Last week, the House of Representatives approved, in a single round and by symbolic vote, Bill 2088/2023, which authorizes the Executive Branch to adopt trade, environmental, and intellectual property (IP)-related countermeasures against countries or economic blocs that impose restrictions on Brazilian exports. The proposal, which originated in the Senate, must now be signed into law by President Lula, expected to occur swiftly given the priority assigned by the government.

Geopolitical context

The approval takes place in a context of increasing adoption of more restrictive trade policies by some countries, intensified after the announcement by then U.S. President Donald Trump regarding the imposition of a 10% tariff on imports from Brazil, in addition to similar measures involving 58 other countries. These new tariffs add to existing restrictions on products such as steel, aluminum, and automobiles, and are applied non-cumulatively. In response, the Brazilian government issued a joint statement from the Ministries of Industry, Trade and Services, and Foreign Affairs, indicating the possibility of adopting diplomatic measures and, if necessary, taking action within the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The original bill was also motivated by concerns related to the European Union’s Anti-Deforestation Law, which sets stricter environmental traceability requirements for the importation of agricultural products. The European legislation, effective as of December 2025, will prohibit the entry of goods originating from areas deforested after December 31, 2020. Estimates suggest that up to 34% of Brazil’s exports to the European bloc could be affected, particularly in sectors such as soy, beef, and coffee.

Key Provisions of Bill 2088/2023

The bill establishes legal mechanisms for the adoption of countermeasures, including:

• Increased import tariffs on products from countries or blocs that impose barriers on Brazil;
• Suspension of trade or investment concessions;
• Suspension or limitation of obligations related to intellectual property;
• Blocking or limiting royalty remittances abroad, including through adjustments to Cide-Royalties (currently at 10%) and Condecine (11%), which fund Brazil’s innovation and audiovisual sectors, respectively.

These measures may be adopted in cases of “actions, policies or practices” that violate multilateral trade agreements, such as those under the WTO. It is important to note that Brazil does not have a preferential tariff agreement with the U.S., unlike agreements between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada.

Diplomatic caution and proportionality

Although the bill authorizes tools typically associated with trade retaliation, lawmakers argue that it prioritizes diplomacy, establishing that countermeasures must:

• Be proportional to the economic impact of the external actions;
• Be periodically monitored for their effects;
• Be reassessed based on the progress of diplomatic negotiations.

The bill also provides for public and technical consultations to guide the definition of countermeasures, aiming to avoid disproportionate impacts on the Brazilian economy.

Legislative process and political support

The bill was approved by a large majority in both the Senate (70 votes in favor) and the House, receiving support from both government and opposition members. The bill’s rapporteur in the House, Rep. Arnaldo Jardim (Cidadania-SP), emphasized the importance of balancing the defense of national interests with respect for the sovereignty of other countries.

During the vote, the Government Affairs team of Di Blasi, Parente & Associados, based in Brasília, met with the rapporteur to present specific concerns regarding the bill’s impact on the intellectual property sector—particularly the risk of using IP as a tool for trade retaliation, with potential consequences for strategic sectors such as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology.

During the legislative process, the Brazilian Association of Industrial Property Agents (ABAPI), chaired by partner Gabriel Di Blasi, in partnership with other major associations in the sector, proposed an amendment aimed at providing greater legal certainty and predictability in the application of IP-related countermeasures.

The amendment suggested a six-month limit on such measures, objective criteria for their application — such as the existence of a single local beneficiary with proven production capacity (local exploitation) — and bimonthly reviews of their effectiveness and economic impact. However, the final text did not incorporate these specific safeguards, instead maintaining broader language regarding the suspension of IP obligations. Although the bill provides that such measures should be exceptional and prioritize proportionality and periodic review, it lacks clear operational criteria, which may generate regulatory uncertainty and indirect impacts on strategic sectors that depend on predictability in the treatment of intangible assets.

Next Steps

The bill is expected to be signed into law by the President of the Republic ahead of the 15-day legal deadline. Following the sanction, the Executive Branch is expected to issue regulations detailing the procedures for imposing countermeasures — including public consultations, assessment deadlines, and suggested measures.

Our Public Affairs team at Di Blasi, Parente will continue to monitor developments on this matter.