Arabfields, Naïla Mokhtari, North, South and Central America Correspondent — A new survey of rice sold in Brazil is raising questions about whether consumers are always getting the quality promised on the package. The investigation, conducted by the Federation of Rice Growers’ Associations of Rio Grande do Sul, found substantial discrepancies between the “Type 1” classification printed on some packages and the quality of the rice inside.

The survey examined 268 samples collected from 167 supermarkets and other retail outlets across Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina, Paraná, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Minas Gerais. The products were collected between November 2025 and January 2026, with researchers travelling roughly 8,500 kilometres to gather samples for laboratory analysis.

Of the 268 samples, 215, or 80.22 percent, did not meet the requirements associated with the Type 1 classification claimed on their packaging. The researchers stressed that the figure does not represent all Type 1 rice sold in Brazil. The samples were deliberately selected because of visible signs of irregularities or unusually low prices.

For shoppers, the difference may become apparent only after the rice reaches the kitchen. Packages containing a higher proportion of broken grains can behave differently during cooking, often producing a softer or stickier result than consumers expect from a premium classification.

That distinction matters in a country where rice is an everyday staple. For people shopping on a tight budget, a cheaper package can appear to be an obvious choice. But when the product is sold under a higher classification than the contents justify, the saving may come with a less satisfactory result.

The findings also concern legitimate producers and processors. Companies that comply with classification rules face competition from products that may be sold at similar prices despite containing rice of a lower commercial grade. For farmers, the issue extends beyond the supermarket shelf because problems further down the supply chain can affect confidence in the quality of the crop itself.

The survey found particularly striking examples of broken grains. Some samples marketed as Type 1 contained 18 percent or even 35 percent broken grains, levels that can correspond to lower classifications under Brazilian standards.

The federation says it intends to submit the findings to the appropriate authorities, including agricultural regulators and public prosecutors. The cases could lead to administrative, civil or criminal investigations, depending on what authorities establish about each product and the companies involved.

The 2026 figures are likely to increase pressure for closer monitoring of rice classification. If regulators expand testing beyond the products selected in this survey, the next stage of the investigation could provide a clearer picture of how widespread the problem is across the national market.

There is also a likely commercial consequence. Retailers and brands may face greater pressure to demonstrate that the quality stated on a package matches the product inside. More frequent laboratory testing, tighter traceability and greater scrutiny of unusually cheap products could become increasingly important as consumers become more aware of the issue.

For shoppers, the immediate lesson is less complicated. A low price alone does not guarantee good value, and the classification printed on a package needs to correspond to what is actually inside.

The rice industry now faces a test of confidence. The 2026 survey does not establish that most rice sold in Brazil is irregular, but its findings show that a significant number of selected samples failed to meet the classification declared on their labels. If similar results emerge from broader testing, the issue could move from a targeted quality investigation to a much larger debate over transparency, enforcement and consumer protection in Brazil’s rice market.