The United States Supreme Court’s decision to suspend the tariffs imposed in 2025 by the Donald Trump administration leaves room for agricultural sectors in Brazil to appeal for reimbursement of the losses they suffered from sales not completed due to the imposition of surcharges, sources linked to the sector tell CNN Agro, on condition of anonymity.
According to economists, the US may have to repay $175 billion in tariff revenue. The Supreme Court’s decision had six votes in favor against three. The next step is to analyze the 170 pages of the decision and the feeling is one of caution, according to an American source linked to agriculture.
One of the segments that can benefit is Brazilian coffee. Until last year, the USA was the main customer for Arabica beans, but with total tariffs of 50%, there was a reduction in exports and North Americans felt the weight of the trade deal in their pockets: the drink in the USA increased by 30% to 40% for the consumer.
According to a coffee expert, conversations between Brazilian and American associations are already taking place. The American court approved this Friday (20/2) the illegality of the tariffs. An analyst heard by the report said that at least the 10% surcharges should be cut, however, under potential pressure from Donald Trump, who is expected to appeal the decision.
In the report, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA) said that, immediately, it is “excellent news”, but that the department is being “very careful” in awaiting possible consequences and reactions from the US president.
Tax perspective
The Supreme Court’s recent decision on tariffs adopted by the federal government should provoke a new round of coordination in the Executive and the private sector, according to international tax expert Gustavo Weiss, associate researcher at New York University (NYU).
According to Weiss, the government is probably already working on a containment plan to try to reinstate tariffs. He states that the measures have been used as an instrument for international negotiation. “These tariffs have been used a lot by the government as a type of bargain, of negotiation. So this even harms the United States’ position in the same negotiations vis-à-vis other countries”, he states.
The expert draws attention to the fact that the Supreme Court did not modulate the effects of the decision. In practical terms, this means that the court did not establish a time frame for the application of the understanding nor did it determine that amounts paid in the past do not need to be returned to avoid tax impact.
Despite this, compensation to companies should not occur automatically. Weiss notes that affected companies were already preparing to challenge the tariffs in court. “The processes were triggered”, he says, indicating that companies must seek restitution through specific actions.
