RIO DE JANEIRO (CN) – Critical minerals are at the center of a political and institutional dispute in Brazil after Ronaldo Caiado and Flávio Bolsonaro, both front-runners in October’s presidential election, signaled openness to partnerships with the United States in a sector regulated by the federal government.
On March 18, Caiado, then governor of Goia, signed a memorandum of understanding with the US government on critical minerals. Goias is home to the only company outside of Asia that produces rare earths at scale.
According to the state government, the agreement covers technical cooperation, investment promotion, capacity building and development of local processing and manufacturing capabilities.
Ten days later, said Senator Flávio Bolsonaro at the Conservative Political Action Conference in the United States that Brazil is “the solution for the United States to break its dependence on China for critical minerals, especially rare earths.”
Rafaela Guedes, a senior fellow at the Brazilian Center for International Relations, said critical minerals are no longer seen simply as commodities, but as key inputs for the energy transition, digital infrastructure, national security and defense.
“In this context, the goal of the United States is not only to ensure access to these mineral resources, but to reduce their vulnerability related to the concentration of processing and production, especially in China,” she said. “And that’s where Brazil comes in, given its geological base for rare earths, nickel, niobium, bauxite, among others.”
Maria José Mesquita, a professor at the Institute of Geosciences of the University of Campinas, said that rare earths are a group of 17 chemical elements that, despite the name, are not necessarily scarce in the Earth’s crust. Rather, she said, the challenge lies in separating them and finding deposits concentrated enough to mine economically.
According to Geological Survey of BrazilBrazil holds 94.1% of the world’s niobium reserves, 25.5% of its graphite reserves and 23.3% of its rare earth reserves.
Vilmar Medeiros Simões, president of Brazil’s Geological Survey, said the country already has a “reasonably good” understanding of the potential of its main mineral provinces.
“Although we still face great challenges in advancing geological knowledge in vast areas of the country, our current level of knowledge already places Brazil prominently in the ranking of the world’s largest reserves of critical minerals,” he said.
Mesquita said Brazil must do more than extract strategic minerals. It should also process them domestically to keep more of the value chain in place, thus supporting industrial development and national sovereignty.
Guilherme Filardi, a partner at São Paulo-based DDSA Advogados, said Brazil has strong geology, abundant resources and the potential for low-carbon production, “which makes it particularly attractive on the global stage.” But he said the country trails other jurisdictions in regulatory speed, institutional coordination and coordination between mining, processing and industrial policy.
William Freire, founding lawyer of the Brazilian Mining Law Institute, said Brazil lacks a regulatory framework specifically for critical and strategic minerals. Instead, the sector is governed by the Constitution, the Mining Code and relevant laws, including environmental laws.
This means that mineral resources belong to the federal government, which grants mining rights through the National Mining Agency and the Ministry of Mines and Energy and has sole authority over mining and geology legislation.
Environmental authority, however, is divided into different levels of government. The federal government, the states and the Federal District share legislative power, while municipalities oversee local affairs. Implementation is shared by all levels of government.
Lucas Sampaio Santos, a partner at São Paulo-based Arruda Alvim & Thereza Alvim Advocacia e Consultoria Jurídica, said the separation of authority makes the regulatory environment more complex in practice than it appears on paper.
“The developer first obtains the mining title from the National Mining Agency, which only assesses mining sustainability, not environmental sustainability,” he said. “Then they go to the relevant environmental body to apply for a licence. The problem is they can get the title and never get the licence.”
The constitution also requires congressional authorization and prior consultation with affected communities for mining on indigenous lands, but the country has never passed a law regulating that provision. In February, the Supreme Court gave Congress 24 months to legislate.
All these factors, Santos said, converge in a system in which the judiciary becomes the ultimate regulator of Brazil’s mining sector, especially when it comes to critical minerals.
“The Supreme Court rules on indigenous lands. The Supreme Court of Justice sets precedent on environmental liability. Local courts intervene in licensing. The public prosecutor’s office files civil lawsuits that stop projects,” he said. “In a sector with maturity cycles of 10 to 20 years, the risk of a court decision during the construction or operation phase is as important as the geological risk.”
Congress is trying to fill that gap. In September 2025, Brazil’s lower house approved fast-track status forBill 2780/2024which would create a National Policy for Critical and Strategic Minerals.
The bill creates an inter-ministerial committee to determine which substances fall into that category and to set guidelines for the production chain. It also provides support for environmental licensing, project prioritization and incentives for research, mineral transformation and innovation.
Freire said that despite the bill’s progress, there is still no timeline for those proposals to become law and be regulated. “I don’t think anything effective will happen in 2026,” he said.
According to him, the ideal scenario would be for countries to adopt a long-term state mineral policy that does not change with changes in government or political party in power.
“The lack of a state policy on minerals favors isolated initiatives driven by media exposure,” he said.
In an interview with ICL Notícias on April 8, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva criticized Caiado and Flávio Bolsonaro. “If we are not careful, these people will sell Brazil and we cannot allow that. This will be part of the political struggle,” Lula said.
The issue is rising on Brazil’s international economic agenda. Finance Minister Dario Durigan is expected to attend a G7 ministerial meeting on critical minerals in Washington this week as a guest to discuss the bloc’s action plan.
Guedes said the latest moves in Brasília reflect an effort to make critical minerals part of an agenda focused on productive development, investment attraction and Brazil’s strategic repositioning on the global stage.
At the same time, she said, the debate centers on at least three concerns: avoiding a new form of foreign dependence, avoiding a model based on the export of raw resources without industrialization, and ensuring that the race for these minerals does not move forward without coordination between federal, state and municipal governments and without adequate social and environmental safeguards.
The government, she said, is trying to take advantage of the reorganization of global supply chains, while also seeking to capture more value domestically and reduce the risk of repeating the mistakes of the past.
“For Brazil, the issue is not only economic or diplomatic. It is also a dispute about what development model the country wants to follow,” she said.
Courthouse News reporter Marília Marasciulo is in Brazil.
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing arguments provides the latest on ongoing trials, major litigation and decisions in courts around the US and the world, while monthly Under the lights feeds legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
