Vitor Ferrari is a lawyer specializing in Judicial Reorganization and a partner at the law firm Mazzucco & Mello Advogados.
Brazilian agribusiness, the engine of the economy and historically dependent on rural credit, faces a scenario of tension and uncertainty after Banco do Brasil threatened to restrict access to rural credit for producers who file for judicial reorganization.
It is undisputed that, in 2025, the number of requests for judicial reorganization by rural producers increased dramatically — a growth of up to 345% compared to the previous year, 2024.
With rural credit becoming more expensive, Banco do Brasil stated that it recorded the worst performance among the country's major banks in the first half of the year. Market analysts predict that this difference will persist, reflecting the continuation of this adverse scenario.
The result stems, in part, from court decisions that guarantee rural producers the protection of their credits, which have come to be considered, by Banco do Brasil itself, as problematic assets. Internal studies by the institution revealed a high rate of default among producers, something unprecedented on such a scale.
To avoid an increase in bankruptcy filings, it is crucial to adopt measures that provide alternatives to traditional credit, so that producers are not left helpless in the face of the crisis. Other solutions to resolve this impasse must be sought in order to mitigate the economic and social effects of the current situation in the agricultural sector.
The recent announcement of restrictions raises serious concerns about respect for the rule of law and the very purpose of Law No. 11.101/2005, which regulates judicial reorganization in the country. This stance is alarming not only because of its discriminatory content, but also because it comes from a state institution of systemic relevance, whose institutional mission includes promoting agribusiness and supporting public policies for economic development. By conditioning access to credit on the waiver of the right to judicial reorganization, Banco do Brasil is, in theory, engaging in conduct that contradicts constitutional principles of free enterprise (Article 170, caput, CF/88), the social function of the company, and equal treatment among economic agents.
Judicial reorganization is an instrument for economic rebalancing that seeks to avoid bankruptcy, promote restructuring, and ensure the continuity of productive activities. In strategic sectors such as agribusiness, where activity is cyclical and highly dependent on climatic and market factors, judicial reorganization has been an essential mechanism for survival and reorganization.
Placing a producer on a “blacklist” simply for exercising this right is, in practice, a form of extrajudicial sanction, prohibited by the very logic of the Brazilian legal system. It cannot be accepted that the exercise of a legitimate right, enshrined in law, be transformed into a criterion for financial exclusion or institutional discrimination.
In addition to being legally questionable, Banco do Brasil's stance creates legal uncertainty and competitive imbalance, and may even constitute an abuse of dominant position in the rural credit market.
It is the role of the national financial system, especially public institutions, to act as a stabilizing agent, not as an instrument of intimidation or indirect coercion against indebted producers. The discourse that credit would be "eternally denied" to those who sought judicial protection also violates the principles of objective good faith and the social function of the contract, in addition to representing a setback in policies to promote and restructure the agricultural sector. If it prevails, such a guideline could trigger a cascade of insolvencies and financial exclusion, worsening the crisis instead of mitigating it.
The situation described, therefore, should be seen as an institutional warning sign, not only for the agricultural sector, but for the Brazilian restructuring system itself, which is a legitimate tool for preserving economic value. Combating the misuse of judicial reorganization must occur through judicial and legal means, never through generalized denial of credit or by curtailing the economic freedom of those seeking to recover within the law.