USA publishes list of products exempt from new tariffs

The measure is the result of a “Section 301” investigation that highlighted unfair commercial practices and Brazilian policies harmful to digital commerce, electronic payments and the environment.

However, to avoid collateral damage to his own economy, American President Donald Trump directed the creation of an extensive list of exceptions.

Earlier, the head of the USTR, Jamieson Greer, declared that there was a lack of commitment from the Brazilian government in negotiations to improve trade relations between the countries, according to reports from the broadcaster CNN.

The government of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) had already signaled the day before that it anticipated an unfavorable decision. After the US announcement, Palácio do Planalto said, in a statement, that it intends to apply the Reciprocity Law and classified the tariff as a “regrettable milestone” in relations between the two countries.

The American government has spared products that fall into four categories:

• Raw materials that, if taxed, would disrupt US domestic supplies;
• Products that could generate imbalances throughout the American economy;
• Items that cannot be produced on American soil in sufficient quantities or at reasonable prices, and that do not have alternative sources of supply outside Brazil;
• Articles whose taxation would not contribute in a practical way to convince Brazil to eliminate the questioned practices.

Industrial and agricultural inputs saved

Several strategic sectors were protected by the exemptions. In heavy industry, pig iron and iron and steel waste will not be charged.

The justification is that American foundries depend on Brazilian pig iron, since more than 95% of US domestic production is consumed internally by the integrated steel mills themselves, leaving little for the free market.

Another critical exempt item is aluminum hydroxide. Brazil supplies around 40% of this input to the USA, which is essential for the sanitation of drinking water and for the manufacture of flame retardant materials used in defense and industry.

Coffee, meat and honey

In the food sector, unflavored instant coffee and organic honey were highlighted. Brazil supplies 80% of American honey imports, while local US production covers just 3% of demand. Instant coffee was spared because it does not have domestic production sources in the US.

Various cuts of fresh, chilled or frozen beef, including carcasses, bone-in and boneless cuts are also exempt. Despite requests from American producers to tax Brazilian meat, the exemption was maintained due to limited availability outside Brazil.

The list of exceptions includes fish such as tuna (yellow gall and bigeye), mackerel, swordfish, tilapia (fresh or frozen, including fillets), as well as lobsters and other marine crustaceans. See below for more exceptions:

• Coffee beans (unroasted or roasted, decaffeinated or not), coffee pods and substitutes;
• Green tea, black tea and mate;
• Coconuts, Brazil nuts, cashew nuts, common chestnuts and macadamia nuts;
• Bananas, pineapples, avocados, guavas, mangoes, mangosteens, papayas, oranges, lemons and kiwis;
• Açaí (fruit, juice and preparations for making drinks).
• Orange juice (frozen or not), lemon juice, pineapple juice and coconut water.

Health and technology

The list of exemptions also prioritized public health. Pharmaceuticals and active ingredients used in the manufacture of medicines were excluded from the surcharge to avoid increasing costs in the American healthcare system. In addition, informational materials, humanitarian donations and accompanied personal luggage remain exempt.

Products that will be surcharged

The 25% tariff can be applied to any commodity or economic sector in Brazil, regardless of whether the sector is involved in the practices that motivated the American investigation.

Only products that appear on the list of exceptions will be free of charge. Among the items that will be taxed are high-purity dissolving cellulose and chemical products for non-pharmaceutical use.

The decision to remove cellulose from the exemption list was based on allegations that Brazilian producers benefit from illegal deforestation to reduce costs.

The USTR rejected exclusion requests for several sectors, which will continue to be charged at 25%, including:

• Agricultural, mining and construction machinery;
• Footwear, clothing (except used clothing) and gardening tools;
• Organic sugar and other agricultural products not specified in the exemption list;
• Rubber components for vehicles, electrical machinery, paper and certain steel items.

USTR final report against Brazil

The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) detailed the technical and legal arguments that led to the decision to impose a 25% tariff on Brazilian imports, effective July 22, 2026.

According to the official document, the investigation conducted under “Section 301” concluded that several acts, policies and practices of the Brazilian government are “unreasonable or discriminatory” and represent a burden that restricts North American commerce.

Among the reasons are Brazilian policies aimed at digital commerce and electronic payment services. The USTR determined that these practices are subject to trade action because they harm the competitiveness of US companies.

US industrial sectors have argued that tariffs against Brazil are an appropriate measure to allow the country to recover market value lost as a result of tariffs imposed by Brazil on American ethanol.

The USTR said it has received testimony alleging that Brazilian producers gain an unfair competitive advantage by benefiting from deforestation, which would artificially reduce land and input costs compared to American producers.

The investigation also highlighted alleged failures in the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in Brazil. The US government has stressed that these concerns have not been resolved despite continued engagement in forums such as the annual “Special 301” report.

The report emphasizes that bilateral consultations with the Brazilian government did not result in a satisfactory solution to American concerns. Therefore, the application of a tariff was considered necessary to force the elimination of the questioned practices.

In addition to the sectors mentioned, the investigation also included in its scope criticisms of the application of anti-corruption laws and the existence of preferential tariffs considered “unfair” adopted by Brazil. The American government concluded that alternatives, such as negotiations without imposing fees or a lower rate, would be less effective in achieving its objectives.