Global anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International has accused the Trump administration of weaponizing the fight against corruption to justify a sweeping commercial attack on Brazil. In a statement released Wednesday, the organization criticized the White House’s use of Brazil’s domestic anti-corruption failures as the rationale for imposing new 25% tariffs, warning that the US is exploiting the agenda as a tool for commercial and geopolitical pressure.
While the organization acknowledged that the US tariff justification correctly cites the weakening of Brazil’s anti-corruption frameworks, it argued that using trade tariffs as punishment violates international norms.
“The imposition of commercial tariffs by the United States on Brazil, based on an investigation pointing out deficiencies in the fight against corruption, represents a violation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption,” the entity stated. The convention dictates that the principles of sovereign equality and non-intervention in internal affairs must guide global anti-corruption actions.
US Backsliding and Selective Enforcement
Transparency International – Brazil acknowledged that the South American nation has suffered “severe setbacks.” The watchdog specifically criticized a recent Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) decision by Justice Dias Toffoli that broadly annulled evidence obtained from the massive Odebrecht/Novonor leniency agreements.
However, the organization emphasized that Brazil’s domestic failures “cannot obscure the severe setbacks also observed in the United States,” noting that both nations have experienced significant declines in TI’s Corruption Perceptions Index. According to the watchdog, the setbacks in Brazil are grave, but “comparable to what is occurring in the US.”
The statement highlighted recent US policy shifts that it says violate international commitments and undermine the multilateral anti-corruption system. Chief among these is the initial suspension and subsequent “selective” application of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)—the pioneering global standard against transnational bribery.
Furthermore, the organization pointed to a 2025 US decision that substantially weakened the Corporate Transparency Act. The move restricted the obligation to disclose true “beneficial owners” primarily to foreign companies, largely exempting American businesses from the same transparency requirements.
The Meat Exemption and Defense of Pix
The watchdog also drew attention to a glaring contradiction in the US tariff policy: the exclusion of the meat trade.
Transparency International noted the dominant market weight of the Brazilian meatpacking giant JBS in this sector. The entity recalled that JBS and its controllers confessed to one of the world’s largest corruption schemes, which involved illicit payments to public officials and bribing pension fund managers to obtain subsidized credit. These schemes were used to fuel the company’s global expansion, including deep into the United States market.
Despite this well-documented history of corruption, the meat sector was spared from the tariffs. The statement pointed to press reports indicating that the Batista brothers, who control JBS, maintain close dialogue with members of the current Trump administration.
Additionally, Transparency International pushed back against US attacks on Pix, Brazil’s instant payment system created by the Central Bank. Rather than being a liability, the watchdog argued that Pix has fostered financial inclusion, reduced transaction costs, and modernized the country’s economy.
“The widespread adoption of Pix has contributed to reducing cash circulation and increasing the traceability of financial transactions, creating potentially favorable conditions for combating money laundering, tax evasion, and other illicit financial flows,” the organization stated.
Ultimately, Transparency International reiterated its denunciation of Brazil’s domestic corruption backsliding—blaming all three branches of the Brazilian government—but firmly warned against the selective use of the anti-corruption agenda as a weapon in trade disputes, a phenomenon it says poses a severe “risk to the credibility of this agenda and the international mechanisms that sustain it.”
Source: ICL, Transparency.org
