In April 2026, the Tribunal of the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (“CADE”, in its Portuguese acronym) approved a settlement agreement with a developer of algorithmic pricing software used by fuel stations, in what was CADE’s first case involving alleged algorithmic collusion. Following the settlement, CADE dismissed the proceedings against the second defendant, a sectoral association, for lack of evidence that it had influenced competitors to adopt uniform commercial practices in the Brazilian fuel market by instructing fuel stations to use the software.
Also in April, CADE reaffirmed its growing scrutiny of the competitive implications of pricing tools and automated systems by initiating an administrative proceeding to investigate alleged price parallelism in the airline ticket market. In its decision to open the investigation, CADE’s Superintendence-General (“SG”) identified airlines’ use of automated pricing techniques and the sector’s high level of concentration as factors that may raise competition concerns.
In May, CADE’s Tribunal examined four transactions involving digital markets and artificial intelligence that fell below the mandatory turnover-based merger filing thresholds but were subject to preliminary review due to their potential competitive relevance. The cases involved atypical transaction structures, including technology licensing, coordinated team hiring, and cloud infrastructure arrangements.
CADE closed three proceedings for lack of evidence of potential competitive harm, but information obtained during the review led to the opening of two new proceedings involving acquisitions of AI startups by a major search platform. In the fourth case, involving technology licensing and the hiring of nearly all employees of an AI startup by a major tech company, CADE found that the arrangement could amount to an acquisition and ordered its notification. Acting President Diogo Thomson noted that such transactions may transfer relevant assets, intellectual property, technological capabilities, and strategic personnel with potential competitive impact, even where the parties have limited turnover in Brazil.
Also in May 2026, CADE’s Tribunal approved Resolution No. 38/2026, establishing a governance framework for consensual solutions in cases under judicial review, as well as rules for the payment and collection of fines imposed by CADE.
Among other measures, the resolution provides for a 10% discount on the amount due for timely payment in full, subject to acknowledgment of the debt and waiver of administrative appeals or judicial challenges to CADE’s decision. In cases involving matters already subject to judicial proceedings, the debtor must also withdraw the related lawsuits. The resolution also provides for the possibility of paying outstanding debts in installments and for the establishment of a negotiation committee composed of representatives of the Tribunal, the SG, and the Specialized Federal Attorney’s Office to pursue consensual solutions.
In June, CADE’s Tribunal ruled on two international cartel investigations involving automotive components, fining companies and executives a total of approx. BRL 100 million.
In the first case, which concerned the market for automotive wiring harnesses and electrical and electronic automotive components (also investigated in other countries, such as the U.S. and Canada), CADE found that references to Brazil in the cartel discussions and potential effects on Brazilian territory established its jurisdiction. The second case concerned the markets for airbag modules, seat belts, and steering wheels. The Tribunal held that, although the relevant components were manufactured outside Brazil, they entered the Brazilian market directly through imports or indirectly as components incorporated into vehicles sold in Brazil.
In July, CADE’s Tribunal overturned an interpretation adopted by the SG under which certain transactions involving foreign companies had been exempted from mandatory notification where the target, considered individually, did not meet the lower Brazilian turnover threshold of BRL 75 million for merger control purposes.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that, under the current rules, the applicable thresholds must be assessed at the economic-group level, rather than at the level of the target alone, thus confirming that mandatory pre-merger notification may be required even where the target is a foreign company with limited or no turnover in Brazil.
Also in July, CADE’s Tribunal ruled on two cases involving alleged “hub-and-spoke” cartels, a practice treated as a by-object infringement and subject to the same legal standard as a classic cartel. The combined fines imposed in the two proceedings exceed BRL 12 million.
In both cases, the Tribunal partially convicted companies and individuals accused of restricting competition in public and private bidding processes through the coordination of distributors by their respective suppliers. The first proceeding originated from a leniency agreement and involved the market for electronic testing and measurement instruments. In the decision, the Reporting Commissioner emphasized that, even when companies sell the same brand, they remain competitors, which is essential for the submission of independent bids in a bidding process.
The second case, which concerned the digital whiteboard market, originated from CADE’s first-ever “hub-and-spoke” cartel conviction, issued in 2023. Notably, in this case the Tribunal pierced the corporate veil of a distributor, holding its managing partner personally liable for payment of the fine.
The Chamber of Foreign Trade (“CAMEX”, in its Portuguese acronym) approved GECEX Resolution No. 906/2026, which governs public interest assessments in trade defense measures. The rule formalizes an additional channel for CAMEX action, allowing members of CAMEX’s Executive Management Committee (“GECEX”, in its Portuguese acronym) to propose interventions in trade defense measures on public interest grounds, even in the absence of a formal administrative request, provided that they submit adequate justification. The mechanism does not replace the technical review conducted by the Department of Trade Defense (“DECOM”, in its Portuguese acronym) but opens a new avenue for action in such cases.
The resolution also assigns powers to the Committee on Trade Defense and Public Interest (“CDCIP”, in its Portuguese acronym), a collegiate advisory technical body that supports GECEX’s decisions and whose internal rules were subsequently approved by GECEX Resolution No. 922/2026. In addition, it expressly provides for the possibility of administrative appeals against the decisions adopted.
The President of Brazil published Decree No. 13,081/26, promulgating the Mercosur–Singapore Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force on August 1, 2026. This is the first trade agreement concluded between Mercosur and a Southeast Asian country.
Upon its entry into force, Singapore immediately eliminated tariffs on all products originating in Mercosur. Mercosur, in turn, will gradually liberalize 95.8% of the negotiated tariff lines. Brazil’s main exports to Singapore include fuel oils, machinery and equipment, and meat products.
The Secretariat for Foreign Trade (“SECEX”, in its Portuguese acronym) launched a public consultation to gather private-sector input on the implementation of paragraph 39 of Annex 18-A to the Mercosur–EU Free Trade Agreement.
The objective is to identify products originating in Mercosur that contribute to forest conservation and restoration, sustainable forest management, or the protection of vulnerable ecosystems. Once identified, these products may benefit from preferential or additional market access, technical assistance, and capacity-building measures.
China recently published a document entitled “China’s Position on the So-Called Excess Capacity Issue”, in which it responds to allegations by countries such as the United States and the European Union that China is flooding global markets with products resulting from excess capacity. In the document, China portrays itself as an innovative country and a source of opportunity, while also advocating for multilateral cooperation and reform of the WTO.
According to China, these allegations are unfounded because: (i) there is no universally accepted conceptual definition of excess capacity, and capacity utilization rates naturally vary across industries; (ii) industrial subsidies do not, in and of themselves, cause excess capacity and are a common market practice; (iii) a trade surplus should not be equated with excess capacity, and China’s share of the global trade surplus is reasonable; (iv) global economic imbalances are systemic in nature and do not result from an alleged shortfall in domestic demand in China; and (v) competition constitutes a natural mechanism for adjusting production capacity, and China does not engage in unfair trade practices.
On September 16, Sistema Indústria (CNI, SESI, SENAI and IEL – a network of organizations representing and supporting Brazil’s industrial sector) and the Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services (“MDIC”, in its Portuguese acronym) entered into a two-year technical cooperation agreement aimed at strengthening the competitiveness of Brazil’s industrial sector.
The partnership, structured around four pillars, encompasses initiatives to expand exports, diversify markets, strengthen trade defense, promote the internationalization of companies, and improve access to foreign markets. The pillars are: (i) governance, dialogue, and institutional coordination; (ii) knowledge production, intelligence gathering, and policy formulation; (iii) development of and support for export capacity; and (iv) training and skills development.
According to the parties, the agreement will enhance coordination among public policies, technical expertise, and support services for the productive sector, contributing to a broader industrial policy aligned with the current international trade landscape, which is characterized by rising trade barriers and transformations in global supply chains.
Initiation of Investigations and Reviews. The following are some of the main trade remedy investigations and reviews initiated by SECEX:
Frozen potatoes from Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands
Anti-circumvention review initiated to assess whether frozen potatoes are being imported from Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands with marginal modifications (light seasoning) relative to the product subject to the antidumping duty, allegedly with no economic justification other than undermining the duty’s effectiveness.
Citric acid and certain citrate salts and esters from China
Redetermination of the antidumping duty requested by an industry association, based on indications that the measure’s effectiveness has been compromised by duty absorption. The redetermination covers one Chinese company.
Reciprocating compressors for refrigeration from China
Investigation initiated at the request of the main domestic producer. Topics that may draw attention include the sharp increase in Chinese imports during the period of investigation and the fact that the injury trend can only be identified over P2-P5, whereas P1 was the petitioner’s worst period.
Glass tableware from China and Egypt
Investigation initiated at the request of an industry association, on behalf of the main domestic producer. Topics that may draw attention include the sharp increase in imports from both origins after the previous antidumping duty lapsed in 2022, and the cumulative assessment of Egyptian imports, which benefit from a tariff preference under the Mercosur–Egypt agreement.
Lactic acid and its salts from China
Investigation requested by the sole domestic producer of the like product. Topics that may draw attention include the 345% increase in Chinese imports while the Brazilian market shrank, and the 213% dumping margin, which relies on the Netherlands as the surrogate country, with normal value based on invoices submitted by the petitioner, whose parent company operates there.
Liquid and crystalline sorbitol from China and India
Investigation requested by the sole domestic producer of the like product. Topics that may draw attention include the use of India, itself an investigated origin, as the surrogate country for China (the authority rejected the United States, which had been suggested by the petitioner), and the fact that price undercutting was found only from P3 onwards, when imports surged.
Welded line pipe from China
Investigation requested by the sole domestic producer of the like product. Topics that may draw attention include the near-collapse of domestic sales and production (around -90% between P1 and P5) in a growing market, and the use of US spot price quotations covering only part of the diameter range in the scope as the basis for normal value (151.7% dumping margin).
Tempered glass for use in household appliances from China
Investigation requested by an industry association. Topics that may draw attention include the concentration of injury in the last period (P4-P5), given that Chinese imports fell and domestic sales grew over the full period, and the 230.1% dumping margin, based on a normal value constructed from the domestic industry’s cost structure.
Preliminary Determinations. SECEX issued six preliminary determinations in antidumping investigations, including only one recommendation to impose provisional antidumping duties and one negative injury finding (highlights below).
E-type and/or E-CR-type glass fibers from China and Egypt
SECEX recommended the imposition of provisional duties to prevent injury to the domestic industry (duty rates ranging from USD 243.42/t to USD 456.44/t). CAMEX approved the provisional duties for a period of up to six months.
Disposable syringes from India and Paraguay
The preliminary determination reached a negative conclusion on injury, as the industry’s operating results peaked at the end of the period of investigation. The investigation will continue.
Conclusion of Investigations and Other Reviews. The following definitive duties were imposed or amended by CAMEX:
Metallic magnesium from China
Following a redetermination proceeding, CAMEX increased the definitive antidumping duty on imports upon finding that the measure’s effectiveness had been compromised.
PET resin from Malaysia and Vietnam
CAMEX imposed a definitive antidumping duty on imports from Malaysia and Vietnam (ranging from USD 24.28/t to USD 160.87/t).
Public Interest: SECEX initiated one public interest assessment at the direct request of interested parties.
Single-mode optical fibers from China
SECEX decided, following the submission of petitions by companies in the sector and their representative entities, to initiate a public interest assessment of the antidumping duty.
Public Interest (ex officio):Following CAMEX’s approval, in May 2026, of proposals to impose definitive antidumping duties coupled with the immediate suspension of their enforceability on public interest grounds, the authority decided to initiate, on its own motion, a public interest assessment proceeding for the following products:
Denise Junqueira
Competition and Antitrust Law
Economic Regulation
Trade Defense and International Trade
djunqueira@cascione.com.br