Growth Energy, the nation’s largest biofuel trade association, will testify today in favor of proposed penalties for Brazil’s unfair restrictions on imports of U.S. ethanol. The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is hosting a hearing on the issue following a year-long investigation into Brazil’s trade practices. Growth Energy also filed written comments earlier this month, welcoming USTR’s proposal to impose tariffs of 25 percent on all goods from Brazil and calling for additional actions to repair the harm Brazil has caused U.S. farmers and ethanol producers. “Brazil has been systematically working to undermine the U.S. bioeconomy since 2017, all while enjoying complete and unfettered access to American markets,” explained Growth Energy’s Chris Bliley, Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs in written testimony. “We support the administration’s efforts to restore balance to our trade relationship with Brazil. To that end, we’re encouraging USTR to go beyond the proposed tariff, and take additional actions to end deceptive practices designed to disguise illegal deforestation by Brazilian producers and block U.S. products from participating in clean fuel markets.”
Among other remedies, Growth Energy is calling on USTR to work with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to remove Brazilian ethanol’s ability to generate credits under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Currently, RenovaBio, Brazil’s renewable fuel program, effectively blocks U.S. biofuels, even as Brazilian ethanol receives favorable treatment under the U.S. program. “Brazil continues to stoke unfounded claims about land use change attributed to U.S. ethanol—yet the land use change and deforestation continue in Brazil. And remarkably, we are charged a land use change penalty by regulators both here and abroad for things that are occurring in Brazil,” Bliley will say in his verbal testimony. “These unfounded penalties directly harm our ethanol exports to the United Kingdom, Japan, and the European Union and are inherent barriers to the use of U.S. ethanol as a marine or sustainable aviation fuel. All while Brazil continues to seek a free pass for its own producers. It makes no sense.” Read more about proposed remedies in Bliley’s testimony, as prepared for delivery today here.
United States Cattlemen’s Association appeared today before the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to testify in support of strong, comprehensive trade action against Brazilian beef under Section 301, following USTR’s determination that Brazil’s acts, policies, and practices are unreasonable and burden U.S. commerce. Testifying on behalf of USCA, Director of Policy & Public Affairs Jenna Stanton called for additional tariffs on all Brazilian bovine products—including carcasses, cuts, trim, and edible offal—citing systemic illegal deforestation, coerced labor, and corruption in Brazil’s cattle sector. “Brazil’s cattle sector enjoys an unfair advantage that no U.S. rancher can—or would ever want to—compete with: a virtually unlimited supply of cheap, illegally created land and labor,” Stanton told the panel. “Those are not isolated abuses; they are business models. We are simply asking for a market where everyone plays by the same basic rules.”
USCA’s testimony urged USTR to:
- Apply an additional 25% tariff to all Brazilian bovine products under the relevant Chapter 2 tariff lines,
- Reject carve‑outs for lean trim or variety meats that would invite relabeling and product shifting, and
- Tie any future relaxation of measures to independently-verified sustained improvements in Brazil’s deforestation, labor, traceability, and anti‑corruption enforcement.
“This is not a food security or affordability question,” Stanton noted. “Imposing tariffs on Brazilian beef will not empty grocery store shelves. Right now, our members are being asked to compete in a market where one side follows strict environmental, labor, and animal‑husbandry rules, and the other side gets a leg up for violating global standards.”
USCA President Justin Tupper underscored what the case means for ranching families: “Every box of Brazilian beef produced on illegally cleared land or with coerced labor sends a message to U.S. cattle producers that their investments in conservation, humane treatment, and compliance with our laws don’t matter,” Tupper said. “This Section 301 case is a chance to send a different message—that the United States will not reward deforestation, forced labor, and corruption with premium access to the most valuable beef market in the world. We’re asking USTR to stand with the independent producers who are doing things the right way and adopt strong, comprehensive tariffs on all Brazilian bovine products, with no loopholes big enough to drive a container ship through.” USCA previously submitted detailed written comments in the investigation, documenting the links between Brazil’s cattle expansion and illegal deforestation, coerced labor, and systemic corruption, as well as the impact of those practices on U.S. producers. The hearing is part of USTR’s process to determine the scope and design of any Section 301 actions in response to Brazil’s unreasonable acts, policies, and practices. This advocacy continues USCA’s longstanding leadership on the issue. USCA Director Emeritus Leo McDonnell’s 2023 Senate testimony notably spotlighted Brazil’s unfair practices, rampant deforestation, and labor abuses—bringing national attention to the need for rigorous enforcement and reform. To read more about this Section 301 process, see the most recent notice from USTR here. You can view this press release on the USCA website here.
Matt Frostic, a Michigan farmer and leader representing the National Corn Growers Association, told the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative this week that the organization supports the proposed 25% tariffs that would include Brazilian ethanol imports and urged the investigation to consider the full scope of the South American country’s action that have penalized U.S. corn growers. The remarks were made during a hearing on the issue on Monday and come after Brazil imposed an 18% tariff on U.S. ethanol in addition to other actions domestically and internationally aimed at placing U.S. ethanol at a disadvantage compared to Brazilian ethanol. “U.S. corn growers felt the effects of the tariff as market access sharply declined,” Frostic told the agency. “In 2018, Brazil was the top market for U.S. ethanol exports by far. Once the tariff was reimposed, the market nearly evaporated, showing that Brazil’s tariff was indeed responsible for the sudden decline of U.S. ethanol exports to Brazil.” While Brazil was imposing tariffs that resulted in a decline of American exports, its sugarcane ethanol was being imported into the United States at an increasing rate, Frostic added. As USTR considers additional proposed action to impose import restrictions, Frostic called on the agency to look at Brazil’s refusal to allow U.S. ethanol producers to obtain approval for their domestic biofuels program. He said the actions show clear discrimination against U.S. ethanol producers. “The United States does not impose such restrictions on participation in our Renewable Fuel Standard, and Brazilian companies are allowed to participate. This should be given strong consideration as USTR continues this investigation.” Frostic also said Brazil’s international advocacy touting a low environmental footprint is nothing short of a guise to artificially boost its carbon intensity score over American farmers. “Brazil claims that its corn is a secondary crop, such that inputs and land used are more minor compared to the United States,” he said. “But this could not be more incorrect, as land conversion from grassland or rainforest in Brazil is not properly documented.” Frostic said more needs to be done to regain market access to Brazil and ensure an international level playing field for U.S. corn growers.
Read Submitted Testimony
