Brazil: One Step Forward, One Sideways on ESG

• Breaking: Brazil Repeals the Mandatory Part of ESG Reporting

Brazil built its reputation as a regional ESG leader on two pillars:  (a) mandatory sustainability reporting for listed companies and (b) a developing carbon market. This week, one of those pillars cracked.

On Friday, May 29, 2026, Brazil’s lead on ESG reporting imploded.  Following the walk back trend of the EU and the US SEC, Brazil’s securities regulator CVM published Resolution 244, removing the mandatory obligation for listed companies to report sustainability information under IFRS S1 and S2. Adoption is now voluntary. The move reverses a commitment that had made Brazil one of the first countries in the world to mandate the IFRS sustainability reporting standards for public companies — alongside Canada, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, and Australia.

The timing is particularly jarring because the 2026 fiscal year reporting cycle was already underway. A number of Brazilian listed companies had already filed their mandatory sustainability reports under Resolution 193, only to have the obligation removed after the fact. For those companies, the investment in data infrastructure, third-party verification, and internal governance built around the mandatory framework now sits in a different regulatory context.

Resolution 193/2023 had been designed to bring Brazil’s capital markets in line with international ESG disclosure standards, integrating sustainability performance into financial reporting with the same rigor applied to financial statements. Companies had been preparing since 2024, with full mandatory reporting set to apply to the 2026 fiscal year — with first reports due in 2027. That obligation is now gone.

The resolution also eliminated the rule that made voluntary adoption permanent.  Previously, a company that voluntarily adopted in one year was locked into continuing in subsequent years, which had been creating a disincentive to test the model.

The Brazilian ESG and capital markets community reacted sharply. Critics point to the absence of clear technical justification, the institutional fragility of the CVM at this moment (operating under an interim presidency and facing structural pressures) and the contradiction of walking back a commitment the regulator itself had publicly championed.

As mentioned, the move fits a global pattern. The EU has delayed and softened the CSRD. The US SEC retreated from its climate disclosure rules. Brazil is now joining that trend — while China, notably, appears to be moving in the opposite direction.

Link to Resolution 244: https://conteudo.cvm.gov.br/legislacao/resolucoes/resol244.html

• The Carbon Market Advances

Against that backdrop, the carbon market side of Brazil’s ESG story looks more substantive. On May 19, 2026, the Ministry of Finance presented the preliminary sectoral coverage proposal for the Brazilian Emissions Trading System (Sistema Brasileiro de Comércio de Emissões or “SBCE”) to its permanent technical advisory committee. This is a key implementation milestone.

The proposal rolls out Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) obligations in three stages:

• 2027: Pulp and paper, iron and steel, cement, primary aluminum, oil and gas exploration and production, refining, and aviation.

• 2029: Mining, recycled aluminum, electricity, glass, food and beverages, chemicals, ceramics, and waste.

• 2031: Road, maritime, and rail transport.

Critically, the initial phase is reporting only — no costs, no reduction obligations, no caps. The first National Allocation Plan will distribute allowances to operators free of charge. Each stage runs four years — the first year for developing monitoring plans, years two and three for active emissions monitoring, and year four for building the allocation framework. A public consultation on the sectoral coverage regulation is planned for July 2026, with final publication expected before year end.

For companies in the chemical sector, food and beverage, glass, and waste management, the 2029 inclusion in Stage 2 is the planning horizon to work toward. The four-year preparation period means those sectors need to be thinking about monitoring infrastructure now.

• The Bigger Picture

Brazil’s carbon market is moving forward on a credible, technically grounded timeline. Its mandatory sustainability reporting framework just moved backward. The two developments in the same week capture the tension at the heart of Brazil’s ESG trajectory: serious institutional ambition alongside real institutional fragility. Companies operating in Brazil should track both.

What is LATAM REACH?

Right now, “LATAM REACH” refers to four different national laws and regulations that for the first time require the registration of chemical substances into new national inventories for later prioritization, risk assessment, and potentially risk management measures.

Despite the shorthand, these are not EU REACH.

he systems in Chile, Colombia, Peru and Brazil are REACH-inspired, CMP-informed, and even TSCA-aware. But don’t let the name fool you. The Latin American versions don’t require pre-registration or full substance dossiers like the European system. Think of them as a new generation of chemical inventory frameworks, built with regional realities in mind.

The overall architecture is similar across the four countries. The details vary significantly.

What should companies be doing now?

If you operate in or sell into Latin America, it’s high time to get familiar with each national system.

Why the urgency? Because the clock is already running:

▶️ Colombia: registration deadlines have come and gone

▶️ Chile: deadlines for pure substances have passed — substances in mixtures follow in 2027 and 2029

▶️ Peru: registration opens in 2028 and runs through 2031

▶️ Brazil: registration could begin as early as next year

👇 The table below sets out the basic framework for each country.

👉 https://brazilreach.com/

Mexico: Red No. 3 Food Dye Banned — Another Safety Signal Travels South

We have noted the pattern before both with regard to this issue of food dyes and  in the context of cosmetics ingredients: safety signals from the US and EU become regulatory action in Latin America. Mexico has now made good on its early commitment to analyze food dyes following the tredn in the U.S.

Mexico is eliminating Erythrosine (Red No. 3 FD&C, SIN 127) from the list of permitted food colorants. The dye had been authorized for use in ice cream, flavored dairy products, non-alcoholic beverages, baked goods, and other categories. That authorization is now revoked. Manufacturers have 24 months to reformulate and exhaust existing inventory.

The move follows a risk assessment by COFEPRIS that found Mexico’s theoretical maximum daily intake of erythrosine reaches 0.231 mg/kg body weight per day – more than twice the acceptable daily intake of 0.1 mg/kg established by the FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives. The assessment flagged particular concern about use in products heavily consumed by children, including gelatin powders, gummy candies, and flavored confections, categories where the dye was being used under a general permissive clause even without explicit listing.

The US FDA banned Red No. 3 from food use in January 2025, citing the same underlying carcinogenicity data from rat studies that formed the basis of the original JECFA acceptable daily intake. Mexico’s COFEPRIS cited that same toxicological foundation (thyroid tumor induction in male rats) alongside its own updated exposure calculations for the Mexican market.

For food and beverage manufacturers selling in Mexico, the 24-month reformulation window runs from May 29, 2026. Companies using erythrosine in any product should initiate reformulation planning immediately.

And take note that Mexico has been looking at other food colorants as part of this process.  This move may not be its last in this area.

Link to Agreement:

https://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5788852&fecha=28/05/2026

Brazil: Government Clarifies Plastic Packaging Reverse Logistics Decree

Seven months after publication of Decree 12.688/2025 — Brazil’s plastic packaging reverse logistics regulation — the Ministry of Environment published Communication LR-DGR/MMA 002/2026 on May 20, 2026, addressing the most pressing interpretive questions from industry. The communication is explicitly non-binding and subject to revision, but represents the government’s current official position.

Who Is Covered

B2B packaging is excluded. The system applies only to packaging that reaches the end consumer. Strictly business-to-business packaging is out of scope, though it remains subject to other waste management obligations. Tertiary packaging counts when it reaches the consumer, including in e-commerce deliveries.

Equivalent Plastic Products

The list is not exhaustive. Plates, cups, and cutlery are examples, not a closed list. Other single-use plastic items may fall within scope. A future regulatory list is under development — until then, companies should assess whether their products fit the definition.

Excluded Categories

Agrotoxic and lubricant packaging is out. Those categories follow their own reverse logistics frameworks. Medical device packaging that is not classified as medicines is in — it must comply with this decree.

Recycled Content Targets

The target is calculated on total mass placed on market annually — suggesting a portfolio-level calculation rather than a per-unit requirement. However, the Ministry’s reporting requirements ask companies to separately track mass subject to PCR restrictions, mass not subject, and recycled content incorporated by packaging category — leaving open whether compliance is purely a company-wide aggregate or requires meeting targets within specific packaging categories.

Food Contact Packaging

Packaging where PCR is restricted by sanitary regulations may be excluded from the recycled content target — but the exclusion is not automatic. Companies must self-declare in their annual results reports, citing the specific regulatory restriction. Where PCR in food contact applications is legally permitted, the targets apply in full.

Management Systems

Thirteen collective management entities are already habilitado. The government’s clear preference is collective compliance. Companies not yet affiliated should join one rather than attempt individual compliance.

Still Open

The traceability platform for verifying recycled content compliance does not yet exist. It was the subject of a public consultation that closed in March 2026 and remains under analysis. Until it is formally designated, verification of recycled content targets remains procedurally unresolved. The Ministry states it is not currently working on revocation or amendment of the decree.

Link to Communique:

https://www.sinir.gov.br/informacoes/comunicados/comunicado-lr-dgr-mma-no-002-2026

Chile: Pesticide Authorization Framework Updated — Natural and Synthetic Products

Chile’s Agricultural and Livestock Service (SAG) published Resolution 3.960/2026 on May 18, 2026, entering into force immediately. The resolution amends two foundational pesticide regulations — Resolution 9.074/2018 on microbial pesticides and Resolution 1.557/2014, the core pesticide authorization framework — bringing both up to date with changes that have accumulated across several regulatory instruments since 2022.

What Changed for Microbial Pesticides

The updates to Resolution 9.074/2018 are the most substantive. The resolution now formally establishes the full range of special authorization pathways available for microbial pesticides, aligning them with the broader framework that applies to conventional pesticides under Resolution 1.557/2014. Specifically:

• Identical active substance or formulation authorizations — streamlined pathway for microbial pesticides based on already-authorized strains or formulations, now explicitly incorporated.

• US/EU recognition pathway — the scheme for recognizing pesticide registrations from the US EPA or EU is now expressly available for microbial pesticides and natural substances, not just synthetic active ingredients. This is a meaningful expansion for biopesticide manufacturers with existing US or EU registrations seeking Chilean market access.

• Other special authorizations — minor crop uses, organic production, export-only, natural ecosystem, analytical standards, and experimental samples are all now formally available under the microbial pesticide framework.

The evaluation procedure for formulated products based on both microbial extracts and live microorganisms is also clarified — where both a fermentation extract and its producing microorganism are present, both must be separately evaluated.

What Changed for the Core Authorization Framework

The amendments to Resolution 1.557/2014 are primarily technical housekeeping but include two substantive additions:

• New definitions — “component of active substance” (CSA), relevant to semiochemicals, and “significant impurities” (subproducts at concentrations equal to or above 1 g/kg) are now formally defined in the core regulation.

• US/EU recognition pathway expanded — the existing recognition scheme for US EPA and EU-authorized active substances is updated and harmonized to expressly cover natural substances alongside synthetic active ingredients. Requirements for biological control agents (strain identification), natural extracts, and semiochemicals are now specified. GMO-derived extracts and Plant Incorporated Protectants remain excluded.

• Digital documentation — Advanced Electronic Signature requirements are incorporated throughout, aligning the regulation with Chile’s Digital Transformation Law.

Why It Matters

For companies seeking Chilean market access for biopesticides, microbial products, or natural substance-based pesticides with existing US or EU registrations, the explicit opening of the recognition pathway is the most commercially significant change — it offers a potentially faster authorization route that was previously available only for synthetic chemicals. For agrochemical companies generally, the alignment of microbial pesticide procedures with the main authorization framework removes a longstanding inconsistency in how different product categories were treated.

Link to Resolution:

https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1224275&idParte=10595267

Medical Devices: Market Access Updates in Mexico and Ecuador

• Mexico: Local Investment Now a Factor in Government Procurement

Mexico published guidelines  operationalizing a June 2025 decree that requires the government’s consolidated health procurement process to favor companies with local manufacturing investment. The guidelines apply to procurement of generic medicines, health inputs, and medical devices by federal health institutions — including IMSS, ISSSTE, and affiliated entities — for deliveries from 2027 onward.

The mechanism works through a points-and-percentages scoring system. Companies bidding on government contracts will receive additional points in three dimensions:

• Infrastructure — demonstrating existing investment in Mexican manufacturing, storage, or distribution facilities, or registered future investment projects.

• Production process — demonstrating that substantive value chain steps — from active ingredient manufacturing through finished product — occur in Mexico.

• Research and development — demonstrating investment in scientific research or innovative health products in Mexico.

Each dimension is supported by specific documentation requirements — sanitary licenses, Good Manufacturing Practice certificates, investment registration with the Ministry of Economy, or audited financial records showing R&D expenditure.

For multinational medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers selling to the Mexican public sector, the practical implication is clear: local manufacturing and R&D presence in Mexico will now directly affect competitiveness in government tenders. Companies without Mexican production infrastructure should assess whether the investment case has changed.

• Ecuador: New Medical Device Registration Framework — January 2027

Ecuador’s health authority ARCSA published Resolution ARCSA-DE-2026-003-DASP, establishing a new technical sanitary standard for the registration, control, and surveillance of medical devices for human use. The regulation enters into force January 28, 2027 — nine months from publication.

For companies with medical devices registered or pending registration in Ecuador, the January 2027 entry into force is the key planning date. A review of existing registrations against the new framework requirements is warranted now.

Link to Mexico guidelines: https://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5788117&fecha=21/05/2026

Link to Ecuador regulation: https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2026/TBT/ECU/26_02732_00_s.pdf

Brazil: Pesticide Regulatory Framework Gets a Modern Overhaul

Two significant recent developments signal that Brazil is modernizing its pesticide regulatory framework on two fronts simultaneously: the scientific basis for hazard classification and the administrative infrastructure for registration.

• GHS Classification Coming for Pesticide Active Ingredients

ANVISA announced a structured strategy to incorporate GHS toxicological classification into the monographs for all registered pesticide active ingredients in Brazil. The agency will start with 71 active ingredients where EU and ECHA classifications converge, prioritizing endpoints with the greatest public health impact: endocrine disruption, reproductive toxicity, mutagenicity, and carcinogenicity. Each group will go through a minimum 60-day public consultation before finalization.

The agency is also incorporating EU occupational exposure reference values (AOEL and AAOEL) for non-dietary risk assessment, implementing the framework established under RDC 998/2025. Prioritization of which active ingredients move first is based on food residue monitoring data, number of registered products, and commercial volume.

For agrochemical companies with products registered in Brazil, GHS-aligned hazard classifications will be progressively incorporated into official monographs, with downstream effects on labeling, hazard communication, and risk assessments.

Link to first phase active ingredient list:

https://www.gov.br/anvisa/pt-br/assuntos/noticias-anvisa/2026/anvisa-estabelece-classificacao-toxicologica-e-de-doses-de-referencia-de-ingredientes-ativos-de-agrotoxicos

• SISPA: Unified Registration Platform Goes Live

The Ministry of Agriculture published Portaria SDA/MAPA 1.631/2026, establishing the official framework and implementation timeline for SISPA, a unified electronic platform that consolidates all pesticide registration and post-registration processes across MAPA, ANVISA, and IBAMA into a single environment.

The rollout runs in four phases through June 2027: commercial names and components, technical products with complete dossiers, equivalent technical products, and formulated products and pre-mixtures. After each phase deadline, new filings for that category must go exclusively through SISPA.

For registrants, the migration is not optional, and the timeline is tight. Companies should begin preparing their documentation, updating their information, and planning internal workflows now.

Link to Portaria:

https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/portaria-sda/mapa-n-1.631-de-26-de-maio-de-2026-708443535

Argentina: ANMAT Updates Cosmetics Prohibited Substances List

ANMAT published Disposition 2601/2026, incorporating MERCOSUR Resolution GMC 07/25 into Argentine national law. The measure updates the list of substances that cannot be used in personal hygiene products, cosmetics, and perfumes under the regional technical standard GMC 62/14 — the same framework that was updated to ban the two gel nail photoinitiators.

The substantive changes cover both additions and removals:

Added to the prohibited list:

• Boric acid derivatives and borate compounds

• Certain organometallic substances

• Nickel compounds

• New polymers

Updated for technical nomenclature and identification:

• Ketoconazole

• Methylene chloride

• Butylphenyl methylpropional

• Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexenecarboxaldehyde

Removed from the prohibited list:

• 4-Ethoxyphenol

• 4-Methoxyphenol

• Benzoyl peroxide

• Methyleugenol

• Hydroquinone

The removals warrant attention: these substances are not being cleared for unrestricted use but rather moved to different regulatory treatment under the updated MERCOSUR framework. Companies that have been avoiding these ingredients due to their prohibited status should review the full updated list before assuming they are now freely available for formulation.

As with other MERCOSUR harmonization measures, the regulation enters into force simultaneously across all member states 30 days after the MERCOSUR Secretariat confirms full incorporation by all members.

For cosmetics and personal care formulators selling in Argentina and across MERCOSUR, a full review of formulations against the updated prohibited substances list is warranted now.

Link: Disposición 2601/26

Argentina: More News on Chemical Precursors and Controlled Substances

Following the update to Argentina’s chemical precursor registration requirements we reported recently, ANMAT has now incorporated a MERCOSUR standard governing how establishments that handle controlled products are inspected.

Disposition 2991/2026 incorporates MERCOSUR Resolution GMC 46/15, which establishes minimum inspection requirements for establishments operating with controlled products — a category that encompasses narcotics, psychotropic substances, and their precursors.

The practical scope is broader than it might appear. Companies across chemicals, agrochemicals, industrial manufacturing, and laboratory supply that handle listed precursor substances are subject to inspection under controlled substance frameworks, not only pharmaceutical manufacturers. The MERCOSUR standard now establishes common minimum criteria for how those inspections are conducted across member states, harmonizing what inspectors look for and the procedural standards that apply.

As with other MERCOSUR harmonization measures, the regulation enters into force simultaneously across all member states once the MERCOSUR Secretariat confirms full incorporation by all members.

For companies with precursor handling obligations in Argentina, this is a signal to review internal inspection readiness against the harmonized MERCOSUR standard — particularly given Argentina’s separate update earlier this month introducing the risk-based technical report pathway for precursor registration.

Link:

Disposición Nº 2991/2026

New Resource: BrazilREACH.com

As Brazil REACH implementation approaches and the implementing regulation expected any day, we have launched a dedicated English-language resource for companies navigating Brazil’s new chemical management framework under Law 15.022/2024. Whether your company is trying to understand whether it is affected, what an Only Representative structure could mean in practice, or how to stay current as the regulation develops, the site was designed to help companies understand their obligations and prepare for compliance.

Watch the tour here: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/melissa-owen_brazilreach-chemicalcompliance-latinamerica-activity-7466832114827800576-rLAB

Visit: https://brazilreach.com/8

This site provides general information based on publicly available sources and is not legal advice.

© 2026. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright and monitored by AI-powered content tracking systems. Unauthorized use, reproduction, or distribution is strictly prohibited.