EN 
PT_BR 
The president of the Parliamentary Front for Agriculture (FPA), congressman Pedro Lupion (PP-PR), stated this Tuesday (1st) that the 2025/26 Harvest Plan, launched by the federal government, “is more of a marketing ploy than an effective policy”. According to him, the announced amount of R$$ 516.2 billion for corporate agriculture contains distortions and omissions that compromise the transparency of the program and impose unprecedented costs on the productive sector. “The government announces a plan of R$$ 516 billion, but only has real control over R$22% of that. The rest is money from banks, at market interest rates, often above R$2% per month. This cannot be sold as state support for agriculture”, said Lupion.
Photos: Shutterstock
According to the deputy, last year the government had promised R$138 billion in resources with controlled interest rates, but contingencies reduced the execution to R$92.8 billion. This year, the government announced R$113.8 billion in this same category, which represents an increase compared to what was actually executed, but a decrease in relation to the amount promised in the previous year. “When I compare what was announced in 2023 with what is being promised now, there was a decline. They are selling growth where there is a loss of ambition”, he said.
Lupion also criticized the amount of federal funds earmarked directly for corporate agriculture. Of the R$13.5 billion earmarked for interest rate equalization in the 2025/26 harvest, R$9.5 billion will go to family farming and only R$3.9 billion to corporate farming. “This is the government’s real spending on corporate agriculture. Everything else is money from banks, from the market, borrowed at often unpayable rates. In the end, the government spends little and passes the cost on to the producer,” he warned.
Producer will pay up to R$58 billion more in interest
According to Lupion, the impact of the increase in the Selic rate — currently at 15% per year — will impose an unprecedented burden on production. He estimates that, even with part of the rural credit operating with equalization, the additional cost in interest alone will be at least R$$ 54 billion in 2025/26, and could exceed R$$ 58 billion if the effects of taxation on instruments such as Agribusiness Credit Letters (LCAs) are also considered. “This is the real record that the government is delivering: R$$ 58 billion more in interest for the producer to pay. The plan is a record in cost, not in support,” criticized the president of the FPA.
Taxation of LCAs threatens rural credit
Lupion also criticized MP 1303/2025, which provides for the taxation of LCAs, responsible for financing up to 43% of rural production in the last harvest. “To change LCAs is to attack the heart of rural credit. Legal uncertainty drives away investors and takes liquidity out of the system. It is a huge risk for those who produce and for those who finance”, he stated.
According to him, the banks themselves could increase the volume of resources allocated to the agricultural sector if they raised the requirement for applying LCAs from 50% to 60%. This would inject around R$$ 64 billion into rural credit without any impact on the public budget. “There are viable alternatives with no fiscal cost. But instead of encouraging this, the government prefers to create insecurity and tax the instrument that works best in agriculture,” he said.
Rural insurance was forgotten
Another point of concern highlighted by Lupion is the government's silence on rural insurance. According to him, this is the main policy for protecting agriculture, and its absence compromises the safety of production. “The government did not even mention rural insurance when launching the plan. It is as if it were something secondary. But without insurance, the producer is exposed and the country ends up discussing debts and renegotiations,” he pointed out.
According to data from the Transparency Portal, of the R$1 billion budgeted for rural insurance in 2025, only R$67 million has been spent to date — just over R$61 million of the total.
Lupion acknowledged the positive aspects of the announcement, such as the speech by the Minister of Agriculture, Carlos Fávaro, who highlighted the strategic importance of agriculture and demonstrated sensitivity towards Rio Grande do Sul. He also praised the increase in the PRONAMP ceiling, from R$$ 3 million to R$$ 3.5 million, and the increase in the PCA limit to 12 thousand tons.
On the other hand, the president of the FPA directly blamed the government's fiscal policy for the high interest rates. "The Selic rate rose to 15% because the government lost control of spending. It is the Central Bank that controls inflation, because the Executive does not control spending. The result is expensive credit, pressured production and more expensive food for the consumer," he said.
For Lupion, the 2025/26 Harvest Plan repeats the formula of grandiose announcements with little practical implementation. “Last year, 32% of the promised credit was not even contracted. And this year the plan is already being launched with a budget contingency. Meanwhile, the producer is footing the bill for fiscal irresponsibility that harms the entire production chain,” he concluded.
Structural proposals
The FPA presented a package of proposals to reduce public spending and increase state efficiency, including:
- Transfer of the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) to the Ministry of Agriculture, avoiding overlap with the MMA;
- Reduction in the number of ministries from 31 to 19;
- End of super salaries and control of compensation payments;
- Restructuring of public properties to reduce rents and generate revenue.
On the economic agenda, the FPA also advocates:
- Extension of the zero IOF-Exchange rate until 2030;
- Legal security for rural credit operations with drawee risk;
- Maintenance of the exemption from the basic food basket as an anti-inflationary mechanism.
