Donald Trump’s return to the presidency of the United States on the 20th is expected to increase competition in agribusiness between Brazil and the United States. Trump returns to power with the announcement of protectionist trade policies that, on the one hand, may favor the trade of Brazilian agricultural products to importing countries, such as China, but, on the other hand, tend to hamper negotiations for expansion and opening of markets between countries. countries.
For experts in foreign trade, representatives of private and government entities, heard by the Broadcast AgroBrazilian agribusiness may gain from Trump’s protectionist policies in exports to other countries, but lose in its own trade with the United States.
In this equation, one of the main factors is the potential resumption of the trade war between the United States and China. Trump promises to apply high tariffs on products imported into the United States and repeat the conflict with the Asian giant – the keynote of his first administration.
In an eventual exchange of retaliations between the countries, Brazil may benefit from the redirection of Chinese demand for soybeans and corn, although to a lesser extent than that observed in the first phase of the Sino-American trade war in Trump’s first term.
The tendency is for Brazil to occupy more space in the supply of grains to the Asian market, if an escalation of the Sino-American trade conflict is confirmed, at least in the short term.
“Today we export 64% of soybeans, meat, cotton and corn to China, while the United States exports 34%. Therefore, the gains would not be as large as they were in the first phase of the trade war, but there may be benefits in the short and medium term”, assesses the coordinator of Insper Agro Global, Marcos Jank.
Continues after advertising
Jank considers that China, however, tends not to want to give up the possibility of purchasing soy from the Southern and Northern Hemisphere at different times of the year at more competitive prices.
“Another concern in the medium term would be a possible truce agreement between the countries, which is part of Trump’s political game of pressure and threats in a possible cession of China”, points out Jank.
In the assessment of the director of International Relations at the Brazilian Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock (CNA), Sueme Mori, Brazil is capable of expanding food supplies to China and other destinations, whether the additional demand is generated by a trade war or by adverse climate issues.
Continues after advertising
Mori considers that the Sino-American dispute could be more critical compared to the first phase.
“The composition of the Trump 2 government will be different from Trump 1 due to the global geopolitical situation. Trump returns with greater legitimacy, domestic political support and freedom to even intensify a trade war with China. On the other hand, China maintains a very large geopolitical influence”, he noted.
“We have to wait for Trump’s arrival in government to see the measures implemented and also how Brazil will behave in this scenario. We defend pragmatism in relationships because Brazilian agribusiness sells to the whole world”, argues Mori.
Continues after advertising
In the relationship with Brazil, in addition to the ideological distance between the Trump and Lula governments – who declared support for Democrat Kamala Harris -, Trump’s stance of greater protectionism for local production could hinder negotiations to open and expand markets between countries .
Diplomats working in the United States assess that the possibility of increasing the quota of beef (currently 65 thousand tons per year) and Brazilian sugar (volumes stipulated per year) sold to the North American market will depend on Brazilian counterparts – such as the reduction tariff on US ethanol imports.
Brazil also wants to sell more fruits to the United States, such as Tahiti lemons, while the United States wants to increase sales of wines, premium meats, pears, American cherries, wild salmon and milk protein.
Continues after advertising
The United States was the second main destination for Brazilian agricultural products last year, with exports of US$ 12.092 billion, accounting for 7.4% of the total exported by agribusiness in the year. Shipments are concentrated in green coffee, cellulose, fresh beef, orange juice and leather, according to data from the Brazilian agribusiness foreign trade statistics system.
Brazil imported US$1.028 billion in agribusiness products from the United States last year.
On the Brazilian government’s side, the intention is to keep bilateral negotiations ongoing and the commercial relationship “of trust, regardless of political positions”, according to the Secretary of Commerce and International Relations of the Ministry of Agriculture, Luis Rua.
“The United States is an important partner for Brazil also from an investment point of view and with an important agricultural innovation ecosystem. The idea is to maintain a fluid relationship, exporting complementary products, such as coffee, among others, and deepening the relationship wherever possible”, stated Rua.
“Depending on the trade policy adopted by President Trump, Brazil will always be available to other countries in the world to meet any needs that these countries may have due to a possible protectionist escalation in the United States with an impact on products exported by North Americans. ”, added Rua, in a recent interview with the reporter.
For Jank, Brazil is not a country that poses a threat to Trump’s trade policy, as it has a general trade balance deficit for Brazilian products – in 2024, total exports reached US$40.330 billion compared to imports of US$40.583 billion.
“Americans will choose friends and enemies for trade policies. From Brazil’s point of view, there are no commercial factors that could affect bilateral relations, on the contrary, there are potential similarities and contributions in biofuels and agricultural technology”, stated the Insper professor.
On the other hand, Jank sees the possibility of greater pressure from the United States to reduce the tariff applied to ethanol exported to Brazil, currently 18%. He also sees market fundamentals for Brazil to seek to increase the quota of beef exported to the USA due to the crisis in local livestock farming.
For Mori, from CNA, the interest of Brazilian agribusiness in expanding trade with the United States continues. “The expectation is that pragmatism will be maintained. There are no signs that this will change. Historically, we have seen other moments of wear and tear between governments and a lack of impact on trade balance figures”, he pointed out.
Representatives of the meat industry and the sugar-energy sector do not expect progress in the negotiations to increase the export quota without tariffs for Brazilian beef and sugar to the North American market.
“The United States tends to continue using Brazilian meat due to domestic supply problems, but a reduction in tariffs is unlikely. The current scenario is already favorable to Brazil”, noted a source from the export sector.
In 2024, Brazil exported 229 thousand tons of beef to the United States, totaling US$1.35 billion in foreign exchange.
The United States is still the main destination for Brazilian coffee today, with 471,539 thousand tons (7.859 million bags) exported last year. Industry interlocutors believe that “commercial rationality” based on pragmatism and good relationships between traders tends to prevail.
Emeritus professor at Fundação Getúlio Vargas and former Minister of Agriculture Roberto Rodrigues assesses that market demands must prevail over ideological issues in the relationship between countries.
“What matters is that the market functions properly so that we continue to participate in it properly,” says Rodrigues. For the professor, “there may be more protectionism” in relation to Brazilian agricultural products. “But Brazil has to negotiate. Our diplomacy must negotiate with parsimony and competence and be open to everyone and the entire world”, he highlights.
In the former minister’s assessment, if Trump’s first term is considered, the effects on agribusiness tend to include a trend towards greater “deglobalization”, with implications for the weakening of multilateral organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) and World Trade Organization (WTO).
“This is bad for everyone, including Brazil too. Without multilateral organizations, there is no direction”, he concludes.
