Finance Ministry backs extension of 12% oil export tax

Foreign Trade Chamber is set to vote on keeping levy for another 60 days, raising concern among oil producers

Brazil’s Finance Ministry has backed extending the 12% tax on oil exports for another 60 days, Valor has learned. The proposal will be considered this Thursday (27) by the Foreign Trade Chamber (Camex), just ahead of the levy’s scheduled expiration on Sept. 9. The ministry’s position has put oil companies on alert.

The Finance Ministry sent its recommendation Tuesday to the Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services (MDIC), which chairs Camex. The document, seen by Valor, is signed by Finance Ministry Executive Secretary Rogério Ceron.

The ministry said its technical analysis shows that the international environment remains highly volatile, with logistical constraints and uncertainty over when supplies of oil and refined products will normalize.

“In view of the elements presented in the information note, this ministry understands that the available information supports, from a technical standpoint, temporarily maintaining the 12% rate for another 60 days, without an increase, accompanied by continuous monitoring and periodic reassessment of conditions in the international and domestic markets for oil and refined products,” Ceron said in the document.

Supply risks

The Finance Ministry said significant constraints on production and exports from the Persian Gulf remain in place, alongside risks affecting international energy transportation routes, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz. In its view, those circumstances warrant continued monitoring of supply conditions.

The ministry also said domestic data collected while the export tax has been in effect show developments “consistent” with the measure’s regulatory purpose, including increased crude processing at Brazilian refineries, lower imports of oil and refined products, and higher domestic production of fuels, particularly diesel.

At the same time, both oil production and exports have continued to expand.

“The available information does not indicate that the 12% rate has materially undermined the economic attractiveness of exploration and production operations, the continuation of projects or the expansion of supply in the short term,” Ceron said.

Against that backdrop, he said, the technical assessment “indicates the feasibility of maintaining the current 12% rate for an additional period of 60 days.”

The ministry considers that timeframe consistent with the temporary nature of the measure and with the need to provide regulatory stability and predictability, while allowing market conditions to be reassessed.

The analysis found no technical grounds, however, for raising the tax at this stage. “The measure currently in place is already producing regulatory effects consistent with its purpose,” the document said.

Industry concerns

Parts of the oil industry are concerned that a measure introduced on regulatory grounds to help offset subsidies for gasoline and diesel may be turning into a revenue-raising tool and could remain in place for longer, weighing on companies’ cash flow and investment decisions.

The tax generated R$3.16 billion in revenue in July, the Federal Revenue Service said Tuesday. The Finance Ministry’s formal recommendation just before the Camex meeting has heightened concern in the sector.

Companies argue that the effects of the levy are more likely to emerge in decisions on new investment than immediately in production from fields already operating.

There is also criticism that the tax is levied on companies’ revenue rather than profits. With production and logistics costs also rising, industry participants say the measure could undermine lower-return projects and even affect operations that, under certain circumstances, are not profitable, further eroding project economics.

Another concern is the lack of a clear end date. Companies fear the tax could be repeatedly extended without a final deadline or objective criteria for its removal.

Even setting an expiration date would not resolve broader objections to the model. Industry participants argue that a mechanism of this kind, if used in exceptional circumstances, should be established through legislation and debated by the National Congress.

Legal challenge

In August, major oil companies went to court to challenge the resolution imposing the 12% tax on crude-oil exports.

Last Friday, the Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute (IBP), which represents companies across the industry, sent a letter to MDIC urging the government not to extend the export tax.

The group argues that Brazil is a price taker in the global oil market, accounting for about 4% of world production and 2% to 3% of global oil exports, and therefore lacks sufficient market power to influence international prices.

IBP also said the tax has failed to redirect to the domestic market oil that would otherwise have been exported because Brazil’s refining system is structurally unable to absorb all the crude produced in the country.

In the group’s view, the levy, which applies to companies’ gross revenue, also places a disproportionate burden on exploration and production projects and threatens the viability of investments planned to revitalize mature fields.

Refining limits

IBP cited Finance Ministry data showing that domestic crude processing reached 101% of national refining capacity, which it said demonstrates that domestic demand for crude has reached its limit.

The group also pointed to an earlier note from the Secretariat for Economic Reforms concluding that the available data did not allow the increase in domestic processing and fuel supply to be attributed through “exclusive causality to the Export Tax.”

“It must be recognized that there is no rationale for maintaining any purportedly regulatory measure aimed at preventing or discouraging oil exports,” IBP said.

If Camex approves the proposal, it will be the second extension of the 12% rate.

The government had estimated that the measure would raise R$15.6 billion over four months, based on Brent crude at $90 a barrel.

The Finance Ministry and MDIC did not respond to requests for comment.

*By Marlla Sabino and Giordanna Neves — Brasília

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

/by

Panco bids for Nutrella as antitrust regulator reviews sale

Bread brand was auctioned in July after Mexico’s Bimbo struggled to complete a divestment required by Brazil’s competition watchdog

 

 

 

Nutrella is among the brands Bimbo agreed to divest after its Wickbold acquisition
Nutrella is among the brands Bimbo agreed to divest after its Wickbold acquisition — Photo: Divulgação/Nutrella

Panco has formally submitted an offer to acquire bread brand Nutrella, which was sold at auction in July after Mexico’s Bimbo ran into difficulties completing a divestment required by Brazil’s antitrust watchdog, the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (Cade).

The move suggests Panco placed the auction’s highest bid, R$4.7 million, for the brand. On Tuesday (25), Cade opened a separate proceeding to review the transaction.

The sale of Nutrella is part of a merger-control agreement reached by Bimbo and Cade in September 2025 that cleared the Mexican company’s acquisition of Wickbold’s brands and operations. The agreement required Bimbo to divest certain assets.

Panco filed a petition asking Cade to remove documents related to the transaction from the public case file and keep them confidential. Pandurata, owner of Bauducco, is also listed as an interested party.

Auction process

Nutrella was due to be divested after Bimbo completed its acquisition of Wickbold, with the Mexican company temporarily managing the brand.

The process dragged on after Cade rejected four prospective buyers submitted by Bimbo. Once an extended deadline expired, the regulator ordered the brand to be auctioned without a minimum price, with trustee Protiviti overseeing the process.

Mega Leilões held the auction on July 24. The highest bid in the first round was R$3 million, rising to R$4.7 million in the second.

Asked for comment, Panco told Valor that it “does not comment on market rumors or speculation about potential negotiations.” The company also said it continues to monitor trends and opportunities in the food industry.

Bauducco declined to comment.

By Vitória Nascimento, Valor — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

/by

Brazil seeks data center growth as costs, bottlenecks pose hurdles

Tax incentives could help attract investment as infrastructure constraints, saturation in U.S. create opportunity for Brazil

 

 

 

 

Andriei Gutierrez — Foto: Divulgação
Andriei Gutierrez — Photo: Divulgação

As the Brazilian Congress prepares to consider the data center tax incentive program, the country is seeking to capitalize on growing constraints and resistance to new facilities in the U.S. But while Brazil has advantages that could help attract investment, they may not be enough to offset the high cost of data center projects, according to experts. Another concern is ensuring that tax incentives can be properly measured and shown to deliver results.

A study by FGV Projetos, the consulting arm of Fundação Getulio Vargas, led by executive manager Charles Schramm, shows that leading international data center hubs have combined natural advantages with regulatory predictability and competitive tax conditions. In the U.S., data centers have increasingly come under criticism over issues including noise and visual pollution and higher energy and water costs.

In Brazil, one of the main disadvantages is the tax burden on imported equipment, which accounts for the largest share of a data center’s investment. Proposed by the federal government, the Special Tax Regime for Data Center Services (Redata) seeks to reduce this cost by suspending federal taxes on such equipment. The state-level Tax on Circulation of Goods and Services (ICMS), however, would not be covered by the regime.

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has identified approval of the program as one of the government’s priorities. On Wednesday (26), Senate President Davi Alcolumbre, after meeting with Lula and House Speaker Hugo Motta, signaled for the first time that he wants to put the proposal to a vote next week.

Brazil is currently Latin America’s largest data center market, accounting for between 37% and 48% of the region’s capacity, depending on the methodology used. The country has between 750 megawatts (MW) and 1 gigawatt (GW) of installed capacity, according to a survey by Andriei Gutierrez, president of the Brazilian Association of Software Companies (ABES). The figure is considered low. With Redata, the government and industry are working with the possibility of reaching 3 GW by 2032, with investments of up to R$100 billion a year.

The incentive is designed precisely to reduce some of the costs needed to make expansion viable. Redata brings forward tax relief mechanisms included in the tax reform. Starting in 2027, the Contribution over Goods and Services (CBS) will fully replace social taxes PIS and Cofins. Redata, however, will continue to cover import duties on equipment, which are not part of the new value-added tax (VAT) created by the reform. ICMS, meanwhile, will gradually be replaced by the Tax on Goods and Services (IBS) through 2033.

The design of Redata seeks to provide greater predictability for investments, according to Uallace Moreira, secretary of industrial development, innovation, trade, and services at the Ministry of Development, Industry, Foreign Trade, and Services (MDIC). The program guarantees a five-year suspension of import duties on eligible equipment, even if equivalent products begin to be manufactured domestically during that period. The list of eligible equipment will be defined later through regulations.

The national program, however, would not by itself eliminate the cost disadvantage. The FGV study estimates that a 100-MW data center requiring a $5 billion investment costs 26.7% more to build in Brazil than the U.S. benchmark. With Redata, the gap would narrow to 17.7%, while cost parity would only be achieved if ICMS were also reduced.

Schramm cites Singapore, where restrictions on new data center projects pushed investment into Malaysia, and Ireland, where limits on connections in the capital Dublin shifted investment to other European countries. “Capital in this industry doesn’t wait: decisions are made within short windows, comparing jurisdictions,” he said.

The incentive policy also involves a dilemma: the government is giving up tax revenue to attract projects, but it needs assurances that the tax break will generate tangible returns for the country.

To that end, Redata includes requirements intended to increase the impact of investments in Brazil, such as allocating at least 10% of processing capacity to the domestic market and investing 2% of the value of eligible equipment in research and development, with part of that investment directed to the North, Northeast and Central-West regions.

Schramm of FGV also advocates tying the incentive to capacity that is actually installed and operational, rather than to investment promises; providing transparency on the tax revenue forgone for each beneficiary; and establishing auditable targets and periodic assessments. “That, to me, is at the heart of the debate,” he said. “An incentive without objective criteria, measurement, and a time limit is neither fiscally nor politically sustainable.”

As for the potential benefits, FGV estimates that a single 100-MW AI-focused data center would mobilize about R$25 billion and generate more than 12,500 direct and indirect jobs during construction alone, as well as R$1.5 billion in gross domestic product (GDP), with spillover effects on construction, energy, telecommunications, and services.

Luciano Fialho, vice president of Scala Data Centers, said the delay in Redata has already affected short-term investment decisions. The company had planned to invest between R$1 billion and R$2 billion a year before the program was announced, but some of those investments were put on hold amid expectations of changes to the tax regime.

Scala, a pioneer in Latin America’s digital infrastructure sector, has already invested R$14 billion in the region, including R$12 billion in Brazil. Fialho said the absence of Redata would not prevent investments supported by domestic demand from continuing, but would limit Brazil’s potential to attract international projects.

Schramm takes a similar view. Even without incentives, he said, Brazil’s market will continue to expand on demand for cloud computing and artificial intelligence. “The real competition is elsewhere. It’s for international processing workloads, which is what turns a country from an infrastructure consumer into an exporter of digital services. That’s the portion that will go wherever the conditions are better,” he said.

Some of that demand could come from the U.S. Fialho believes the country will not be able to expand its infrastructure at the same pace as demand because of power constraints and local opposition, among other factors. “Demand isn’t going to wait for the U.S. to solve this problem. Some of it will come down to Brazil,” he said.

Energy is one of Brazil’s main advantages in this competition, since data centers, particularly those supporting artificial intelligence, require large amounts of electricity. According to ABES, 92% of Brazil’s electricity generation mix is renewable, compared with 25% in the U.S. and about 30% globally.

Brazil can have surplus generation, while in competing markets grid saturation can mean new projects wait seven to 10 years for a connection with enough capacity to operate. Brazil’s advantage, however, does not eliminate domestic transmission and grid-connection bottlenecks.

Entering the global data center investment race later also gives Brazil a chance to learn from mistakes early movers made. Gutierrez points to the need to consider more modern technologies for water use in cooling systems, land use, traffic during construction, and potential impacts on local communities. He notes that Brazil has a robust legislative and institutional framework to support sustainable growth in these areas.

*By Giordanna Neves — Brasília

Sourcee: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

/by

Brazil’s largest retailers post R$1.3tn in sales as store growth slows

Real sales growth was the weakest since 2021, while regional chains continued to expand faster

 

 

 

 

(From left) EduardoTerra and Alberto Serrentino — Foto: Gabriel Reis/Valor
(From left) EduardoTerra and Alberto Serrentino — Photo: Gabriel Reis/Valor

As major retail groups face a series of debt renegotiations, new figures point to a pronounced slowdown across the sector.

The companies ranked among Brazil’s 300 largest retailers posted combined sales of R$1.3 trillion in 2025. Among the 227 chains with comparable data for the past two years—those included in both the 2024 and 2025 surveys—sales rose 8.6% to R$1.1 trillion, twice the 4.26% inflation rate measured by the Extended Consumer Price Index (IPCA) compiled by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).

The 8.6% nominal increase, however, was the smallest annual gain since 2018, when sales rose 7.9%. The net balance of stores in Brazil—openings minus closures—was also the lowest since 2020.

Adjusted for inflation, sales grew 4.3%, more than twice the rate recorded by IBGE’s national retail survey. Even so, that was the slowest growth pace since 2021, during the pandemic.

The figures come from the “Top 300 Brazilian Retailers 2026” survey, prepared by the Retail Think Tank Institute (IRTT) and published by Valor for the past 10 years in partnership with the institute’s founders, Alberto Serrentino, Eduardo Terra, and Helio Biagi.

The survey also shows that 282 chains with comparable data for the past two years posted a net gain of 2,474 stores last year, taking openings and closures into account. That was the smallest net increase in the past five years.

In 2020, retailers closed stores as lockdowns were imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic, producing the study’s lowest net gain, at 163 stores.

“We don’t see a crisis in the sector, but a slowdown in activity. Retail is feeling the effects of the Brazilian economy; there’s no way to separate the two. There are cyclical factors, such as rising public debt and high interest rates, as well as additional factors, such as the expansion of sports betting with cuts in essential spending to pay for gambling,” Serrentino said.

“Those that outperform the average tend to have low leverage, a solid capital structure and discipline in executing projects, allowing them to maintain certain investments even in an uncertain environment,” he said.

The figures also highlight the strength of regional retailers, with chains in the middle of the ranking expanding faster. Historically, these companies have tended to grow with low leverage and their own capital during periods of high interest rates.

At the same time, the five largest retail companies have barely changed their share of total sector sales over the past five years. The group accounted for 13.3% of total retail sales in 2025, compared with 13.1% in 2020. In 2024, the share was 13.5%, meaning it actually declined slightly last year.

The five companies are, in order, Grupo Carrefour, Assaí, RD Saúde (Raia Drogasil), Magazine Luiza, and Grupo Boticário.

The 50 largest retailers, however, including strong regional players, increased their combined share from 33.5% to 35.7% over five years. Among the 100 largest, the share rose from 39.7% to 42.4%.

At the same time, the share of chains with stores in one to five states increased from 63.1% to 67.4% since 2020. More companies also expanded from a single state into two or three states, with the number of such chains rising from 37 to 41.

More groups also sought to establish a presence across Brazil, aiming to increase sales volume, strengthen their bargaining power with manufacturers and become more competitive. In 2025, 41 chains operated in all 27 states, compared with 38 retailers the previous year.

“The Brazilian market strengths include regional and family-run retailers. Concentration in our sector remains low and well below levels seen in other markets with similar or greater levels of maturity,” Terra said.

The 10 largest retailers accounted for 19% of Brazil’s retail market in 2025, compared with 57% in Mexico, 53% in the U.S., and 82% in Germany, according to the IRTT study. The figures underscore how fragmented Brazil’s retail market remains and how much room chains still have to grow.

Among regional chains that expanded into new markets last year, according to the Valor survey, was Lojas G, a Paraná-based home-goods retailer founded in 1996 in Maringá and now operating 70 stores nationwide. The chain invested R$20 million to open its first store in Espírito Santo state—its eighth state of operation—at the end of 2025. In the short term, it plans to open 10 stores in the region and invest R$200 million, according to the latest projection announced by management.

Another regional chain, Grupo Amma, opened the first store under its Amma Atacadista banner last year. Owned by the Zat family of Concórdia, in Santa Catarina state, the business was founded 40 years ago as a supermarket retailer under the Super Zat brand and has grown with low leverage and investments funded with its own capital. In the second half of this year, it plans to enter Paraná state with its first cash-and-carry store.

“They had already opened three cash-and-carry stores since last year and plan to have five by 2027, but in a controlled manner, spending just over R$20 million to R$25 million per store. They are a good example of the regional-retail mindset, focused on planned growth without taking excessive risks,” said a former executive who is now a retail consultant in Paraná.

The Brazilian retailer with the highest sales per store is Andorinha Hipercenter, which generated R$982 million in sales in 2025 at its single location in northern São Paulo.

The survey shows that only 25 chains operate more than 1,000 stores in Brazil, a country of continental dimensions where retailers face limited access to capital. “The explanation for this modest number [of 25 chains] lies in the companies’ development history, with restricted access to capital markets until they reach a certain scale,” Serrentino said.

“There are only 41 publicly traded companies among the 300 largest, and franchising ends up being a model that enables chains to expand,” he said.

For Terra, however, last year’s environment doesn’t yet fully reflect the downturns companies have faced in the consumer market in recent months, amid worsening household debt and delinquency.

“We have a more challenging international and domestic environment this year than in 2025, with greater uncertainty due to fluctuations in the dollar and oil prices, as well as higher inflation followed by some cooling. All this volatility creates a great deal of uncertainty around companies’ business plans. We’ll see the effects of these conditions in next year’s survey,” he said.

Among retail groups with annual sales above R$1 billion, there were 138 chains in 2020, compared with 206 last year.

Looking at the past decade, however, gives a clearer picture of the sector’s expansion. The number of chains with annual revenue above R$1 billion rose from 109 to 206, while the number generating more than R$10 billion jumped 250%, from eight to 28.

The survey found that 79 retailers reported having artificial intelligence (AI) projects underway—the first time the study has tracked this information. Another 35 groups said they were already developing sales initiatives using AI agents.

*By Adriana Mattos — São Paulo

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

 

/by

Vale weighs no-cash role in Porto Sudeste bid

Brazilian mining group could back BlackRock-owned GIP and Gerdau in bid for Rio de Janeiro iron ore terminal without taking an equity stake

 

 

 

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/

/by

Brazil-China trade triangulation unlikely, despite U.S. criticism

White House lists Brazil among countries accused of facilitating illegal transshipment of Chinese goods but experts say country makes little sense as a hub for transshipping

 

 

 

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.

A 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/

/by

Braskem seeks restructuring of $10.9bn debt

Petrochemical producer wins 90-day standstill after securing support from holders of 39.6% of debt covered by proceeding

 

 

 

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/

/by

Inventário extrajudicial não exigirá mais pagamento prévio de imposto sobre transmissão 

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

/by

Abra files antitrust appeal against American Airlines investment in Azul

Holding company of Gol and Avianca cites risk of coordination among competitors and potential loss of rival airline’s independence

 

 

 

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/
/by

Vale weighs no-cash role in Porto Sudeste bid

Brazilian mining group could back BlackRock-owned GIP and Gerdau in bid for Rio de Janeiro iron ore terminal without taking an equity stake

 

 

 

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/

/by