Gustavo Augusto Freitas de Lima says that the initiative can be an instrument of coordination between competitors; The municipality judges the case this 3rd (30.set)
The president of the (Administrative Council for Economic Defense), said that (which prevents the purchase of soybeans cultivated in deforested areas) can be an instrument of, because companies gather without antitrust protocol.
The court of the municipality must judge this 3rd (30.Set.2025) a preventive measure on the case, which involves large tradings responsible for 90% of grain purchases and sales. “Only the investigation will say if it is a cartel”said Augusto in an interview with Poder360.
According to Gustavo Augusto, the investigation into the soy moratorium does not conflict environmental and competitive legislation, but exposes the need for protocols that ensure transparency in ex -ex -(environmental, social and governance agreements in Portuguese). According to him, there is resistance from companies to adopt antitrust protocols.
“I do not think there is a conflict between environmental legislation and competition legislation. Competition legislation is not above environmental law, but it is not side by side. They have to comply. Cade does not defend any illegal business model. If there is an illegal soybean production, they should not buy. They should refuse to buy this product. Soybean, specifically, are large companies, which account for 90% of what we call trading – which is buying and selling soy – being joining the same table without having an antitrust protocol ”he said.
Watch the full interview (38min44s):
With a mandate until April 2026, Gustavo Augusto Freitas de Lima has been part of the Cade Court since 2022. He holds a degree in Law and Naval Sciences, Master in Law, with courses at and (Getulio Vargas Foundation). Federal Prosecutor since 2006, he was a legal advisor to the Presidency of the Republic, Deputy Chief of Economic Policy and Director of the Department of Litigation of (Federal Attorney General).
The interview was recorded at the studio of this digital newspaper in Brasilia, on Friday (26.set).
Read below other highlights:
- cartoon: “We have been more rigorously, specifically in the fuel cartel. We have a concern, 1, with the damage to the consumer. We have evaluations that these cartels cause the consumer in the order of billions. In the Federal District alone, $ 2 to $ 3 billion per year of overpricing. gasoline ”;
- BIG TECHS SUPERVISION: “We have a great concern, when aiming at these conduct, ending up innovation, inhibiting new businesses, especially small businesses. One of the filters we do is establish market power […] We try to focus on companies that have greater market share, not necessarily Big Techs […] We try to have a thoughtful position and we negotiate a lot […] We only lead to conviction in the latter case ”;
- fusions: “We greatly privilege economic evidence. The only way we have to separate a good merger from a bad fusion is with economic evidence, with study, with practice, is investigating the market […] The fusion is not good or bad. Each case is a case. You can have a merger that will generate efficiency, which the company can compete more, invest more. And you can have a fusion that will generate a monopoly and will harm the consumer. Separate what is our challenge ”;
- Anticompetitive practices in the health sector: “The health sector has had little conduct problem and more concentration. We have already seen a few years of concentration movements of sector, vertical integrations. Vertical integrations can generate efficiency, ie the health plan can control a little better what is happening at the tip, but we have some time in relation to the health sector, mainly, mainly on the issue of captive hospitals, especially the issue of captive hospitals. exclusivity contracts. ”
