Mercosur is a South American free trade zone created in 1991. Today, it brings together Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay, forming an economic heavyweight, particularly in the agricultural sector. On the other side, the European Union represents the other block in this partnership, totaling nearly 700 million consumers.

he EU-Mercosur agreement, negotiated for more than twenty years, aims to bring these two blocs closer together by removing most customs barriers. Officially, it is a broad association agreement covering trade, political cooperation, human rights, education, and counter-terrorism. In practice, however, it is the commercial aspect that generates the most tension.

Specifically, Mercosur would commit to eliminating tariffs on 91% of European products, currently taxed up to 35% for vehicles, machinery, or chemical and pharmaceutical products. In return, the European Union would open its market to 92% of Mercosur imports, mainly agricultural products (beef, poultry, sugar) but also minerals, such as lithium and copper. For example, the agreement sets annual export quotas of 160,000 tons of beef and 180,000 tons of poultry at virtually zero tariffs.

This sectoral imbalance explains much of the opposition. European industries (automotive, chemical, pharmaceutical, and large energy or infrastructure groups) stand to benefit. In contrast, European agriculture, particularly beef farming, faces direct competition from South American producers with significantly lower costs. According to available data, producing beef costs on average 40% less in Mercosur, and up to 60% less in Brazil. Even limited import volumes could drive prices down. The European Commission is aware of this and promises an annual €1 billion compensation fund, though details remain unclear.

Beyond price concerns, the agreement raises significant health and environmental issues. The use of pesticides banned in Europe, GMO soy, hormones, or antibiotics as growth enhancers remains permitted in South America. While Brussels asserts that European standards will remain unchanged, questions about actual traceability persist, as highlighted by a 2024 audit noting Brazil’s inability to guarantee the absence of certain hormones in exported meat. Additionally, there is the climate impact: meat and soy production are major drivers of deforestation, which the agreement risks accelerating.

Politically, the agreement has faced numerous twists and turns. First finalized in 2019, it was then frozen, notably due to the Brazilian context. On December 6, 2024, the European Commission announced the political conclusion of the negotiations, without direct participation from member states, as trade policy falls under its exclusive competence.

The key remaining question is adoption. To avoid national blockages, the Commission relies on a procedural workaround called “splitting,” which separates the trade component from the rest of the agreement. This mechanism could allow faster ratification without going through national parliaments, provided a qualified majority in the European Council and a vote in the European Parliament are obtained.

The EU-Mercosur agreement is therefore far from a formality. It represents a major political choice: embracing free trade, at the cost of social, agricultural, and environmental tensions that Europe will have to confront sooner or later.