justified as a measure to safeguard China’s livestock industry, shows that Beijing is also turning to protectionist measures to achieve self-sufficiency.

And animal proteins are not the only target. China also wants to reduce its soybean imports, which currently come mainly from Brazil and the U.S. with which it is engaged in a trade war. To that end, Chinese animal-nutrition companies have been changing feed formulations, using a smaller proportion of soybean meal.

But Suping Geng, DBN Biotech’s vice president for Latin America business, does not expect a significant substitution in the short term because soybean meal remains nutritionally superior in pig-feed formulations. “If you talk to feed producers, they still believe soy is better than corn,” the executive told reporters during a visit to DBN’s laboratory in Beijing.

*By Danton Boatini Júnior, Globo Rural — Beijing

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/