Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
4 min of reading 
0 comments 
The investigation opened by the Trump administration gathers criticisms of Pix, digital commerce, intellectual property, ethanol, and Brazilian environmental policies
A broad commercial investigation conducted by the United States has once again heightened tensions between Brasília and Washington. The process, initiated in July of last year by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, gathers accusations related to Pix, digital commerce, ethanol, intellectual property, trade tariffs, and the fight against deforestation. The investigation gained relevance after the meeting between Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Donald Trump at the White House, where the two presidents discussed a solution to the impasse. Sources indicate that the American government is close to announcing the results of the investigation, which served as a basis for tariffs against Brazilian products.
Pix becomes one of the main targets of the American investigation
The Pix has taken a central position in the debate because the United States sees potential harm to American electronic payment companies. According to USTR documents, Brazilian policies in the digital sector could affect the competitiveness of foreign companies in the country. Experts consulted by BBC News Brazil, however, assess that the system created by the Central Bank has expanded financial inclusion and stimulated competition. The presence of Pix in the investigation is also associated with technological competition with services like Apple Pay, Google Pay, and WhatsApp Pay. Welber Barral, former Secretary of Foreign Trade, states that Pix does not prevent private competitors, as other payment methods remain authorized in Brazil.
Digital commerce broadens divergences between the two countries
The investigation also addresses Supreme Federal Court decisions on digital platforms and the accountability of social networks. The USTR claims that changes in this field could affect American companies present in the Brazilian market. Technology and digital rights specialists, on the other hand, argue that similar regulations are being discussed in various regions of the world. Bruna Martins dos Santos, from the organization Witness, assesses that sovereign countries have been developing their own norms for the digital environment. This debate heightens tension, as it involves digital sovereignty, the freedom of platforms to operate, and responsibility for illegal content.
-
French Navy intercepts a sanctioned Russian oil tanker in the high seas more than 740 km off Brittany, captain refuses to comply, ship appears without a flag, and Moscow reacts furiously, calling the operation illegal and comparing it to an act of international piracy.
-
Attacks on refineries in Iran release a gigantic toxic cloud with 33,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, crossing 2,000 kilometers in just two days and triggering an environmental alert compared to a large-scale volcanic eruption.
-
The USA and Ukraine signed an agreement in 2025 that gives Washington priority access to lithium, titanium, uranium, and rare earths in exchange for military aid. The country, which has one-third of Europe’s lithium reserves and 7% of the continent’s titanium, is negotiating sovereignty over resources worth trillions using geological maps made by the Soviet Union 60 years ago.
-
The USA classifies PCC and Comando Vermelho as terrorists, targets asset freeze and material support, but the decision opens a diplomatic crisis with Brazil and reignites alert over sovereignty, sanctions, and the fight against organized crime in a year of national political tension.
Ethanol, tariffs, and trade agreements enter the center of the dispute
Traditional commercial issues also remain the focus of the investigation. The American government questions tariff agreements made by Brazil with countries such as Mexico and India, alleging preferential treatment for certain products. Ethanol has once again become one of the most sensitive points, as the United States criticizes Brazil’s 18% tariff on American fuel. Experts claim that the measure seeks to protect national producers, especially plants in the Northeast. The dispute shows how agricultural, industrial, and energy interests continue to influence the trade relationship between the two countries.
Intellectual property and anti-corruption also appear in the investigation
Another axis of the investigation involves protection of intellectual property, product counterfeiting, digital piracy, and delays in patent analysis by the National Institute of Industrial Property. American documents cite Rua 25 de Março, in São Paulo, as an example of concern with counterfeit products. The investigation also mentions transparency and anti-corruption, arguing that institutional failures could harm American companies. Welber Barral acknowledges that there are internal problems in Brazil but assesses that trade tariffs would not solve this type of issue.
Deforestation becomes part of the economic debate
Illegal deforestation entered the investigation because the United States claims that areas opened irregularly could create a competitive advantage for Brazilian agricultural products. The American document acknowledges a recent drop in rates but considers that the levels are still high. Data from MapBiomas, released in May this year, indicated a 32.4% reduction in national deforestation in 2024. Even so, the accumulated amount between 2019 and 2024 remains significant. The inclusion of the topic shows how trade, environment, technology, and foreign policy have come to walk together in the same impasse.
The future of the dispute between Brazil and the United States
The investigation tends to influence trade negotiations, diplomatic decisions, and discussions on economic sovereignty in the coming months. The stalemate involves the interests of American companies, Brazilian public policies, and strategic sectors such as digital payments, agribusiness, energy, and technology. The outcome may determine whether tariffs will be maintained, revised, or expanded.
In this scenario, does the inclusion of Pix, ethanol, tariffs, and deforestation in the same investigation represent a legitimate concern with market rules or a growing dispute for global economic influence?
Be the first to react!