I decided to write this essay to establish an open and frank dialogue with the president of the United States. Over decades of negotiation, first as a union leader and later as president, I have learned to listen to all sides and to take into account all the interests at stake. That is why I have carefully examined the arguments that have been put forward by the Trump administration to impose a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian products.
Bringing American jobs back and reindustrialization are legitimate motivations. When in the past the United States has raised the banner of neoliberalism, Brazil warned of its harmful effects. Seeing the White House finally acknowledge the limits of the so-called Washington Consensus, a policy prescription of minimal social protection, unrestricted trade liberalization and overall deregulation dominant since the 1990s, vindicated the Brazilian position.
But resorting to unilateral action against individual states is to prescribe the wrong remedy. Multilateralism offers fairer and more balanced solutions. The tariff increase imposed on Brazil this summer is not only misguided but illogical. The United States is not running a trade deficit with our country, nor is it subject to high tariffs. Over the past 15 years, it has accumulated a surplus of $410 billion in bilateral trade in goods and services. Nearly 75 percent of U.S. exports to Brazil enter duty-free. By our calculation, the average effective tariff on American products is just 2.7 percent. Eight out of the 10 main items face zero tariffs, including oil, aircraft, natural gas and coal.
The lack of economic rationale behind these measures makes it clear that the motivation of the White House is political. The deputy secretary of state, Christopher Landau, reportedly said as much earlier this month to a group of Brazilian business leaders who were working to open negotiation channels. The U.S. government is using tariffs and the Magnitsky Act to seek impunity for former President Jair Bolsonaro, who orchestrated a failed coup attempt on Jan. 8, 2023, in an effort to subvert the popular will expressed at the ballot box.
I am proud of the Brazilian Supreme Court for its historic decision on Thursday, which safeguards our institutions and the democratic rule of law. This was not a “witch hunt.” The judgment was the result of proceedings carried out in accordance with Brazil’s 1988 Constitution, enacted after two decades of struggle against a military dictatorship. It followed months of investigations that uncovered plans to assassinate me, the vice president and a Supreme Court justice. Authorities also discovered a draft decree that would have effectively annulled the 2022 election results.
The Trump administration has furthermore accused the Brazilian justice system of targeting and censoring American tech companies. Those allegations are false. All digital platforms, whether domestic or foreign, are subject to the same laws in Brazil. It is dishonest to call regulation censorship, especially when what is at stake is the protection of our families against fraud, disinformation and hate speech. The internet cannot be a land of lawlessness where pedophiles and abusers are given free rein to prey on our children and teenagers.
Equally baseless are the administration’s allegations of unfair practices by Brazil in digital trade and electronic payment services and its alleged failure to enforce environmental laws. Contrary to being unfair to U.S. financial operators, Brazil’s digital payment system, known as PIX, has enabled the financial inclusion of millions of citizens and companies. We cannot be penalized for creating a fast, free and secure mechanism that facilitates transactions and stimulates the economy.
In the last two years, we have cut the rate of deforestation in the Amazon by half. In 2024 alone, the Brazilian police seized hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of assets used in environmental crimes. But the Amazon will still be in danger if other countries fail to do their part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Rising global temperatures could turn the rainforest into a savanna, disrupting rainfall patterns across the entire hemisphere, including the American Midwest.
When the United States turns its back on a relationship of more than 200 years, such as the one it maintains with Brazil, everyone loses. There are no ideological differences that should prevent two governments from working together in areas where they have common goals.
President Trump, we remain open to negotiating anything that can bring mutual benefits. But Brazil’s democracy and sovereignty are not on the table. In your first address to the United Nations General Assembly in 2017, you said that “strong sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect.” This is how I see the relationship between Brazil and the United States: two great nations capable of respecting each other and cooperating for the good of Brazilians and Americans.
Source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/14/opinion/lula-da-silva-brazil-trump-bolsonaro.html