Arabfields, Naïla Mokhtari, Correspondent, São Paulo, Brasil — Brazil’s agricultural chemicals industry is facing growing divisions over the rapid expansion of Chinese pesticide imports, as domestic manufacturers push for higher import duties while distributors and agricultural businesses warn that the proposed measures could increase costs for farmers.
The dispute has intensified following a request by the National Union of Plant Protection Products Industry (Sindiveg) to raise import tariffs on selected agricultural pesticides to as much as 35%. The proposal, submitted to Brazil’s Foreign Trade Chamber (Camex) in October, covers several fungicides, herbicides and insecticides used extensively in the country’s agricultural sector.
The products concerned include chemicals based on mancozeb, 2,4-D, azoxystrobin, tebuconazole and prothioconazole, as well as insecticides containing bifenthrin and lambda-cyhalothrin.
Sindiveg argues that the rapid growth of imports, particularly from China, is weakening the competitiveness of Brazilian manufacturers and threatening industrial investment and employment. The organisation believes higher tariffs could help restore more balanced competition between locally manufactured products and imported formulations.
The figures underline the scale of the challenge. Between January and September 2026, Brazilian imports across six pesticide tariff categories covered by industry proposals reached approximately $2.79 billion. China accounted for $1.36 billion, representing almost 49% of the total value.
China’s share of imports in these categories has increased considerably, rising from 10.5% in 2020 to 48.8% in 2026. The growing presence of Chinese suppliers reflects their competitive pricing and expanding role in international agricultural chemical markets.
However, the proposed tariff increases have exposed disagreements within the industry itself. Several companies, including Agroallianz, BRA Agroquímica, Indofil Brasil and AgriConnection, have criticised the initiative, arguing that higher import duties could reduce product availability and increase costs for agricultural producers.
Agroallianz warned that additional charges could reduce farmers’ negotiating power and affect investment decisions. For soybean and maize producers, who already face pressure from fertiliser, fuel and financing expenses, more expensive crop protection products could further squeeze operating margins.
The disagreement has also prompted changes within industry associations. Tecnomyl Brasil and SML Brasil have criticised Sindiveg’s position and decided not to renew their memberships. Their departure highlights the growing divide between manufacturers seeking stronger protection and businesses whose commercial models depend partly on imported agricultural chemicals.
The consequences are particularly important for Brazil’s farming communities. Pesticides are essential to protecting major crops against weeds, insects and plant diseases. Any significant increase in input costs could influence planting decisions, farm profitability and the competitiveness of Brazilian agricultural exports.
Meanwhile, multinational agrochemical company Adama has announced plans to close its manufacturing facility in Taquari, in Rio Grande do Sul state. The factory produces active ingredients including picoxystrobin and trifluralin, which the company intends to import instead.
The closure illustrates the structural challenges facing domestic production. Although manufacturers argue that higher tariffs could encourage local industrial activity, the relocation of production and continued reliance on imported ingredients suggest that rebuilding domestic manufacturing capacity may require more than changes to import taxation.
Looking ahead to 2027, the outcome of the discussions at Camex could reshape Brazil’s agricultural chemicals market. If the proposed tariffs are approved, imported formulations could become more expensive, potentially creating greater opportunities for domestic manufacturers. However, the extent of any shift towards local production will depend on manufacturing capacity, investment costs and access to imported active ingredients.
For farmers, the central concern will remain the affordability and availability of essential agricultural inputs ahead of the next planting seasons. Higher protection for domestic industry could support some manufacturers, but it could also increase production expenses across Brazil’s major agricultural supply chains.
The debate therefore reflects a broader economic challenge for Brazil: how to strengthen its industrial base without undermining the competitiveness of one of the world’s largest agricultural producers. As negotiations continue, manufacturers, importers and farmers will be watching closely for a decision that could have lasting consequences for the country’s agribusiness sector.
