Although the trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur has been signed, its implementation still requires ratification within the European Union. Certain aspects of the agreement, particularly those concerning market access for agri-food products, have sparked opposition from farmers in countries such as France and Poland.
“In general, tariffs are bad because they complicate the market. On the other hand, they protect the domestic market, so in some cases, they are necessary. However, such tools must be used with extreme moderation,” says MEP Bogdan Zdrojewski.
Negotiations between the EU and Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) lasted for 25 years, covering trade partnership, political dialogue, and sectoral cooperation. They concluded with the signing of an agreement on December 6, 2024. The Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM) notes that if the EU-Mercosur agreement comes into force, it will create one of the largest free trade areas in the world, encompassing over 750 million people. The trade-related provisions aim to facilitate the exchange of goods and encourage investment by eliminating most tariff and non-tariff barriers, as well as opening access to service and public procurement markets. The agreement will remove tariffs on 91% of products, benefiting EU exporters. Currently, Mercosur imposes high tariffs on EU products, including 35% on cars, 27% on clothing and footwear, and 20% on chocolate.
“I don’t recall any trade agreement being negotiated for so long—it has effectively taken 30 years. On the other hand, this agreement has raised certain hopes, particularly in the transport and automotive industries. However, the deal is not finalized, and a clear lack of transparency has led to significant mistrust regarding its impact on specific product groups covered by the agreement,” Zdrojewski told Newseria.
Farmers from France, the Netherlands, and Poland have voiced opposition to opening the EU market to food imports from South American countries. Experts suggest that this resistance could be a major obstacle to the ratification of the agreement within the EU. PISM reminds that the trade liberalization agreement will require a qualified majority in the EU Council and a simple majority in the European Parliament. A coalition of at least four member states representing at least 35% of the EU population could block the agreement in the Council.
Opposing countries argue that their agricultural sectors could suffer significantly due to increased imports of cheaper products, such as meat and grain, from Mercosur nations. They also claim that agricultural production in the South American bloc is subject to lower food safety standards and does not adhere to sustainable development principles.
“Agricultural production conditions in Europe and South America are not identical. This includes the use of various substances, ecological infrastructure, and transport conditions,” Zdrojewski explains.
The Polish Ministry of Agriculture strongly opposes the Mercosur agreement. It argues that the deal proposes excessive reductions in EU tariffs, overly high tariff quotas, and fails to address the issue of importing agricultural products produced under different conditions and standards. One unresolved demand is that the removal of EU tariffs should be conditional on Mercosur products meeting EU sustainability standards, including climate protection, environmental, labor, and animal welfare regulations.
While the agreement introduces several additional commitments regarding sustainable development and includes mechanisms to protect against excessive market liberalization, it does not alleviate concerns among skeptics.
“Some aspects of the agreement do not concern me, but others raise justified doubts, especially regarding meat production. We know that the volume of meat designated for the European market under this agreement is not large in absolute terms, but it is very significant in terms of high-quality meat. This will inevitably cause disruptions, as we have already seen in the poultry sector. In some areas, such as dairy, concerns are much smaller because production costs are relatively low, while transport costs are proportionally very high. This agreement is highly complex and varied, but unfortunately, not all details are fully transparent,” the MEP from the Civic Platform emphasizes.
On the other hand, the Mercosur agreement could serve as a counterbalance to the protectionist measures introduced by former U.S. President Donald Trump, which have significantly altered the conditions of international trade.
“In general, tariffs are harmful because they complicate the market. However, they are necessary in cases where domestic markets need protection from non-competitive production conditions compared to Europe. This is the case with very cheap Chinese production, which is carried out without ecological constraints and, therefore, is absolutely unbeatable in terms of price in the European market. Such tools must, however, be applied with extreme moderation, balance, and an understanding of the need to foster free competition, especially within Europe itself,” concludes Zdrojewski.
