Download:
pdf |
pdfUES Application Report
Page 1 of 24
United States Department of Agriculture
Unified Export Strategy
Home
UES
Financial
You are here : Home > UES > Application > Application Report
Reports In
Reports Out
Welcome
Manage
Tools
About FAS
Help
[Administrator][POD] [ Log Off ]
UES Application Report
The entire UES Application for the chosen year is displayed here. Scroll to see the entire report or to navigate to a specific
section, you can click directly on the Table of Contents sections. - Add/Edit
2014 Unified Export Strategy Application
Participant: Tuna Packers Consortium "Test ParticipantIgnore" (TPC)
Table of Contents
1.SECTION 1: PROFILE, INDUSTRY EXPORT GOAL, AND CONTRIBUTIONS
1.1 Applicant Profile
1.1.1 Participant Profile
1.1.2 Office
1.1.3 Contact
1.1.4 Industry
1.1.5 Industry Personnel
1.1.6 MAP/FMD Start/End Dates from Plan Submittal
1.1.7 Resource Request Table
1.2 Industry Export Goals
1.3 Promised Contributions
1.4 Proposals
2.SECTION 2: MARKET ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND STRATEGY
2.1 Market Definitions
2.2 Promoted Commodities
2.3 Targeted Market Assessment
3.SECTION 3: FOREIGN OFFICES AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
TASC
3.1 Administrative Budget (Admin Activity) Summary For MAP, FMD Section 108 And
3.2 Worldwide US Personnel Cost Summary: FMD
3.3 Worldwide Contingent Liabilities Summary: FMD
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 2 of 24
1.SECTION 1: PROFILE, INDUSTRY EXPORT GOAL, AND CONTRIBUTIONS
1.1 Applicant Profile
1.1.1 Participant Profile
Description:
Either hit or miss on this one
Organization Type: Nonprofit U.S. Agricultural Trade Organization
Federal Tax Identification:27-0935770
Agency Element: Program Operations Division
1.1.2 Office(s)
Office
Type
Address
City
State
Province
ZipCode Country
Tuna
Packers
Consortium
"Test 123123123
Participant-Ignore"
Branch
Office
3453
Falls
Church
VA
22041
TestOffice
Other
12345
Test
Office test
San Salvador
Regional
Office
Office Name
test
DUNS
Number
123456789
Branch
Office
23
United
States (US)
United
States (US)
El Salvador
(ES)
123 test
test
test
29210
United
States (US)
1.1.3 Contact(s)
First
Name
Last
Name
Gary
Sarb
Job
Title
Contact
Phone
Contact
Fax
Schulz
559-225-0520
Johl
CEO
(559)
1425
595-
Contact
Email
Contact
URL
Contact Types
[email protected] test
John
Public
Handy
Andy
test
EM
MAPFMDQSPClaim
Handy
Andy
EM
1.1.4 Industry
Organization Description:
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 3 of 24
Executive Summary:
Brazil Country Strategy Statement – 2015
Section 1
Agricultural Economy and Policy Review
General Political Situation and Trends:
Brazil is the fifth largest country in the world by population (205 million[D-1] ) and
land mass. Larger than the continental United States, it occupies nearly half of the
South American continent, and it is the only Portuguese speaking country in the
region. Its political system is similar to that of the United States: a federal
government with three branches, 26 state governments, and one federal district.
Brazil holds democratic elections every four years for Congress (Senate and
House), President, Governors, and Mayors. Brazil’s first female president, Dilma
Rousseff, a left-of-center politician, was sworn into office on January 1, 2015 for
her second term. Rousseff’s re-election maintained the “Workers Party” (PT) as
the dominant party of a political coalition. Brazil is Latin America’s most influential
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 4 of 24
political and economic country and has strongly emerged over the last decade as a
global player on issues as varied as trade, agriculture, environment, security, and
energy. The United States and Brazil share much in common in terms of
democratic values, ethnic diversity, geographic expanse, and vision of the future.
The United States and Brazil, despite trade differences, collaborate closely in the
areas of agricultural research, food safety, and bioenergy.
Macroeconomic Situation and Trends:
Brazil is among the ten largest economies in the world with a gross domestic
product (GDP) of nearly US$2.3 trillion and per capita income of US$11,252 (data
for 2014). However, after strong growth of 7.5 percent in 2010, the Brazilian
economy has seen its growth slip to 0.1 percent in 2014, despite aggressive
stimulus programs from the federal government to encourage economic
expansion. Inflation has also worsened in recent years, closing 2014 at 6.4
percent. Brazil had a US$ 3.9 billion trade deficit in 2014, with total exports at
US$225.1 billion and imports at US$229 billion. The average real-dollar exchange
rate (the “real” is Brazil’s currency) increased to R$2.36 per dollar in 2014. The
outlook for 2015 calls for a drop in the GDP growth rate of 1.8 percent, inflation at
9.2 percent, and a trade surplus of nearly US$5 billion, with an average exchange
rate around R$3.25 per dollar. Rising unemployment and a drop in real income has
eroded consumer purchasing power. The country is currently facing an economic
recession and Brazil’s President has a challenging period ahead as the political
scenario is the “worst since the country’s return of democracy[D-2] .”
The Brazilian population has undergone significant demographic changes in the
last three decades, which have major social and economic ramifications. The most
recent official data from Brazil’s 2010 Bureau of the Census showed that the
country had a population of 196.5 million people expanding at an annual rate of
1.2 percent. The urban population was estimated at 85 percent of the total
population, with the 10 largest cities accounting for nearly 20 percent of the total
population. The fertility rate was estimated at 2.02 children per woman and infant
mortality is placed at 19 per 1,000 live births. The infant mortality rate dropped
47.5 percent over the period 2000-2010 to 15.6 deaths per thousand according to
the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). While this is great
news, Brazil continued far behind other Latin American countries such as Cuba
(5.04 deaths per thousand) and Chile (6.99 deaths per thousand). Brazil’s rank in
the world, according to United Nations statistics, was 87 out of 197 countries –
ahead of Venezuela and below Mexico. This significant drop in infant mortality was
due to the implementation of social policies such as the conditional cash transfer
program Bolsa Familia, increases in the minimum wage, and improvements in
health and sanitation. Undergirding all these changes was the implementation of
the Real Plan in 1994, which eliminated double- and triple-digit inflation. The drop
in infant mortality in the Northeast (58.6 percent during 2000-2010) played a
major role in the overall reduction. In the Northeast, where the average salary is
lower, the increase in the minimum wage had an enormous impact because it
affected a large number of people. Life expectancy averages 72 years. The
literacy rate is estimated at 90 percent of the population above 15 years of age.
The extreme poverty level is assessed at 8.5 percent of the total population.
One of the most important changes which has taken place is the growth of the
domestic market, abetted by the maintenance of sound economic policies and the
expansion of social safety-net programs which have been the main forces behind
the reduction in overall poverty. According to a study by the highly-respected
Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV), in 2011 economic inequality dropped for the
eleventh straight year and the Gini coefficient, which measures income
concentration, fell to 0.5190[D-3] . FGV economists forecast that the decline in the
Gini coefficient, which they consider to have been a spectacular accomplishment,
will continue into the future. It is important to note, according to FGV, that over
the last decade, the income of the poorest 50 percent of the Brazilian population
grew by 68 percent while the income of the top ten percent grew only 10 percent.
Despite this impressive growth, there is still much more that needs to be done to
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 5 of 24
eradicate poverty and the index of income concentration is still one of the 12
highest in the world.
Agriculture in the Economy:
Agriculture is a very important sector of the Brazilian economy and is crucial to
economic growth and foreign exchange earnings. In 2014, the agribusiness
sector, including production agriculture and processing and distribution, accounted
for 21 percent of Brazil’s GDP, of which crop production and related inputs
accounted for 68 percent and livestock and related inputs accounted for 32
percent. In 2014, agribusiness contributed nearly 43 percent of total exports and
only 7 percent of total imports. The agribusiness sector also accounted for about
12 percent of the labor force.
Brazil has a total area of 851 million hectares, of which 79 million hectares are in
crop production, annual and perennial, and about 200 million in pasture land.
Other uses, including forestry, indigenous reservations, national reserves and
protected areas, and national parks, account for 471 million hectares. Brazil ranks
number one in world exports of coffee, sugar, beef, poultry, and frozen
concentrated orange juice (FCOJ); number two in soybeans, corn, tobacco, and is
a major exporter of pork, cotton, forest products, tropical fruits, and nuts.
In terms of agricultural expansion, there is potential available area of over 100
million hectares in the “Cerrados,” or tropical savannah area, and an estimated
area of 70 million hectares of degraded pasture land that could potentially be
turned into production as the livestock sector improves its productivity. In the
past, potential agricultural expansion was grossly underestimated. Already, the
majority of planted area in Brazil is producing two crops per year, and spurred by
historically high crop prices, this trend is increasing rapidly. There is significant
potential to increase food, fiber, and fuel production in Brazil due to the
availability of these huge areas of unutilized arable land, but continued expansion
in the “Cerrados” and Amazon biomes will be constrained by environmentally
related developments. Brazilian farmers, thus, talk about “vertical” expansion via
increasing investments in advanced technology to augment yields, in addition to
the more efficient use of existing agricultural and pasture land. By becoming
more efficient at integrating crop and cattle production and fully utilizing degraded
pasture lands, Brazil could greatly increase crop production.
On December 9, 2011, the National Land Reform and Settlement Institute (INCRA)
published a set of new rules covering the purchase of Brazilian land by foreigners.
These rules follow an August 2010 Attorney General’s opinion that similarly limited
foreign agricultural land ownership. Under the new rules, the area bought or
leased by foreigners cannot account for more than 25 percent of the overall area
in its respective municipal district. Additionally, no more than ten percent of the
land in any given municipal district may be owned or leased by foreign nationals
from the same country. The rules also make it necessary to obtain congressional
approval before large areas of land can be purchased by foreigners, foreign
companies, or Brazilian companies with the majority of shareholders from foreign
countries. On September 3, 2013 INCRA published a normative instruction to
clarify the regulations laid out in new rules. The normative instruction does not
change the new set of rules, but spells out the regulation and implementation of
the rules, as well as providing guidance for foreign investors. This continues to be
a barrier to U.S. investment in Brazilian agricultural land. However, as of June
2015, Brazil’s House of Representatives began discussions to ease restrictions on
the acquisition of land by foreign companies in order to boost investments in
agriculture and forestry. The proposed change also has the support of the first
female agriculture minister, Katia Abreu, who is an outspoken defender of
agribusiness.
On October 18, 2012, President Dilma Rousseff signed into law a new Brazilian
Forest Code. The original Forest Code Law #4,771 was passed in 1965. The
Forest Code serves as Brazil’s environmental law and is an enduring source of
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 6 of 24
controversy for environmentalists and agriculturalists as its implementation affects
environmental, social, and economic issues for the country. President Rousseff
vetoed nine of the 84 items in the Brazilian Forest Code approved by Congress
before signing the new proposal into law. The main vetoes focused on issues
related to the permanent preservation areas (APPS) required by the law, such as
the reforestation requirements given property size, aspects of the Environmental
Rural Registrar (CAR), and an online instrument which will geo-reference rural
properties and track compliance with the new Forest Code in all 26 states and the
Federal District. Her vetoes were based on three principles: no amnesty for those
responsible for illegal deforestation; no incentive to farmers to deforest; and, no
undermining of the promotion of social inclusion of small landowners to compete in
broader agricultural markets. Both the Congressional farm lobby (referred to as
“ruralistas” in Portuguese) and environmentalists, who were also unhappy with the
Forest Code, threatened to take judicial action to stop implementation of the new
law, questioning the constitutionality of the specific mechanism by which President
Rousseff enacted her vetoes. However, the law is being implemented and
Rousseff just announced the regulations which will govern the implementation of
the CAR.
Beginning with the 2011/12 crop season, Brazil has annually provided subsidized
interest rates for producers that address sustainability through the Low Carbon
Agriculture Program (ABC). The program objectives include diminishing
greenhouse gas emissions, reducing deforestation, ensuring compliance of rural
properties
with
environmental
legislation, promoting
reforestation,
and
encouraging recovery of degraded lands. For the 2015/2016 crop season (Oct 1,
2015 through Sep 30, 2016), the federal government allocated R$3 billion (nearly
US$1 billion) for this program. The limit per farmer is R$2 million for 10 years
term, and a grace period of 3 years. The subsidized interest rate for this program
is 7.5 percent per year.
Possessing 20 percent of the planet’s fresh water, Brazil has tremendous potential
to expand planted area via irrigation projects that make possible second and third
crops rotated over a yearly growing season. Historically high crop prices have
greatly improved the timeframe for return on investment with the main
constraints being water use licenses and capital investment requirements. Large
irrigation project investments are increasing made possible through growing one
crop or rotating that crop with higher returning cash crops such as fruits, tree
fruits, coffee, wheat, edible beans, and cotton. More recent supplemental
irrigation schemes are bringing vast new areas into second or third crop rotation
and improving yields and quality. According to the Brazilian Association of
Industry and Machinery, which tracks irrigation equipment sales, irrigated area
grew by 5 percent in 2014, bringing total irrigated area to 6,320 million hectares
or 8 percent of total area under agricultural cultivation for annual and perennial
crops. Although specialists say that Brazil has a potential to increase irrigation up
to 30 percent of cultivated area (nearly 24 million hectares), the country has been
hit by a hydraulic crisis affecting large urban areas in the Southeast region, with
repercussion in some production areas mostly affecting vegetable and fruit
production. Conservation and water management are now being addressed by
policy makers and agricultural leaders in the country as a factor of food security.
The food crisis of 2008 increased world interest in purchasing agricultural land in
Brazil. This interest was one of the factors, which has led to land price increases
of an average 30 percent and by foreign acquisitions of agricultural areas in
Brazil. Currently, the average price for agricultural land in areas lacking basic
logistical support, for example, in parts of the Northern and Northeastern states of
Tocantins, Piaui, and Maranhao is US$2,800 per hectare. This compares to the
average cost for productive land in areas such as western Mato Grosso state which
is around US$8,000 per hectare. The average farm size varies from 67 hectares
in southern Brazil to over 2,000 hectares in the Center-West region.
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 7 of 24
Infrastructural development of storage, port facilities, roads and railways has not
kept up with the breakneck pace of growth in agricultural production and exports.
Large investments in rehabilitating and expanding transportation infrastructure
are needed to meet demand growth and to lower the cost of freight – a significant
component of the so-called “Custo Brasil” (Brazilian cost). “Custo Brasil” is a term
that has come to denote the general cost of inefficiency from production and
distribution bottlenecks, including the various logistical transactions associated
with exports; high taxes; excessive government regulations; labor rigidities; and
inadequate education and training; among other factors. Transactional export
costs, for example, represent 15 to 20 percent of the free-on-board price for
agricultural commodities.
The “Landless Movement” (MST) and “Via Campesina,” a movement affiliated with
the MST, contribute to “Custo Brasil.” These activist groups increase the factors of
risk and uncertainty to commercial farming when they occupy vulnerable rural
properties (e.g., experimental sites owned by multinational companies doing
research on new biotech events, land owned by groups which the MST and “Via
Campesina” consider to be members of the “oligarchy,” etc.). One of their prime
stated objectives is to pressure the government to speed up land reform. These
groups have used various NGOs, including foreign NGOs, to secure funds from the
federal government. Over the past several years, illegal occupation of land
carried out by these groups has diminished but still occurs with no apparent legal
consequences for the perpetrators. The continued existence of MST serves as a
threat and adds to the cost of doing business.
Brazil has two Ministries which are involved with agriculture: the Ministry of
Agriculture, Livestock, and Food Supply (MAPA), which oversees commercial
agricultural production; and the Ministry of Agrarian Development (MDA), whose
focus is to support subsistence and family farmers. MDA, created in 1999, has
mostly been devoted to agrarian reform, since the Law of Family Farming
(#11,326) was not published until July 24, 2006. According to the last Brazilian
Agricultural Census taken in 2006, family farming accounts for 75 percent of the
agricultural area in Brazil with an average farm size of 18.4 hectares (45.4
acres). However, commercial farming accounts for 62 percent of farm income
while family farming accounts for 38 percent. In addition to the above Ministries,
Brazil also has two other Ministries involved with agriculture: the Ministry of the
Environment, which regulates environmental regulations as they affect agricultural
production, and the Ministry of Fisheries, which oversees fishing.
Government credit and tax incentive programs have assisted in spurring crop
production and supporting the construction of processing facilities. Over the last
ten years, Brazil has significantly increased financial support to its agricultural
sector. Credit from the federal government for production is an important source
of financing for agricultural producers, along with direct credit supplied by
agricultural input companies and trading companies. The 2015/2016 Agriculture
and Livestock Plan (Oct 1, 2015 though Sep 30, 2016) was announced in early
June 2015. The plan allocated R$187.7 billion (US$ 60 billion) to commercial
agriculture, an increase of 20 percent from the previous crop year. Despite the
generous increase in the volume of credit during a difficult year of fiscal
adjustment in Brazil, the government increased the subsidized interest rates to a
range of 7.5% to 8.75% per year, as compared to a range of 5.5% to 6.5 % in
the previous crop year. In addition to higher interest rates, commercial farmers
are also facing higher cost of production, mostly due to higher electricity and fuel
costs. On June 20, the federal government also announced the 2015/2016 (Oct 1,
2015 through Sep 30, 2016) Family Farming Plan to subsistence/family
farming. The volume of credit allocated for this program was R$28.9 billion (US$
9.4 billion). As in the commercial agricultural plan, interest rates for loans under
this program is highly subsidized, but the government increased the rate to a
maximum of 5.5% per year (up from 3.5% in the last crop year).
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 8 of 24
Most of subsidies in Brazil are for interest rates on rural credit operations for
production costs, marketing and investment operations. For instance, in the
2015/2016 crop and livestock plan, 64% percent of the financing will be offered
with subsidized interest rates in the range of 7.5% to 8.75% per year. Therefore,
36 percent of the financing in the new Plan will be offered with market-rate
interest rate, which is in the range of 17% to 23% per year, depending on a
farmer’s individual circumstance. As a reference, the prime rate (SELIC) in Brazil
is currently set by the Central Bank at 13.75% per year.
Domestic Agricultural Policy Overview:
Government Programs: The Brazilian government (GOB) maintains a rural credit
system and several long-term loan programs to support agricultural production
and farm income, all at subsidized interest rates. The following is a summary of
the most important domestic support programs:
Government Commodity Loan Program (EGF): This program is frequently used by
farmers to finance the holding of their products in accredited warehouses as loan
collateral. The loan amount is based on the value of product offered as collateral,
based on a minimum price set annually by the government for various products.
Banks normally provide loans on the basis of 70 percent of the minimum price.
Subsidized interest is available at annual rates in the range of 7.5% to 8.75% for
commercially-oriented agriculture and for family farming; it is available at the
highly subsidized rate of 5.5% per year. The volume of such subsidized credit
available is limited and commercially-oriented farmers complain that this
subsidized credit is hard to access. They also complain that credit limits per
farmer force them to source credit from commercial credit sources increasing
interest rates that range between 13 and 23 percent per year. Commercial
farmers also depend on credit supplied by Brazilian and multinational trading
companies. Due to the current economic recession in Brazil and higher credit at
market-rates, “barter” exchanges of inputs versus crops are expected to increase
significantly during the 2015/2016 crop year.
Industry Commodity Loan Program (EGF - Industry): This program is similar to
EGF, but applicable only to processors of agricultural commodities under the
Minimum Support Price Program, except for rice and soybeans. Access to this
program is predicated on an arrangement between the processor and the farmer
or cooperative. Financing is limited to 50 percent of the production capacity of
processors, and payment to farmers cannot be lower than the governmentestablished minimum commodity price. Subsidized interest is available at annual
rates of 5.5 percent.
Federal Government Acquisition (AGF): This program allows the government to
acquire agricultural products at the minimum price when the market price is below
the minimum. It also allows the government to acquire products at market prices
for use in the Family Agriculture Program and to build strategic stocks.
Rural Promissory Note (CDR): Processors of agricultural commodities can contract
a CDR with accredited banks. Financing is limited to 50 percent of the processor’s
production capacity. Processors must prove they have paid at least the minimum
price to the producer. Products eligible for the CDR are: cotton, rice, corn, and
wheat. Subsidized interest rates are 5.5 percent plus banking expenses.
Premium for Product Outflow Program (PEP): Through this program, the
government pays the difference between the prevailing market price and the
minimum price of the product. Cotton, wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, dry edible
beans citrus, grapes, wine, and rubber have been eligible for this program so far.
The federal government through MAPA’s National Company of Food and Supply
(CONAB) conducts public auctions to set a premium for buyers of a given
product. These buyers then contact producers interested in selling their
production at the current minimum support price. Buyers, normally processors or
millers, must transport the product to the destination previously established by
the program. The objective of PEP is to move commodities from areas of high
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 9 of 24
product concentration to areas of need, typically in the demographically-sparse
parts of the North, and Northeastern (55 million inhabitants) regions of the
country. However, in addition to the ability to send the product to the North and
Northeastern parts of the country, PEP participants can also export the product.
For this reason, most traders and companies recognize PEP as an export subsidy.
FAS/Brasilia has carried out research to gather and analyze critical information to
support the USG case against PEP. FAS/Brasilia will continue to collect data about
the program.
The Value for Marketing of Products (VEP): VEP provides the minimum
guaranteed price to producers and cooperatives by paying the difference between
the minimum guaranteed price and the market price. The essential difference that
distinguishes VEP from PEP is that VEP auctions public stocks while PEP auctions
private stocks. The objective is to supplement the supply of commodities in areas
of the country considered to be deficient in agricultural production, such as the
Northeast of Brazil. In 2012, MAPA used VEP extensively to source corn from the
Center-West to supply livestock and poultry producers in the Northeast, an area
impacted by a severe drought in 2012.
Risk Premium for Acquisition of Agricultural Products Deriving from Private
Contracts of Sales Options (PROP): PROP is a subsidy program granted in the
form of a public auction for the consumer to acquire, at a future date, a
determined product directly from the producer and/or cooperative at a prefixed
price, utilizing a private contract for the option to sell.
The Equalization Premium Paid to the Producer (PEPRO): PEPRO is a premium
granted to the farmer or cooperative which sells its products at a public auction.
The government pays the difference between the Official Reference Value and the
value of the premium (the maximum value paid by the government as a guarantee
of the Reference Value).
Option to Sell Contract: This contract is a futures option offered by the federal
government through public auctions to producers and cooperatives. By purchasing
a futures option, the holder has the right to deliver to the government by a
specified date a certain quantity of the commodity, named in the contract, at a
specific price. This program signals government expectations of futures prices to
the market, and it represents a price hedge to producers and cooperatives.
Product Equivalency: Small producers under the Program to Strengthen Family
Farms (PRONAF) are entitled to production cost financing based on the
equivalency concept whereby farmers pay off delinquent loans by delivering an
equivalent amount of the crop. The government-established minimum price is
used as reference. This scheme is only available for cotton, rice, corn, and wheat.
Interest rates for small family farms are highly subsidized at the annual interest
rate of two percent for loans above R$10,000 (US$5,000). The volume of credit
available at this rate is limited.
Other Long-Term Support:
Long-term support for production and processing of agricultural products is
centralized in the Brazilian Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES)
and the Special Agency for Industrial Financing (FINAME), which are the principal
components of the BNDES system. The mission of the BNDES system is to foster
economic and social development in Brazil, with the BNDES serving as an agent to
direct and oversee long-term investments. The BNDES system provides financial
support to the following sectors of the Brazilian economy: agriculture, industry,
infrastructure, commerce and services.
In 2014, the BNDES system allocated R$187.8 billion (US$80 billion) to the
various sector of the Brazilian economy, of which R$16.7 billion (US$7 billion) for
the agriculture and livestock sectors, down 11 percent from 2013. For 2015,
BNDES forecasts an allocation of R$ 170 billion for all sectors of the economy,
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 10 of 24
down 9 percent from 2014.The BNDES system offers a broad range of services to
support various agribusiness project types. Among the most important
investments programs are:
1.
2.
C. BNDES programs for the biofuels sector: BNDES provides specific credit lines
for the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy industries to fund investments on sugarcane
production, expansion of industrial capacity for sugar and ethanol, cogeneration,
logistics, and multimodal transportation. Total financing for the industry in 2014
was R$ 6.8 billion similar to 2013 (R$ 6.9 billion). BNDES reports that a total of
R$ 5 billion should be released in 2015 as a consequence of likely lower activity in
the industry. A total of R$ 1.5 billion should be available to fund Prorenova, a
credit line to finance the renewal and/or expansion of sugarcane fields. The
ethanol stock program also known as BNDES PASS program should release a total
credit of R$ 2 billion.
1.
1.
specific for commodities, such as: Program for the Development of
Apiculture (PRODAMEL); the
1.
Soil Conservation Program (PROSOLO); the Program for Sheep and Goat
Development
1.
(PRODECAP); the Shrimp Development Program (PROCAMOL); the Wine
Development Program
1.
(PRODEVINHO); the Pasture Improvement Program ( PROPASTO); the Milk
Development Program
1.
(PROLEITE); Fruit Industry Development Program (PROFRUTA) and BNDES
CEREALISTA
1.
(storage financing).
Biotechnology
Agricultural biotechnology in Brazil is rigorously regulated under a risk-based
system similar to the United States that was initially established in 1995 under the
first Brazilian Biosafety Law. The current regulatory framework for agricultural
biotechnology is outlined in Brazil’s Biosafety Law 11,105 of March 24, 2005,
along with Presidential Decree 5,591 of November 22, 2005. These acts provide
safety norms and inspection mechanisms for activities that involve genetically
modified organisms and their by-products, activate the National Biosafety Council
(CNBS), restructure the National Biosafety Technical Commission (CTNBio) and lay
out the National Biosafety Policy (PNB). The law also includes provisions for stem
cell research in Brazil. On March 21, 2007, Law# 11,460 altered certain important
provisions of the Biosafety Law of 2005 to improve the CTNBio voting process for
approval of individual biotech events. As of June 18, 2008, all CTNBio approvals
of biotech events are now final and cannot be appealed to the CNBS. The CNBS
now only has authority to consider issues involving social and economic interest in
the examination of CTNBio biotech event approvals. This decision eliminated a
major constraint in the regulatory process.
Under the current legal framework, all imported or local commercially grown,
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 11 of 24
processed, sold and consumed biotech products must be pre-approved by CTNBio,
which is overseen and is part of the Ministry of Science and Technology. CTNBio
is the lead Brazilian agency for regulating all biotech products and has a system
similar to that of the United States for ensuring that all biotech products are as
safe for the environment and for human and animal health as their conventional
counterparts. CTNBio has a board comprised of 27 members, including
government and private sector representatives. Approval of commercial biotech
events is not an easy process, mainly due to a number of anti-biotech members
on the commission, but approvals are granted by absolute majority vote.
Ten years after the first commercial approval of biotech soybeans in Brazil, the
total area planted to GE crops during the last crop season (2014/15) reached 42
million hectares, which places Brazil as the second largest producer of GE crops in
the world. GE events with herbicide tolerance traits lead the adoption rate with 65
percent of the total are planted followed by insect resistance with 19 percent and
stacked genes with 16 percent. As of July 2015, there are 45 GE events approved
for commercial cultivation in Brazil, of which 25 events for corn, 12 for cotton, six
for soybeans, one for dry edible beans, and most recently one for eucalyptus. In
April 2014, CTNBio also approved for commercial release GE mosquitoes in Brazil.
Ethanol:
Brazil is the second largest producer and consumer of ethanol, following the
United States. It produces both hydrous (for direct sale as E-100) and anhydrous
(blended to gasoline) ethanol. Current legislation requires gasoline sold in Brazil
to have anhydrous ethanol content between 18 and 27.5 percent, with the
executive branch having the flexibility to adjust this percentage within that band.
The blend is currently set at 27 percent.
The Brazilian sugarcane production for marketing year 2015/16 is projected at
648 million metric tons, up 3 percent from previous season due to increased area
for harvest and a marginal increase in agricultural yields. Approximately 58.5
percent of the cane is expected to be diverted to ethanol which should result in
approximately 29.35 billion liters of the product, up 800 million liters from last
season’s production.
Ethanol prices in Brazil depend on gasoline prices given that ethanol-fueled cars
have 70 percent of the efficiency compared to gasoline fueled cars. Gasoline prices
are set by Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company, which is controlled by the GOB.
The cap on gasoline prices has negatively affected the ethanol industry. However,
in February 2015, the increase of federal taxes on the fossil fuel has encouraged
higher demand and therefore higher ethanol production. Nonetheless the sugarethanol plants have still been struggling to pay debts. The Sugar and Alcohol
Millers Association of São Paulo State (UNICA) reports that over 63 sugar-ethanol
mills have closed over the past six years.
Agricultural Trade Environment:
Stimulated by high international commodity prices, Brazil’s agricultural exports
have grown significantly over the past five years, reaching a record US$99.9
billion in 2013, up 4.3 percent from 2012, while agricultural imports increase by 4
percent to US$17 billion. However, in 2014, because of lower commodity prices,
total agricultural exports dropped by 3.2 percent to US$ 96.7 billion, while imports
dropped by 2.6 percent to US$16.6 billion. Brazil is the third largest agricultural
exporter behind the United States and the European Union (EU). According to
Brazilian official data, agricultural shipments accounted for nearly 43 percent of
the country’s total exports of US$225.7 billion in 2014, while imports accounted
for 7.3 percent of the country’s total imports of US$229 billion.
Agricultural trade between Brazil and the United States increased by 3.2 percent
from US$6.3 billion to US$6.5 billion in 2014. Brazil exported to the United States
US$4.8 billion of agricultural and food products, up 8 percent from 2013, and
imported US$ 1.7 billion, down35 percent from 2013. Much of the decline was due
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 12 of 24
to a significant decrease in wheat imports. Although the United States and Brazil
are often competitors in third markets, the United States is a major export
destination for Brazilian sugar, coffee, orange juice, fruits, processed meat,
tobacco, and wood products. Brazil imports wheat, dairy products, cotton, and
other intermediate and consumer oriented products from the United States.
Brazil is the largest member of the Common Market of the South – Mercosul (in
Portuguese), a regional customs union that promotes free trade between
Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, and, since July 2012, Venezuela. In 2015, Bolivia
was also declared as a new full member of the Common Market, but decision
needs to be approved by the Brazilian congress. Associated members include
Chile, Bolivia, and the Andean Pact (Colombia, Peru and Ecuador). Venezuela’s
accession to Mercosul had been blocked by Paraguay since 2006, but in the
aftermath of a polemical political transition in June 2012, Paraguay was officially
suspended from participating in Mercosul and Venezuela effectively became a
member. On December 7, 2012, Bolivia became an accessing member, which still
requires ratification from member state legislatures. Brazil’s applied agricultural
tariff rates are within World Trade Organization (WTO) bound tariffs. Each
member of the MERCOSUL has an exception list, or a list of products for which the
import tariffs are different from those rates of the MERCOSUL’s Common External
Tariff (TEC). At the December 2011 meeting, MERCOSUL members agreed to
increase the list of excepted items allowed by an additional one hundred items.
The most important agricultural items for the United States on Brazil’s exception
list are a number of dairy products whose applied tariffs are above the MERCOSUL
rates and are now being considered to be further increased to the WTO bound
rates, potentially to trade-prohibiting levels. The CXT rates, including the higher
tariffs on the exception list, are lower than Brazil’s WTO final bound rates, which
for many agricultural products are in the 30-55 percent range.
In recent years Brazil has increased its participation in organizations such as
Codex, where it been increasingly coordinating its positions with the United State.
In multilateral negotiations, Brazil and the United States share many common
positions, particularly regarding the production and trade distorting policies of
highly developed economies, such as the EU and Japan. However, Brazil usually
groups the United States into the trade-distorting category citing the U.S. Tariff
Rate Sugar Program and agricultural domestic support programs among others.
In the WTO, Brazil has strong influence as a leader of the G-20 group. Brazil has
won dispute settlement cases against the U.S. cotton program and EU sugar
subsidies. Regarding the U.S. cotton program, in June 2010, the United States
and Brazil signed a Framework for a Mutually Agreed Solution to the Cotton
Dispute in the WTO. As part of the Framework Agreement, Brazil did not impose
US$829 million in countermeasures authorized by the WTO. In exchange, the
United States agreed to work with Brazil to establish a fund of approximately
US$147.3 million per year on a pro rata basis to provide technical assistance and
capacity building to the cotton sector in Brazil, and for international cooperation
related to the same sector in certain other countries. Under the Memorandum of
Understanding related to this settlement, the United States agreed to finance this
fund until passage of the next Farm Bill or until a mutually agreed solution to the
Cotton dispute is reached. However, due to sequestration in September 2013 and
the elimination of the line item for funding in the President’s FY14 budget, the
funding for this settlement has been discontinued.
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Regulatory System:
MAPA’s Office of Agricultural Protection (SDA) is responsible for enforcing sanitary
and phytosanitary (SPS) regulations governing plant and animal product imports.
For certain processed products, responsibility is shared with the Ministry of
Health. Brazil has a centralized rule-making system under which all relevant
executive acts must be published in the Brazilian Federal Register (“Diario
Oficial”).
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 13 of 24
SPS market access issues for agricultural and food products have become major
trade irritants between the United States and Brazil. However, the establishment
of the U.S.-Brazil Consultative Committee on Agriculture (CCA) has improved
bilateral dialogue.
The Seven U.S.-Brazil CCA was held on March 31, 2015, in Brasilia. Two important
sub-groups of the CCA were created: First, the US-Brazil High Level Biotechnology
Working Group (HLBWG) and the US-Brazil High Level Working Group to Promote
Cooperation and Coordination (HLCCWG).
Food Security:
As a leading producer and exporter of agricultural products, Brazil is one of the
world’s few countries which will be in the lead to address future food security
issues. Though occupying this important and privileged position, the Brazilian
government (GOB) recognizes that there are poor areas of Brazil (e.g., parts of
the Northeast and North) which continue to suffer from hunger, and is
implementing programs to address this situation. In the last 16 years, the GOB
has been consolidating diverse nutrition programs under an overarching National
Food and Nutrition Policy. The existing structure combines cash transfer
programs, with or without conditionality, with different outreach programs led by
public-private partnerships and civil society organizations. Various ministries
(please see below) are involved in implementing these food security programs.
These programs are characterized by efficient logistics, and targeted approaches
to at-risk groups and regions, and are carefully monitored and evaluated.
Since 2007, food and nutrition programs have become an integral part of both the
very successful and highly touted Family Support (“Bolsa Familia” – a conditional
electronic cash transfer program) and Family Health Programs. The Family
Support Program assists more than 11 million families. Under the Family Health
Program, community health workers canvass both urban and rural areas to
identify chronic, nutrition-related diseases, and to assess the nutritional status of
the population. They then elaborate mechanisms to procure locally grown
produce and deliver it to families, which helps improve overall nutrition. While the
Family Support Program, especially the “Bolsa Familia” component, has played a
critical role in improving the overall nutrition and health of Brazil’s abject poor, it
has been criticized for making them dependent on a program which does not train
and prepare them for the job market. A case in point is the city of Guaribas,
located in the state of Piaui, where the “Bolsa Familia” Program was launched
nationally in 2003. Since the implementation of the program, health and
educational indicators there have improved but these changes have not been
accompanied by employment generation. Thus, 87 percent of the population
continues to depend solely on “Bolsa Familia” for its survival. Supporters and
critics alike point to the need for the establishment of training programs which will
allow “Bolsa Familia” participants to learn marketable skills which will enable them
to “graduate” from the program.
The ministries which are in the lead in delivering food and nutrition programs
include: Social Development (Family Support Program); Education (School
Nutrition Program); and Health (chronic noninfectious diseases, in addition to
HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis and other transmissible diseases). The Ministries
of National Integration, Labor, Communications and Planning also play a role in
coordinating with the lead ministries in the execution of these programs. MAPA,
through CONAB, is also responsible for supporting food security through two
programs: 1) The Program of Food Acquisition (PAA), which is coordinated with
the Ministry of Social Development; and 2) an emergency program which involves
the assembling of food baskets for delivery to families facing temporary food
insecurity. Brazil is expected to meet the Millennium Development Goals related
to food and nutrition. Brazil's progress towards these goals will be crucial to
ensuring the achievement of these goals in other developing countries, via
bilateral and trilateral cooperation with the U.S., particularly in Portuguese-
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 14 of 24
speaking African countries.
[D-1]Dates?
[D-2]Citation?
[D-3]From what?
Organization Mission:
Cross Commodity Collaboration:
USDA Stakeholders:
The following cooperators (eight commodity boards and one regional association)
are conducting activities in Brazil: the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute, U.S.
Dairy Export Council, USA Rice Federation, Pear Bureau Northwest, California Pear
Advisory Board, U.S. Apple Export Council, Northwest Cherry Growers, U.S. Grains
Council, and Food Export USA. These groups all maintain regular communication
with the Agricultural Trade Office (ATO) in Sao Paulo. Their activities focus on trade
servicing (matchmaking), retail (conducting in-store promotions, trade shows and
PR events), and monitoring GOB domestic support programs.
Industry Prior Experience:
Affiliations:
Affiliated Organizations:
USDA on-going activities and areas of engagement with Brazil include:
U.S.-Brazil Consultative Committee on Agriculture (CCA) since 2003
U.S.-Brazil Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to Advance Cooperation on Biofuels since 2007. In 2011
under the MOU, an agreement was signed on cooperation in aviation biofuels.
USDA bioenergy capacity building in developing countries with Brazil in the G-8’s Global Bioenergy Partnership
since 2006
The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) currently has over 108 active collaborative research projects
with Brazil, some of which are under the umbrella of the Technical Cooperation Agreement, “Labex-USA,” with
Embrapa, which has been operational since 1998. The projects range from production agriculture and technical
capacity building, research in renewable energy.
The USDA Forest Service has continued to be actively engaged with Brazil on technical cooperation and
sustainable forestry practices, in conjunction with the U.S. Agency for International Development for over 15
years. There has been recent emphasis on fire prevention and management on private farms in the western
Brazilian Amazon, and assisting in satellite monitoring of deforestation in the Amazon biome.
The USDA Natural Resource and Conservation Service (NRCS) is collaborating with Brazilian scientists in several
soil conservation projects.
USDA works with the U.S. State Department in trilateral cooperation in capacity building with Brazil focused on
biotechnology and food security. The first collaborative seminar with Brazil focused on biotechnology was held in
Mozambique in 2010. In 2011, a biotechnology outreach program was held in Ghana. For 2013, USDA
conducted a reverse African biotechnology training program in Brazil.
USDA is supporting a technical cooperation project with Codex and the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture. This
project aims at coordinating the overall hemispheric Codex strategy. Currently, there is not adequate
coordination between among Latin American and Caribbean countries due principally to: non-continuity among
representatives, financial difficulties, and institutional issues. With the joining of forces, it will be possible to
strengthen national offices, to train technical experts in various areas and, finally, to integrate countries in the
decision making process to develop regional positions to be negotiated in Codex meetings. The Inter-American
Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture (IICA) technical staff located in offices throughout the Americas will play
an important role in contributing to this goal.
· United States – Brazil Agricultural Dialogue – an initiative in coordination with Brazil’s Agricultural and
Livestock Federation (CNA) to discuss with the agricultural private sector about issue of common interest.
· MAIZALL is a private-sector corn growers organization whose members are the U.S., Argentina, and Brazil. It
was launched in May 2013 and aims to promote the joint interests of U.S., Brazilian, and Argentine corn
growers.
· HLCCWG – the High Level Working Group to Promote Cooperation and Coordination is a new USDA-MAPA
entity which aims at attacking trade barriers in third countries.
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 15 of 24
1.1.5 Industry Personnel
Manager/Administrator Name
Position/ Title
MAP %
FMD %
John Q. Public
International Marketing Specialist1
70.00
30.00
1.1.6 MAP/FMD Start/End Dates from Plan Submittal
Submission Date:
MAP Start:
MAP End:
1.1.7 Resource Request Table
Program
Requested Amount
Emerging Markets Program (EMP)
20,000
Market Access Program (MAP)-GBI
110,000
Market Access Program (MAP)-Non GBI
0
Trade Policy Initiatives (# of activities)
0
1.2 Industry Export Goals
Goal Period Type: Crop Year
Goal Period Span: January 1 - December 31
Data Source:
test data source
Export Goals Metrics:
US Exports($)
Export Year
(whole number only)
World Trade($)
(whole number only)
Status
2009
100,000
900,000 Actual
2010
05
05 Actual
2012
05
2013
100,004
900,004 Estimate
2014
100,005
900,005 Estimate
2015
100,006
900,006 Goal
2016
100,007
900,007 Goal
2017
100,008
900,008 Goal
2018
100,009
900,009 Goal
2019
100,010
900,010 Goal
2020
100,011
900,011 Goal
2021
100,012
900,012 Goal
2022
100,013
900,013 Goal
2023
100,014
900,014 Goal
05 Actual
1.3 Promised Contributions
Applicant/Participant Promised Contribution
Program
(%)
Industry Promised Contribution
($)
MAP
150
FMD
150
(%)
($)
100
100
EMP
10,000
5,000
QSP
15,000
5,000
1.4 Proposals
1.4.1 EMP Proposals:
Proposal ID
Targeted Market
Proposal Title
Status
2293
Central Africa - Processed Tuna
Central Africa Tuna Dealers
Submitted
1.4.2 TASC Proposals:
Proposal ID
Targeted Market
Proposal Title
Status
1.4.3 QSP Proposals:
Proposal ID
Targeted Market
Proposal Title
Status
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 16 of 24
2.SECTION 2: MARKET ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT, AND STRATEGY
2.1 Market Definitions
Title
Description
Market
Kind
List of Countries
Central
Central America
America Tuna
Products
Geographic
ES-El Salvador , GT-Guatemala
Market
Central
Africa
Geographic
CF-Congo (Brazzaville) , CM-Cameroon , CT-Central African Republic
Market
Taiwan
Geographic
TW-Taiwan
Market
global
!2-British Pacific Islands , !7-Canton & Enderbury Islands , !9-French
Pacific Islands , !E-Palau , AA-Aruba , AC-Antigua and Barbuda , AFAfghanistan , AG-Algeria , AJ-Azerbaijan, Republic of , AL-Albania , AMArmenia, Republic of , AN-Andorra , AO-Angola , AQ-American Samoa ,
AR-Argentina , AS-Australia , AU-Austria , AV-Anguilla , BA-Bahrain , BBBarbados , BC-Botswana , BD-Bermuda , BE-Belgium-Luxembourg , BFBahamas, The , BG-Bangladesh , BH-Belize , BK-Bosnia-Hercegovina , BLBolivia , BM-Burma , BN-Benin , BO-Belarus, Republic of , BP-Solomon
Islands , BR-Brazil , BT-Bhutan , BU-Bulgaria , BX-Brunei , BY-Burundi ,
CA-Canada , CB-Cambodia , CD-Chad , CE-Sri Lanka , CF-Congo
(Brazzaville) , CG-Democratic Republic of Congo , CH-China (Mainland) ,
CI-Chile , CJ-Cayman Islands , CK-Cocos (Keeling) Islands , CMCameroon , CN-Comoros , CO-Colombia , CQ-Northern Mariana Islands ,
CS-Costa Rica , CT-Central African Republic , CU-Cuba , CV-Cape Verde ,
CW-Cook Islands , CY-Cyprus , DA-Denmark , DJ-Djibouti Afars-Issas ,
DO-Dominica , DR-Dominican Republic , EC-Ecuador , EG-Egypt , EIIreland , EK-Equatorial Guinea , EN-Estonia , ER-Eritrea , ES-El Salvador ,
ET-Ethiopia , EZ-Czech Republic , F3-French West Indies , FG-French
Guiana , FI-Finland , FJ-Fiji , FK-Falkland Islands (Islas Malvin, FMMicronesia, Federated States o, FO-Faroe Islands , FP-French Polynesia ,
FR-France , FS-French Southern & Antarctic La, GA-Gambia, The , GBGabon , GG-Georgia, Republic of , GH-Ghana , GI-Gibraltar , GJ-Grenada ,
GL-Greenland , GM-Germany , GP-Guadeloupe , GQ-Guam , GR-Greece ,
GT-Guatemala , GV-Guinea , GY-Guyana , GZ-Gaza Strip , HA-Haiti , HKHong Kong , HM-Heard Island and McDonald Isla, HO-Honduras , HRCroatia , HU-Hungary , IC-Iceland , ID-Indonesia , IN-India , IO-British
Ind. Ocean Territory , IR-Iran , IS-Israel , IT-Italy , IV-Ivory Coast , IZIraq , JA-Japan , JM-Jamaica & Dep , JO-Jordan , KE-Kenya , KGKyrgyzstan, Republic of , KR-Kiribati , KS-Korea, Republic of , KTGeographic Christmas Island , KU-Kuwait , KV-Kosovo, Republic of , KZ-Kazakhstan,
Republic of , L3-Leeward-Windward Islands , LA-Laos , LE-Lebanon , LGMarket
Latvia , LH-Lithuania , LI-Liberia , LO-Slovakia , LS-Liechtenstein , LTLesotho , LU-Luxembourg , LY-Libya , MA-Madagascar , MB-Martinique ,
MC-Macau , MD-Moldova, Republic of , MG-Mongolia , MH-Montserrat , MIMalawi , MK-Macedonia (Skopje) , ML-Mali , MN-Monaco , MO-Morocco ,
MP-Mauritius and Dependents , MQ-Midway Islands , MR-Mauritania , MTMalta & Gozo , MU-Oman , MV-Maldive Islands , MX-Mexico , MYMalaysia , MZ-Mozambique , NC-New Caledonia , NE-Niue , NF-Norfolk
Island , NG-Niger , NH-Vanuatu/New Hebrides , NI-Nigeria , NLNetherlands , NO-Norway , NP-Nepal , NR-Nauru , NS-Surinam , NTNetherlands Antilles (exc. Aru, NU-Nicaragua , NZ-New Zealand , P1Pacific Islands , PA-Paraguay , PC-Pitcairn Islands , PE-Peru , PK-Pakistan ,
PL-Poland , PM-Panama , PO-Portugal , PP-Papua New Guinea , PS-Trust
Territory of the Pacific, PU-Guinea-Bissau , QA-Qatar , RE-ReUNION , RMMarshal Islands , RO-Romania , RP-Philippines , RQ-Puerto Rico , RSRussian Federation , RW-Rwanda , SA-Saudi Arabia , SB-St. Pierre and
Miquelon , SC-St. Christopher-Nevis , SE-Seychelles and Dependents , SFSouth Africa, Republic of , SG-Senegal , SH-St. Helena (Br W Afr) , SISlovenia , SL-Sierra Leone , SN-Singapore , SO-Somalia , SP-Spain , STSt. Lucia , SU-Sudan , SW-Sweden , SY-Syria , SZ-Switzerland , TC-United
Arab Emirates , TD-Trinidad and Tobago , TH-Thailand , TI-Tajikistan,
Republic of , TK-Turks and Caicos Islands , TL-Tokelau , TN-Tonga , TOTogo , TP-Sao Tome and Principe , TS-Tunisia , TT-Dem. Republic of
Timor-Leste , TU-Turkey , TV-Tuvalu , TW-Taiwan , TX-Turkmenistan , TZTanzania, United Republic of , U0-US Outlying Islands , UG-Uganda , UKUnited Kingdom , UP-Ukraine , US-United States , UV-Burkina , UYUruguay , UZ-Uzbekistan, Republic of , VC-St. Vincent and the Grenadines,
VE-Venezuela , VI-British Virgin Islands , VM-Vietnam , VQ-Virgin Islands
of the U.S. , WA-Namibia , WE-West Bank , WF-Wallis and Futuna , WIWestern Sahara , WQ-Wake Island , WS-Western Samoa , WZ-Swaziland ,
YI-Serbia and Montenegro , YM-Yemen , YU-Yugoslavia (>05/92) , ZA-
global
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 17 of 24
Zambia , ZI-Zimbabwe
Geographic
AQ-American Samoa
Market
jljllk;l;lk k;;lk;
2.2 Promoted Commodities
2.2.1.1 Basic Information
Promoted Commodity: OTSEA - Other Seafood
Commodity Aggregate: Other Seafood (OTSEA)
U.S. Origin(%): 100
Value Added: No
2.2.1.2 Domestic Information
Developments:
There are two types of tuna that are farmed in the United States: white and black. Kentucky has the largest
farming operations for tuna. In 2010, U.S. produced 10 million pounds of tuna with a value of 3.2 million
dollars.
Outlook:
Supermarket demand for tuna continues to grow. Tuna is a cost effective alternative to tilapia of haddock.
Tuna has superb health benefit which is why demand continues to grow. In 2011, demand for tuna was up by
5%.
Share Exported:
US Export share of the tuna market is 15% compared with Russia, 30%, China 5%., Australia 20% and Japan
30%.
Strengths and Weaknesses:
The U.S. has the most efficient methods of getting the tuna to market. From the time the tuna is caught,
canned and shipped it is less than 48 hours. The quality of U.S. tuna is far superior to the Russian or other
international competitors.
Drawbacks: once the tuna reaches the international market, import restrictions
forces the tuna sits in the shipping vessel for a day or two. This spoils the end product.
2.2.1.3 International Information
Market Conditions:
Import restrictions add delay getting the tuna into foreign markets. High tariffs makes it cost prohibited for
importers to buy U.S. tuna.
Outlook:
Due to the possible change in tariffs, there may be an opportunity for U.S. tuna to enter the Malysian market.
TPC expects an increase of 2.5% sales.
Competitive Threats:
China, Japan provides low cost alternatives to U.S. tuna. Both countries tuna products are subsidized by their
governments.
2.2.1.4 U.S. and World Production and Trade
Volume Unit:Pounds
Data Source:
Other Seafood almanac
World Production Metrics:
US Production
Exports as a Share
of U.S. Production
US Export
U.S. Share of
World Trade
World Trade
Year
Vol.(LB )
Value($)
Vol.(LB )
Value($)
Vol.(%)
Value(%)
Vol.(LB )
Value($)
Vol.(%)
2008
198,000
112,510,000
50,000
800,000,000
25
711
1,000,000
1,568,000,000
5
51 Actual
2009
199,500
120,500,000
55,000
810,000,000
28
672
1,005,000
1,575,000,000
5
51 Actual
2010
200,000
123,000,000
58,000
817,000,000
29
664
1,016,000
1,583,000,000
6
52 Actual
2011
203,500
124,500,000
62,000
820,000,000
30
659
1,035,000
1,625,000,000
6
2012
204,000
126,000,000
65,000
823,000,000
32
653
1,045,000
1,688,000,000
6
49 Actual
2013
206,000
129,500,000
67,500
824,500,000
33
637
1,056,000
1,700,000,000
6
48 Estimate
2014
206,300
129,700,000
68,300
824,700,000
33
636
1,061,000
1,705,000,000
6
48 Forecast
2015
206,301
129,700,001
68,301
824,700,001
33
636
1,061,001
1,705,000,001
6
48 Forecast
2016
206,302
129,700,002
68,302
824,700,002
33
636
1,061,002
1,705,000,002
6
48 Forecast
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
Value(%) Status
50 Actual
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 18 of 24
2017
206,303
129,700,003
68,303
824,700,003
33
636
1,061,003
1,705,000,003
6
48 Forecast
2018
206,304
129,700,004
68,304
824,700,004
33
636
1,061,004
1,705,000,004
6
48 Forecast
2019
206,305
129,700,005
68,305
824,700,005
33
636
1,061,005
1,705,000,005
6
48 Forecast
2020
206,306
129,700,006
68,306
824,700,006
33
636
1,061,006
1,705,000,006
6
48 Forecast
2021
206,307
129,700,007
68,307
824,700,007
33
636
1,061,007
1,705,000,007
6
48 Forecast
2.2.2.1 Basic Information
Promoted Commodity: Processed Tuna
Commodity Aggregate: Fish & Seafood (SEAFD)
U.S. Origin(%): 100
Value Added: No
2.2.2.2 Domestic Information
Developments:
Outlook:
Share Exported:
Strengths and Weaknesses:
2.2.2.3 International Information
Market Conditions:
Outlook:
Competitive Threats:
2.2.2.4 U.S. and World Production and Trade
Volume Unit:
Data Source:
World Production Metrics:
US Production
Year
Vol.(Unit)
Exports as a Share
of U.S. Production
US Export
Value($)
Vol.(Unit)
Value($)
Vol.(%)
Value(%)
U.S. Share of
World Trade
World Trade
Vol.(Unit)
Value($)
Vol.(%)
Value(%) Status
2.3. Targeted Market Assessment
2.3.1.1 Basic Information
Market Definition: Central Africa
Promoted Commodity: OTSEA
Market Type: Growth Market
Market Keywords:
FAS Market Keywords:
2.3.1.2 Substantive Information:
Market Assessment:
The U.S. is the leading market for canned tuna in Central Africa. The U.S. accounts for over 35% of canned
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 19 of 24
tuna imported into Cameroon, Congo Brazzaville and the Central African Republic. The people in this region are
moving toward a more healthy diet. that has account for the increase demand for canned tuna. In addition, the
lower tarrifs for tuna imports has positioned the region as strong market for U.S. canned tuna.
Market Strategy:
Tuna Packers has developed a strong relationship with the retailer to increase visibility of Tuna Packers products
on store shelves. Long term strategies includes more instore promotion, advertising on local radio and TV
stations. Our goal is for a 10% increase of sales.
Past Performance and Evaluation Results:
2014 is the first year for the Tuna Packers' program in Central Africa thus past performance and evaluation
results are not available.
2.3.1.3 Metrics Information
Export Volume Unit:24-Pound Cartons
Data Source:
U.S. NEI
Targeted Market Export Goals:
Year
Volume(24LBC)
Value($)
Market Share
(%)
Status
2009
1000
100,000.00
5.00
Not Set
2010
2000
100,001.00
6.00
Not Set
2011
3000
100,002.00
7.00
Not Set
2012
4000
100,003.00
8.00
Not Set
2013
5000
100,004.00
9.00
Not Set
2014
6000
100,005.00
10.00
Not Set
2015
7000
100,006.00
11.00
Not Set
2016
8000
100,007.00
12.00
Not Set
2017
9000
100,008.00
13.00
Not Set
2018
10000
100,009.00
14.00
Not Set
2.3.1.4 Export Strategy
2.3.2.1 Basic Information
Market Definition: Central Africa
Promoted Commodity: SEAFD
Market Type: Growth Market
Market Keywords:
FAS Market Keywords:
2.3.2.2 Substantive Information:
Market Assessment:
Market Strategy:
Past Performance and Evaluation Results:
2.3.2.3 Metrics Information
Export Volume Unit:LB, Farm Sales Wt Eq
Data Source:
Seafood Almanac
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 20 of 24
Targeted Market Export Goals:
Year
Volume(LBFSW)
Value($)
Market Share
(%)
Status
2009
1000
100,000.00
5.00
Not Set
2010
2000
100,001.00
6.00
Not Set
2011
3000
100,002.00
7.00
Not Set
2012
4000
100,003.00
8.00
Not Set
2013
5000
100,004.00
9.00
Not Set
2014
6000
100,005.00
10.00
Not Set
2015
7000
100,006.00
11.00
Not Set
2016
8000
100,007.00
12.00
Not Set
2017
9000
100,008.00
13.00
Not Set
2018
10000
100,009.00
14.00
Not Set
2019
11000
100,010.00
15.00
Not Set
2.3.2.4 Export Strategy
2.3.2.4.1 Constraints/PM
2.3.2.4.1.1 Basic Information
Constraint No: 1
Constraint Title: Increasing tuna dealers
Constraint Type: N/A
Constraint Description:
EMP Current Circumstances:
Constraint Keywords:
FAS Constraint Keywords:
2.3.2.4.1.2 CPR Specific Information
Recommendations:
Evaluation and Findings:
Post Assessment:
Division Assessment:
Success Story:
Lessons Learned:
2.3.2.4.1.3 PM Specific Information
Baseline Baseline Baseline
Baseline
Year
(-2)
(-1)
Title:
Number
of
dealerships
2013
Description:
5
Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseli
(+1)
(+2)
(+3)
(+4)
(+5)
(+6)
(+7)
G 6
A
Note: G = Goal, A = Actual
FootNote:
2.3.2.4.1.4 Activities:
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 21 of 24
2.3.2.4.1.4.1.1 Basic Info
Program: MAP
Activity Code: M14GXTEST1
Activity Title: this is a test
Requested Amount ($): $110,000
Funded Amount ($):
Activity Status: Draft
Activity Description:
xxxx
Activity Results Timeframe(Expected):
Activity Results (actual):
Contribution List:
Contribution Type
Amount ($)
2.3.2.4.1.4.1.2 Activity Tag Basic Information:
Priortity Name
Global-Broadbased Initiative
2.3.3.1 Basic Information
Market Definition: Central America
Promoted Commodity: OTSEA
Market Type: Growth Market
Market Keywords:
FAS Market Keywords:
2.3.3.2 Substantive Information:
Market Assessment:
Central America wide open market
Market Strategy:
Overcome lack of awareness in Central America
Past Performance and Evaluation Results:
2.3.3.3 Metrics Information
Export Volume Unit:
Data Source:
Targeted Market Export Goals:
Year
Volume(Unit)
Value($)
Market Share
(%)
Status
2.3.3.4 Export Strategy
2.3.3.4.1 Constraints/PM
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 22 of 24
2.3.3.4.1.1 Basic Information
Constraint No: 1
Constraint Title: Increasing market awareness
Constraint Type: N/A
Constraint Description:
EMP Current Circumstances:
Constraint Keywords:
FAS Constraint Keywords:
2.3.3.4.1.2 CPR Specific Information
Recommendations:
Evaluation and Findings:
Post Assessment:
Division Assessment:
Success Story:
Lessons Learned:
2.3.3.4.1.3 PM Specific Information
Baseline Baseline Baseline
Baseline
Year
(-2)
(-1)
Title:
Increase
market
awareness
2015
PMs
Description:
5%
Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseli
(+1)
(+2)
(+3)
(+4)
(+5)
(+6)
(+7)
G
A
Note: G = Goal, A = Actual
FootNote:
2.3.3.4.1.4 Activities:
2.3.3.4.2 Constraints/PM
2.3.3.4.2.1 Basic Information
Constraint No: 2
Constraint Title: Educate dealers
Constraint Type: EMP
Constraint Description:
EMP Current Circumstances:
Constraint Keywords:
FAS Constraint Keywords:
2.3.3.4.2.2 CPR Specific Information
Recommendations:
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 23 of 24
Evaluation and Findings:
Post Assessment:
Division Assessment:
Success Story:
Lessons Learned:
2.3.3.4.2.3 PM Specific Information
Baseline Baseline Baseline
Baseline
Year
(-2)
(-1)
Title: # of
dealer
seminars
2014
Description:
8
Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseli
(+1)
(+2)
(+3)
(+4)
(+5)
(+6)
(+7)
G 9
A
Note: G = Goal, A = Actual
FootNote:
2.3.3.4.2.4 Activities:
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
UES Application Report
Page 24 of 24
3.SECTION 3: FOREIGN OFFICES AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
3.1. Administrative Budget (Admin Activity) Summary For MAP, FMD Section 108
And TASC
3.2. Worldwide US Personnel Cost Summary: FMD
Worldwide U.S. Personnel Cost Summary: FMD
3.3. Worldwide Contingent Liabilities Summary: FMD
Contingent Liability Type
Amount($)
FAS Home | USDA.gov | Economic Research Service (ERS) | World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB) | Trade Links | FOIA |
Accessibility Statement | Privacy Policy | Non-Discrimination Statement | Information Quality | USA.gov | White House
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationReport
11/30/2016
| File Type | application/pdf |
| File Title | https://apps.fas.usda.gov/ues/WebApp/Application/ApplicationRep |
| Author | benjamin.chan |
| File Modified | 2018-07-30 |
| File Created | 2016-11-30 |