Brazilian representation at Parlasur approves Mercosur–European Union agreement

The Brazilian Representation in the Mercosur Parliament (Parlasul) unanimously approved, this Tuesday morning, the favorable opinion to the Provisional Trade Agreement between Mercosur and the European Union, maintaining the rite of processing the treaty in Brazil. The vote followed the report by deputy Arlindo Chinaglia (PT-SP).

The agreement could be considered today by the plenary in the Plenary of the Chamber of Deputies and, later, it will go to the Federal Senate. The text also needs the approval of the European Parliament.

— We are dealing with an issue that will have repercussions that, in many aspects, we are not yet in a position to assess. This does not mean a pessimistic assessment, but the recognition that an immense window of opportunities is opening — said Arlindo Chinaglia.

He highlighted that the understanding with the European Union occurs in a global context marked by increased protectionism. “With the advancement of unilateralism, this agreement expresses another worldview, based on commitment to democracy, the rule of law and sustainable development”, he stated, adding that the country will be able to increase its participation in production chains.

— We don’t have a crystal ball, but we believe we are on the right side, also because society has spoken out — he said.

Signed on January 17, 2026, in Asunción, Paraguay, after more than two decades of negotiations, the agreement between Mercosur — formed by Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay — and the European Union seeks to consolidate a free trade area between the two blocs. The text foresees, among other points, the gradual reduction of import tariffs on industrial and agricultural goods, in addition to rules for investments, services, public purchases, intellectual property and dispute resolution mechanisms.

French resistance

In the European Parliament, the processing of the agreement between Mercosur and the European Union continues to be hampered by political and legal obstacles. In addition to the decision to submit the text for analysis by the Court of Justice of the European Union, to assess its legal basis and the approval procedure, the agreement faces open resistance from some Member States. France has led this movement, pressured by rural producers and environmental concerns, and argues that the treaty should only move forward with additional safeguards. Other countries also expressed reservations, which keeps the topic under debate and with no defined timetable for a final vote in the European Parliament.

The agreement was structured to allow for phased implementation. The strictly commercial part — which involves reducing tariffs, access to markets and trade rules — can enter into force provisionally by decision of European institutions, without the immediate need for ratification by all countries in the bloc. The political and institutional part of the agreement, which includes broader commitments to cooperation and political dialogue, is classified as mixed and, therefore, depends on the approval of the national Parliaments of each European Union country, which makes the process longer and subject to internal disputes.

Concerns of the agricultural sector

Despite the prospect of expanding bilateral trade, Brazilian agribusiness entities warn that potential gains from the agreement may be limited or even partially neutralized by requirements and mechanisms adopted by the European Union. In an analysis by the Brazilian Agriculture and Livestock Confederation (CNA), published by GLOBO on February 10, the effectiveness of the treaty, especially for products such as beef, will depend not only on the reduction of tariffs, but also on Brazil’s ability to face European regulatory requirements and safeguard mechanisms that could compromise effective access to the European market.

The CNA highlights that new requirements — such as the European Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which imposes strict rules on traceability and proof of environmental origin — function, in practice, as conditions for taking advantage of negotiated tariff preferences, with the risk of excluding small and medium-sized producers and increasing compliance costs. Furthermore, the bilateral agricultural safeguards provided for in the agreement may allow the suspension of tariff benefits based on growth in imports or drops in prices, without the need to prove serious damage, which could reduce the benefits provided for by the treaty in the first year of validity.