Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
1 comment 
Foreign Capital Increases Indirect Control of Rural Areas in Brazil, According to Experts Gathered at USP, Using Funds and National Intermediary Companies. The Topic Involves Sovereignty, State Monitoring, FIAGRO, and Social Impacts in Strategic Regions.
Experts at USP Warn About Land Foreignization
Experts gathered at the Law School of USP warned that foreigners have been controlling Brazilian rural lands and properties through indirect means, outside the reach of public statistics and often, of oversight.
The topic dominated the panel “Foreignization and Land Grabbing,” held on Tuesday (30/9) during the International Symposium on Property and Foreigners.
Among the most frequent origins of this capital, United States, Portugal, Japan, and Canada were mentioned.
-
The government requests the Federal Revenue Service for a new system to automate the income tax declaration, reducing errors, time, and bureaucracy for millions of Brazilians.
-
Pix in installments, international Pix, and contactless payment without internet: the Central Bank revealed the new features coming to the tool that is already used by almost every adult in Brazil.
-
Mercado Livre has just started selling medications with delivery in up to three hours to your door, and this move could completely change the way Brazilians buy medicines on a daily basis.
-
In Dubai, rising tensions from the war in the Middle East are causing super-rich individuals to leave the Gulf and direct their fortunes to a new financial refuge in Asia.
Moderated by Professor José Fernando Simão (FDUSP), the debate brought together jurists and researchers who have been following the so-called “Financialization of Land”.
Lawyer Ney Strozake (MST) described the appropriation by foreign companies as a “more subtle” and “more legalistic” form of territorial occupation, aimed at producing commodities for export — and not for offering food to the domestic market.
In his assessment, the lack of state control over land use contradicts the social function of property provided for in the Constitution and threatens national and food security.
According to Strozake, the expansion of this capital reinforces land concentration and pushes peasant, indigenous, and quilombola people out of their territories.
He advocated for collaboration between universities and civil entities to monitor the phenomenon, promote qualified debates and demand budget and capacity from Incra.
How Foreign Capital Controls Land Without Direct Purchase (FIAGRO and Structures)
Economist and sociologist Sérgio Pereira Leite (UFRRJ) stated that the official numbers from Incra underestimate foreign control because a good portion of operations does not present itself as direct ownership by non-residents.
Instead, they resort to Brazilian subsidiaries, complex corporate structures, and, above all, financial vehicles.
A highlight was FIAGRO — a fund regulated by CVM — which allows the participation of non-resident investors, increasing the presence of foreign capital in agribusiness without necessarily appearing as the owner of rural properties.
Leite also pointed out the global scale of resources directed at land and agro-industrial assets.
In 2023, there were about 960 funds specializing in food and agriculture worldwide, a number that helps to explain the appetite for land in countries like Brazil.
Cases, Numbers, and Impacts on the Territory (Bahia, Piauí, MATOPIBA)
A study that Leite participated in identified 224 international companies with some degree of land control in Brazil, with a predominance of groups from the USA, Portugal, Japan, and Canada.
The actions involve everything from pension funds and university endowments to agribusiness, finance, and mining companies.
In several cases, these companies operate through firms with national names, making identification in the records difficult.
Examples mentioned in the panel include the presence of Harvard and the pension fund of American professors (TIAA).
Reports and journalistic dossiers show that structures linked to these investors have operated in Bahia and Piauí, with records of land conflicts, allegations of land grabbing, and corporate restructuring to circumvent legal obstacles.
The areas of Cotegipe (BA), associated with the company Caracol Agropecuária, and regions of MATOPIBA, including southern Piauí, appear in independent investigations.
The advance of this capital has economic and social effects.
According to Leite, the arrival of large investors pressures land prices significantly above inflation.
In Luís Eduardo Magalhães (BA), the accumulated appreciation would have reached 600% between 2001 and 2020, compared to 230% of inflation in the same period.
Additionally, there have been reports of forced displacements of rural and traditional populations, such as in São Raimundo Nonato (PI) and Cotegipe (BA).
The professor advocated for an urgent improvement in the state’s monitoring capacity over its own territory.
This involves a strengthening of Incra, which currently has insufficient structure to deal with this phenomenon.
FIAGRO and Transparency Gaps
The FIAGRO was established by Law 14.130/2021 and consolidated in the regulatory framework of CVM 175 and Annex VI (Resolution 214/2024).
By allowing broad fundraising — including from non-residents — and investments in rural properties through credits, leases, or corporate participation, the instrument facilitates foreign investment in the sector without requiring direct acquisition of properties.
For experts, this creates gray areas in the official measurement of “foreign ownership” and requires more transparency in identifying the investors.
Land Concentration and Sovereignty
The debate takes place in a country historically marked by land concentration.
Recognized reports indicate that almost half of the rural area is in the hands of 1% of properties, which deepens inequalities and conflicts in the countryside.
Research by Oxfam and analyses based on data from the Agricultural Census support this high concentration framework, although historical series present methodological differences.
With information gaps and the speed of financial operations, participants advocated for strengthening Incra and modernizing official records.
The idea is to improve monitoring of the territory and attribute responsibility to those who control large areas — whether through direct purchase or through corporate partnerships and investment funds.
Gender and Land: Female Participation
Lawyer Mônica Sapucaia Machado (IDP) brought the gender perspective.
She argued that, in a scenario of financial capital expansion over land, women tend to be pushed out of jobs and excluded from decision-making.
This assertion resonates with the female underrepresentation in the ownership and management of rural establishments in Brazil, as evidenced in recent surveys.
International studies, on the other hand, point out that the widely spread phrase that “women hold only 1% of the land in the world” is controversial and lacks comparable data across countries.
In Brazil, statistical cuttings show female participation significantly lower than male participation, but above this globalized level.
Regulatory Pathways to Protect Land Sovereignty
For Mônica Sapucaia Machado and other jurists, the challenge is to protect land sovereignty without hindering development.
This involves clear rules of transparency for funds, effective barriers to structures that mask the origins of capital, and governance tools that consider the territory as a strategic public good.
The guideline, they summarize, is to align development, democracy, and decolonization of the debate on land in Latin America.
If financial mechanisms allow control over vast areas without appearing as “foreign ownership,” what should be the priority of public power: mapping who commands, limiting the advance through funds, or revising the entire land access and use policy?
É um assunto que todos brasileiros deveriam se aprofundar mais,pois é de grande relevância para o país é afeta principalmente a classe mais pobre.