Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
6 min of reading 
0 comments 
List of exceptions reduces the scope of the surcharge proposed by the United States and keeps Brazilian products related to food, energy, mining, fertilizers, medicines, and aviation out of the charge, while commercial investigation cites Pix, piracy, and other practices attributed to the Brazilian government.
A list of Brazilian products is expected to be excluded from the additional 25% tariff proposed by the United States, following the conclusion of a commercial investigation accusing Brazil of adopting practices considered “unreasonable” and harmful to U.S. trade.
Released by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the USTR, on the evening of Monday, June 1, 2026, the proposal provides exceptions for sectors of the Brazilian export agenda, such as food, energy, minerals, fertilizers, medicines, and aviation.
Among the spared items are coffee, meats, fruits, nuts, crude oil, petroleum derivatives, rare earths, metals, ores, pharmaceuticals, organic chemicals, fertilizers, aircraft, and aircraft parts.
-
Agro giant focuses on Brazil and announces an automated factory worth R$ 100 million to double production, after the market grew 22.8% and moved R$ 517 million; the company bets on cutting-edge technology to revolutionize the agricultural substrates sector.
-
Toyota confirms the end of an era in Brazil with the closure of a historic factory, but the new destination is still uncertain after the unit produced over 1 million Corollas in 28 years and ended operations with a billion-dollar investment in Sorocaba.
-
Does Bolsa Família create dependency? Understand how the social program works and why this question has once again divided opinions in Brazil.
-
Free PIX for Brazilians bothered the US: understand why Trump accuses the Central Bank of giving an unfair advantage to Brazil’s payment system
The list indicates that Washington removed from the charge inputs used by American companies and consumers, according to criteria presented in the public consultation process opened by the U.S. government.
By leaving these products out of the tariff, the proposal reduces the immediate scope of the measure on strategic areas of the Brazilian economy and keeps part of the U.S. imports of goods supplied by Brazil without a surcharge.
According to the USTR, some exceptions involve raw materials whose taxation could affect the internal U.S. supply, an argument used by the agency to justify the differentiation between Brazilian goods.
Brazilian products outside the 25% tariff
The surcharge proposal is not expected to reach informational materials, donations, accompanied luggage, and products already subject to national security tariffs provided for in Section 232 of U.S. trade legislation.
Also excluded are goods listed in an annex by the American government, which separated items from different sectors before opening the public comment phase on the tariff.
In the group of food and agricultural products, the list includes certain types of beef, fruits, nuts, coffee, tea, spices, cereals, seeds, oilseeds, industrial and medicinal plants, as well as straw and fodder.
Coffee appears among the excluded products at a time when Brazil remains one of the suppliers to the North American market, according to data used in foreign trade analyses.
In the area of natural resources, energy, and mining, the annex includes crude oil, petroleum derivatives, rare earths, metals, and ores, all cited among the goods that would not be subject to the additional 25% charge.
These items supply industrial and technological chains in the United States, especially sectors that depend on imported inputs for production, refining, transformation, or use in more complex equipment.
In the industrial segment, the American government included aircraft manufactured in Brazil, parts of the aeronautical sector, and other related components in the list of products that would be exempt from the proposed taxation.
The exclusion reduces the possibility of additional charges on a chain involving manufacturers, suppliers, maintenance, airlines, and international contracts signed between Brazilian and American companies.
Organic chemicals, pharmaceutical compounds, medicines, and fertilizers also appear on the list of goods spared by the proposal presented by the USTR at the end of the trade investigation.
In this group, the justification presented in the process relates to supply, production costs, and possible effects on sectors such as health, agriculture, and the chemical industry in the United States.
Why the United States Proposes the New Tariff
The 25% tariff was proposed after the conclusion of an investigation opened on July 15, 2025, by determination of President Donald Trump, based on the Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
This instrument allows the American government to investigate foreign practices considered unfair, discriminatory, or harmful to U.S. trade, before the eventual adoption of commercial retaliation measures.
According to the USTR, certain Brazilian policies related to digital trade, electronic payment services, preferential tariffs, anti-corruption efforts, intellectual property protection, ethanol market access, and illegal deforestation would be “unreasonable” or “discriminatory.”
In the evaluation of the American agency, these practices would burden or restrict U.S. trade, a formulation used to frame the Brazilian case under the rules of Section 301.
Pix was mentioned within the axis of digital trade and electronic payment methods, in one of the fronts analyzed by the U.S. government during the investigation opened in 2025.
The investigation also addressed intellectual property, a theme associated with piracy and counterfeiting, in addition to raising questions about ethanol, illegal deforestation, and the application of anti-corruption rules in Brazil.
When opening the investigation in July 2025, the United States Trade Representative, Jamieson Greer, stated that the USTR had detailed Brazilian practices that would restrict American exporters’ access to the national market.
The statement was made during a trade crisis between the two countries and accompanied the Trump administration’s decision to increase tariff pressure on Brazilian goods.
In the most recent document, the American agency argues that the additional tariff would be a possible response to the conclusions of the investigation, but the measure has not yet come into immediate effect.
Before any definitive application, the process includes public consultation, hearing, and final evaluation, stages in which companies, associations, and governments can present statements to the USTR.
Public consultation on the US tariff
The USTR has opened a period for interested parties to express their views on the scope of the tariff and on the list of products excluded from the additional charge proposed by the United States government.
Written contributions must be submitted by July 1, 2026, while requests to participate in the public hearing must be presented by June 22, 2026.
The hearing is scheduled for July 6, 2026, according to the schedule provided by the Office of the United States Trade Representative after the conclusion of the investigation.
After this stage, the American government is expected to evaluate arguments from companies, associations, governments, and other interested parties before deciding whether to apply the tariff, change its scope, or expand the exceptions.
The USTR document states that factors such as the availability of alternative suppliers, the risk of supply disruption, effects on the US economy, and the efficiency of the tariff in pressuring Brazil to change the questioned practices will be considered.
With these criteria, the proposal separates Brazilian products subject to the surcharge from items that, according to the American assessment, could generate undesirable effects on US production chains.
Instead of applying a uniform charge on all Brazilian goods, the American government presented a list of exclusions and opened space for interested parties to request adjustments before the final decision.
Trump tariffs against Brazilian products
The new proposal comes after a tariff offensive initiated by the Trump administration against Brazilian products in 2025, when Washington imposed additional charges on part of the imports coming from Brazil.
On July 30 of last year, the White House published Executive Order 14323, which imposed an additional 40% tariff on certain Brazilian articles.
In practice, this charge was added to existing tariffs and increased the tax burden on part of the Brazilian imports entering the United States market.
The American government justified the measure based on a national emergency linked to policies and actions attributed to the Brazilian government, according to documents released at the time by the White House.
Months later, on November 20, 2025, Trump modified the scope of this charge and removed certain Brazilian agricultural products from the additional tariff imposed that year.
The White House cited ongoing negotiations with the government of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and initial advances in bilateral talks to justify the removal of part of the tariffs.
The current proposal, based on Section 301, follows another legal path and targets specific trade practices pointed out by the USTR after a formal investigation opened against Brazil.
Unlike the executive order of 2025, the process provides for investigation, public consultation, and hearing before the adoption of any potential commercial retaliation against Brazilian products.
Even with the list of exceptions, the 25% tariff maintains pressure on Brazilian sectors that were not spared by the proposal presented by the United States government.
The final impact can only be measured after the definition of the final list of products subject to the surcharge and the potential implementation of the measure.
The Brazilian government had already contested the legitimacy of the investigation opened by the United States and argued that trade disputes should be addressed within the framework of the multilateral trade system.
Until the most recent conclusion of the USTR, the bilateral talks had not eliminated the differences pointed out by Washington.
Be the first to react!