Cade has the chance to prevent the soybean purchasing cartel

The Soy Moratorium, created in 2006 as a private agreement between large grain traders and processors, was initially publicized as a voluntary environmental protection mechanism in the Amazon biome.

The announced objective is legitimate, but in practice, this instrument began to produce negative competitive effects, imposing barriers and restricting free competition in the Brazilian soybean marketing market.

The Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE) , which is investigating the issue, has the opportunity to prevent private agreements in favor of sustainability from violating the constitutional principle of competition.

By preventing the acquisition of soybeans from areas deforested after 2008, even when legally authorized and environmentally compliant under the Forest Code, the Moratorium may be operating as an anticompetitive agreement, lacking legal backing, with harmful effects on thousands of producers, especially small and medium-sized ones. There are indications that it constitutes a violation of the economic order, as per Article 36 of Law No. 12,529/2011.

The initiative, which could initially be seen as aligned with sustainability objectives, began to reveal a clear asymmetry between large and small agents.

The Moratorium rules are not legal in nature, were not approved through the legislative process with extensive debate, and do not allow for broad defense or contradiction.

The Moratorium restricts soybeans but does not impose the same limitations on cotton cultivation in the same areas—a distinction lacking in clear arguments, which could indicate market manipulation aimed at concentrating power in the hands of the private sector agreement's signatories. By limiting who can produce and sell, the pact favors large groups.

Cade's history records institutional courage and technical competence in confronting large cartels in sensitive sectors of the economy, and now has the opportunity to declare that private agreements, even under the guise of sustainability, cannot violate Brazilian law, nor serve as an instrument to eliminate competition and concentrate the market.

By setting a precedent, the agency will have the opportunity to protect legal producers, consumers, and the regulatory environment. It will also reinforce Brazil's commitment to international competition enforcement standards and prevent the abusive use of environmental seals and pacts, establishing clear criteria under which a sustainability agreement could operate without violating competition.