Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
7 min of reading 
0 comments 
Created to respond to unilateral measures from other countries or economic blocs, the Reciprocity Law allows Brazil to adopt commercial countermeasures, suspend concessions, and react to tariffs that harm national competitiveness in international trade
The federal government contested the preliminary conclusion of the United States Trade Representative’s Office, known by the acronym USTR, that Brazil and 59 other countries had failed to prohibit or inspect the importation of goods produced with child or forced labor. In this scenario, the possibility arises for Brazil to use the Reciprocity Law.
The American assessment could pave the way for new tariffs, of up to 12.5%, on products imported from these countries.
In a statement released this Wednesday (3), the Brazilian government stated its “deep disagreement” with the conclusion announced by the USTR in the context of the investigation based on Section 301 of the United States trade legislation.
-
China found a loophole and is entering Europe through the back door by setting up an army of factories for batteries, tires, and auto parts on the other side of the Strait of Gibraltar, in Morocco, which bypass the tariffs of up to 45% that Brussels established precisely to block Chinese electric cars.
-
A new survey shows that the circular economy is gaining traction among Brazilians, but the preference for conventional products still hinders the sector’s progress, affecting investments, green job creation, and long-term environmental goals.
-
Vale abolishes the 6×1 schedule before the national law, sets a 40-hour workweek in its Brazilian units, and places one of the world’s largest mining companies at the center of a labor change that may still face resistance in the Senate.
-
Ranking of the world’s richest sees billionaire shift: Elon Musk reaches $835 billion and could become the first trillionaire with SpaceX, while Larry Ellison gains $71 billion with AI and surpasses Mark Zuckerberg.
For the Palácio do Planalto, the measure indiscriminately penalizes dozens of countries and the European Union by treating a topic considered sensitive in international trade relations as a generalized failure.
Brazilian government rejects preliminary conclusion of the USA
The Brazilian reaction occurs amid a new front of commercial tension with the United States. A day before the statement on forced labor, the American government had concluded another commercial investigation against Brazil and suggested the application of a 25% tariff on a significant portion of Brazilian exports to the North American market.
In the specific case of forced labor, the Brazilian government stated it considers it “regrettable” that the protection of decent conditions for workers is used as a justification for unilateral protectionist measures.
The Planalto also classified as “absurd” the association between economic competitiveness and external inputs obtained through trade that violates human dignity.
The official Brazilian position maintains that the country already has legal, administrative, and institutional instruments to combat forced labor and prevent the circulation of products associated with this type of violation. According to the government, products manufactured wholly or partially with forced labor may have their entry denied or be confiscated by the competent authorities.
Planalto cites ILO recognition
The note also highlights that the International Labour Organization has recognized Brazil for decades as an international reference in combating forced labor. This recognition, according to the Brazilian government, is linked to actions of inspection, accountability, institutional cooperation, and political commitment in addressing this type of practice.
The Ministry of Labor and Employment was also mentioned in the official statement. The government informed that the ministry remains available to maintain active cooperation with the United States Department of Labor, in an attempt to preserve technical dialogue channels even in the face of commercial divergence.
Furthermore, Planalto stated that the free trade agreements signed by Brazil and Mercosur include commitments to combat forced and compulsory labor. The note mentions instruments celebrated with Chile, the European Union, and the European Free Trade Association, known by the acronym EFTA, as examples of pacts that provide mechanisms to ensure the application of these norms.
Brazil says it can use the Reciprocity Law
Despite the disagreement, the Brazilian government stated it hopes that the preliminary conclusions of the USTR are not converted into effective tariffs. At the same time, it warned that it may adopt measures to reduce impacts on the economy, employment, and income if trade restrictions advance.
This is where the so-called Reciprocity Law comes in, cited by the Palácio do Planalto as a possible basis for a Brazilian response. The law was enacted in April 2025 and establishes criteria for the Executive Branch to suspend commercial concessions, investments, and obligations related to intellectual property rights in response to unilateral measures adopted by another country or economic bloc.
In practice, the law creates a legal instrument for Brazil to react to foreign decisions considered detrimental to Brazilian international competitiveness. It does not obligate the government to retaliate automatically, but authorizes the adoption of countermeasures when external actions, policies, or practices that negatively affect the country are identified.
What is the Reciprocity Law
Law No. 15,122, of April 11, 2025, was published in the Official Gazette of the Union on April 14, 2025. The text states that the rule applies when a country or economic bloc adopts measures that interfere with Brazil’s legitimate and sovereign choices, violate trade agreements, or nullify benefits obtained by the country in international treaties.
The law also covers unilateral measures based on environmental requirements more burdensome than the parameters adopted by Brazil. In these cases, elements such as the Paris Agreement, the Forest Code, the National Policy on Climate Change, the National Environmental Policy, Brazilian climate commitments, and specific attributes of the national productive system, such as the high participation of renewable energy in the electrical and energy matrices, must be considered.
Although this section has a strong relation to environmental disputes, the general structure of the law is broader. It authorizes the Executive to respond to unilateral measures that affect Brazilian competitiveness in trade, investments, and intellectual property. Therefore, the government has started citing it as a possible tool in the face of new tariffs or restrictions imposed by the United States.
What countermeasures the law allows
Among the countermeasures provided are restrictions on the importation of goods and services, imposition of commercial rights on imports from the country or bloc that adopted the contested measure, suspension of trade concessions, and suspension of obligations assumed by Brazil in international agreements.
The law also allows, in exceptional cases, the suspension of obligations related to intellectual property rights. This type of measure should be used only when other countermeasures are deemed inadequate to reverse the effects of the foreign action. The law itself establishes that this alternative is of an exceptional nature.
Another important point is proportionality. The Reciprocity Law determines that countermeasures should be, as far as possible, proportional to the economic impact caused by foreign actions. The text also advises that the Brazilian response seeks to minimize damage to economic activity and avoid disproportionate administrative costs.
Brazilian response needs to consider economic impacts
This means that even when Brazil decides to react, the law requires caution. The response should not be adopted randomly or purely politically. It needs to consider the effects on companies, consumers, supply chains, foreign trade, and ongoing diplomatic negotiations.
The law also provides for diplomatic consultations to try to mitigate or nullify the effects of the measures and countermeasures. This point indicates that commercial retaliation is not treated as the first mandatory path. Before or during the adoption of responses, the government should seek dialogue to reduce the impacts of the dispute.
The stages of implementing countermeasures must be defined in regulation. The law requires that this regulation provides for public consultations, deadlines for analyzing each case, and suggestions for measures. In this way, affected sectors will be able to present information before adopting a definitive response.
Provisional countermeasure can be adopted in exceptional cases
There is also provision for a provisional countermeasure in exceptional cases. This allows the Executive to act before the completion of all formal stages, provided the situation is considered urgent or extraordinary. Even so, the law maintains the need for subsequent monitoring.
The federal government is also authorized to alter or suspend the adopted countermeasures, considering the evolution of diplomatic negotiations and the verified economic effects. This flexibility allows adjusting the Brazilian response if the foreign country or bloc backs down, negotiates, or modifies the initially contested measure.
Mention of the law serves as a warning to the United States
In the case of the USTR’s conclusions on forced labor, the mention of the Reciprocity Law serves as a political and legal warning. Brazil signals that it disagrees with the American assessment, rejects the possibility of new tariffs, and may activate internal instruments if it believes that the United States’ measures harm its international competitiveness.
The dispute still depends on the next steps of the American government. The conclusions released by the USTR are preliminary, and the Brazilian government itself stated it hopes they will not be turned into effective tariffs. Until then, the official reaction seeks to combine public contestation, defense of Brazil’s track record in combating forced labor, and preservation of diplomatic channels.
The episode reinforces the importance of the Reciprocity Law as a response tool in an international environment marked by trade disputes, regulatory demands, and the increasing use of tariffs as a pressure instrument. For Brazil, the legislation creates a formal basis to react to external measures considered unilateral. For companies and exporting sectors, the outcome of the dispute could influence costs, access to the American market, and foreign trade strategies in the coming months.
Be the first to react!