This followed a recent legal challenge to the moratorium, which was submitted to Brazil\u2019s competition regulator, and the passing of local legislation that removed tax breaks for companies signed up to it. Both issues have reached the supreme court, which referred them to its mediation body on 19 March.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Abiove\u2019s withdrawal significantly weakens the soy moratorium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The private sector pact has been considered one of the most successful<\/a> initiatives in combating deforestation in the biome. Studies have already warned of the consequences that its weakening could have. A projection shared with Dialogue Earth by the Amazon Environmental Research Institute (Ipam<\/a>), as well as another published<\/a> by The Nature Conservancy in January, foresee substantial increases in deforestation as a result.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another recent study<\/a> finds more than 13 million hectares of the Amazon would be at risk \u2013 an area roughly three times<\/a> the size of Rio de Janeiro.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The pact\u2019s importance was underlined<\/a> at the supreme court hearing on 19 March by Jo\u00e3o Pedro Carvalho, a representative of Brazil\u2019s attorney general. Carvalho said the soy moratorium shows \u201cit\u2019s possible to grow Brazilian agriculture without deforestation\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ana Clis Ferreira represents the Zero Deforestation Front (DZ), a Greenpeace Brazil group that acts as an observer to the pact. In a statement sent to Dialogue Earth, she said its end would compromise Brazil\u2019s climate commitments. Other organisations said it could affect the country\u2019s environmental reputation<\/a> on the international market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Several of Europe\u2019s leading supermarkets \u2013 including Tesco, Lidl and Aldi \u2013 said<\/a> they were \u201cdeeply disappointed\u201d by the decision. They have also indicated they would continue to avoid products linked to Amazonian deforestation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Abiove\u2019s withdrawal from the soy moratorium has complicated timing, due to the EU-Mercosur trade deal<\/a>. This multinational agreement will ease trading barriers between much of South America and the European Union when it comes into provisional force on 1 May. Exports of Brazilian soybeans to China \u2013 the main destination for the commodity \u2013 are also set to decline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The soy pact has also garnered criticism from the agricultural industry. Aprosoja and Famato, two associations that represent Brazilian farmers, say the moratorium imposes<\/a> barriers to production expansion, and limits the ability of the state<\/a> to define its own rules to combat deforestation in the Amazon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Abiove tells Dialogue Earth it will continue to meet \u201cthe rigorous demands of global markets\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The soy moratorium was introduced in 2006. According to a study<\/a> published in Science, nearly 30% of Brazilian soy expansion between 2004 and 2006 occurred by deforesting the Amazon. The moratorium was created by the industry and various environmental NGOs in response. Under the pact, companies committed not to purchase or finance soybeans produced in deforested areas. They were given until July 2008 to become compliant, a milestone designed to ensure transition and alignment with environmental legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The moratorium brought together<\/a> exporters and processors represented by Abiove. Brazil\u2019s Federal Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office (MPF) provided monitoring, with support from environmental organisations. Implementation was based on annual satellite monitoring and public reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Greenpeace, between 2009 and 2022 deforestation fell by 69% in the monitored areas, despite the area planted with soybeans growing<\/a> by 344%. Today, only 3.4% of production in the Amazon falls outside the rules of the soy moratorium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Coordination of Indigenous Organisations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB<\/a>) says the moratorium helped to contain land conflicts by reducing the economic incentive to plant in newly deforested areas. COIAB warns its end could aggravate \u201chuman rights violations\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite these successes, the moratorium has its critics \u2013 even among environmental groups. Luciana Gatti is a senior researcher at Brazil\u2019s National Institute for Space Research (INPE<\/a>), which is the main government body monitoring deforestation via satellite. She says the moratorium was never fully complied with, and small-scale deforestation continued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Gatti says the moratorium changed how deforestation happens, rather than stopping it entirely: by curbing soy-driven clearing in the Amazon, it encouraged land to be cleared for cattle ranching, which was later converted for soy cultivation. She also notes the agreement only covers the Amazon. Soy-related deforestation has continued in other regions, especially the Cerrado<\/a>, a tropical savannah in central and north-eastern Brazil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For their part, producers have argued the soy moratorium is anti-competitive and harms small- and medium-sized companies. In a complaint to the Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE; Brazil\u2019s antitrust authority), the National Confederation of Agribusiness (CNA<\/a>) argued that the moratorium had \u201charmful effects\u201d on the market and consumers. CADE determined<\/a> it should be suspended. That ruling has been postponed, however, pending the supreme court\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meanwhile, the regional legislation in the state of Mato Grosso that removed tax benefits for companies in the pact is currently being challenged<\/a> in the supreme court. Carvalho says this raised \u201cthe possibility of a member state using its power to tax, in order to punish those who have chosen to protect the Amazon rainforest to a greater extent, and reward those who do not\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even if the moratorium ends, Brazilian producers could still find themselves bound by the demands of their customers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Several British supermarkets have already indicated they will continue to source deforestation-free soy products only, while exports will continue to be subject to European Union anti-deforestation laws. The European Union is the second biggest market for Brazilian soybeans, and the EU-Mercosur agreement<\/a> could lead to an increase in these exports. As such, there are fears<\/a> that ending the moratorium could damage the reputation of Brazilian soybeans and hinder export growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Farmers\u2019 groups including Aprosoja have said<\/a> the EU-Mercosur trade deal could simply reproduce the environmental barriers imposed by the moratorium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As for China, its purchases of Brazilian soy in 2025 exceeded 85 million tonnes. This was the highest volume in a decade, as the country\u2019s tariff war with the US prompted China to turn to Brazilian imports. With the easing of trade tensions since then, Beijing has expanded its purchases from the US market. This has been detrimental for Brazilian grain \u2013 China is expected<\/a> to buy about 10 million tonnes less in 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cChina wants to be less dependent on the Brazilian market, which it considers high risk,\u201d says Niklas Weins, an international studies professor at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Weins explains that, although China does not impose formal environmental requirements as strictly as the European Union, it is mindful of the reputational risk associated with the origin of soybeans. He adds: \u201cChina understands that climate change poses a risk to soybean production and, consequently, to its food security.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The weakening of the moratorium has led civil society organisations to demand guarantees from the market. \u201cCompanies that claim to maintain zero deforestation commitments must explain how these commitments will be met without the moratorium,\u201d says Greenpeace\u2019s Ferreira.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Brazil\u2019s environment and climate change ministry tells Dialogue Earth <\/em>that public policies to combat deforestation \u201cwill not be weakened\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other programmes exist, such as Agro Brasil + Sustent\u00e1vel<\/em><\/a> (More Sustainable Agro Brazil), which seeks to create a national standard for monitoring, tracking and validating environmental practices in agricultural production. It also wants to incorporate<\/a> environmental criteria into the granting of rural credit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n[The soy pact shows] it\u2019s possible to grow Brazilian agriculture without deforestation<\/blockquote>Jo\u00e3o Pedro Carvalho, representative of Brazil\u2019s attorney general<\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Two decades of moratorium<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Wawi-Querencia-Indigenous-Village-soya-tamandua_Flavia_Milhorance_Dialogue_Earth.jpg\")
<\/div>The future of exports<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Soya](\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/soya-beans_Brazil_CNA-Brasil_Flickr_51896376628.jpg\")
<\/div>Soybeans after the moratorium<\/h2>\n\n\n\n