Passed last week, the law ends incentives for companies participating in the soy moratorium—a 2006 agreement in which traders like Cargill, Bunge, and ADM pledged not to purchase soy from areas cleared after 2006 (later revised to 2008).
Under the new law, only soy from illegally deforested areas will be blocked from sale, while the moratorium previously banned all soy from properties with post-2008 deforestation.
Critics, including environmental groups and companies like Cargill, Bunge, and ADM, warn that this law could weaken environmental protections and harm sustainability efforts.
Reacting to the new legislation, Nathalie Lecoq, director general of FEDIOL, and Anton van den Brink, deputy secretary general of FEFAC, told FeedNavigator that the law’s intent is concerning. “It is aimed at cutting tax benefits of companies participating in agreements that impose restrictions on the expansion of agricultural activities into areas that can be legally deforested. The intention of such a law is to undermine initiatives in support of zero deforestation sourcing, such as the soy moratorium.”
They emphasized that the Amazon soy moratorium, supported by public authorities and stakeholders since 2006, has been an effective tool in reducing deforestation in the Amazon biome.
“The law still requires a decree from the State Governor to define further details. We hope that the necessary clarifications will give room to develop or maintain sustainability instruments, such as the Amazon Soy Moratorium, at a moment when the EU is setting up deforestation-free supply chains,” the representatives of the European oilseeds and feed trade groups added.
Aprosoja, the main group representing Brazilian soy growers, has long been pushing to end the soy moratorium, arguing that it is not in accordance with national legislation that allows some agricultural activities in the Amazon.
An effective tool under threat
Studies have shown the moratorium's significant role in Amazon preservation, with a 2020 Nature Food study highlighting its contribution to reducing deforestation in that region.
“The law is a setback,” said Bernardo Pires, sustainability director of the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries (Abiove), which supports the moratorium. “Companies committed to sustainability should receive twice as many benefits instead of losing them,” he told AP.
André Nassar, a representative of Abiove, has repeatedly cautioned that these changes would also affect consumer markets. He told a meeting of Brazilian stakeholders in July that a thorough analysis had been conducted to assess the potential consequences of ending the moratorium on Brazilian soybeans in international markets. The analysis concluded that lifting the moratorium would likely lead to a boycott of Brazilian soybeans abroad.
The law has sparked division within Brazil’s government. Agriculture Minister Carlos Fávaro has supported it, while others, including the Ministry of the Environment, argue that it undermines Brazil’s deforestation goals and national sustainability efforts.
