Tax Law
March 12, 2026
The FETHAB in the context of Mato Grosso soybeans
How the state financing structure interacts with costs, logistics, and economic performance of the State’s main commodity
Mato Grosso is the largest producer of soy in Brazil. The scale is impressive: in the 2024/2025 harvest alone, the state surpassed 50 million tons produced, consolidating itself as a central hub for Brazilian supply destined for the domestic market and, above all, for exports. The state alone accounts for approximately one-quarter of national production and is part of a region, the Center-West, responsible for about 45% of all soybeans produced in the country. Paradoxically, however, the Mato Grosso producer often receives one of the lowest average prices per sack in the domestic market. A structural dilemma then arises: how does a state that is an absolute leader in volume coexist with squeezed margins?
Part of the answer may lie in a little-discussed element of the regional economic environment. Instruments created to finance state infrastructure, such as the State Fund for Transportation and Housing (FETHAB), also become part of the cost structure that influences the competitiveness of the state’s main commodity. In this context, the fund ceases to be merely a fiscal mechanism and takes on a relevant role in the debate on competitiveness.
Infrastructure
Created in the early 2000s, FETHAB has consolidated itself as one of the main infrastructure financing mechanisms in Mato Grosso. Its design is simple: part of the agricultural production contributes with values linked to commercialization, destined for state public works and policies. Over time, however, the fund began to operate in an articulated manner with the state tax system, especially with the Goods and Services Circulation Tax (ICMS), conditioning access to certain tax regimes to adherence to the mechanism.
It is at this point that the debate ceases to be merely administrative and takes on economic contours. FETHAB is not just a collection fund; it is part of the incentive architecture that organizes the relationship between the State and agribusiness. Its impact dialogues with cash flow, commercialization timing, and price formation. In production chains strongly integrated into the international market, moderate cost variations can affect margins and strategic decisions.
In 2023, for example, the soy chain generated about R$ 1.2 billion in revenue for FETHAB, the equivalent of approximately 68% of the fund’s total. This is not surprising: Mato Grosso leads national production and sustains a relevant portion of the supply destined for exports. What deserves reflection is the following: when the financing of infrastructure depends on the performance of the state’s main commodity, part of the sector’s competitiveness comes to finance the very logistical environment in which it operates.
It is an arrangement that reveals virtues and tensions. On the one hand, the model allows the State to increase investments in transport and infrastructure, essential elements for reducing historical bottlenecks in outflow. In regions far from ports, logistics represent a significant portion of the cost composition. Sector estimates indicate that freight[1] can represent between 20% and 30% of the value of exported soybeans, depending on the distance and transport conditions.
On the other hand, the contribution linked to production integrates into the producer’s cost structure. This pressure becomes more relevant when observed in the context of price formation in the national market. Although it is not the only relevant factor, as exchange rates, freight, storage, credit, and climate continue to be determinants; it composes the economic environment in which decisions are made. In a sector exposed to international volatility, any element that alters margins deserves careful analysis.
Paradox
The paradox emerges with clarity: the largest national producer frequently ranks among the states with the lowest average price received. Data from Conab show that, in 2023, while the soybean sack reached approximately R$ 141.79 in Rio Grande do Sul and R$ 134.83 in Paraná, in Mato Grosso the average value was around R$ 124.89, values that at various times remained below those recorded in other producing states. The reasons are multiple, especially logistical and geographical. However, the discussion on competitiveness cannot disregard the internal composition of costs. Sectoral financing instruments, when linked to the enjoyment of tax benefits, begin to occupy a structural position within the productive system.
This model also raises federal reflections. Funds linked to agricultural production are not exclusive to Mato Grosso; other states have adopted similar structures. Nevertheless, the articulation between policy of incentive and sectoral contribution requires constant attention regarding competitive neutrality and the predictability of rules. In regional economies highly dependent on commodities, the balance between revenue collection and competitiveness becomes particularly sensitive.
It is not a matter of stating that FETHAB is, in itself, distortive or inefficient. The central issue is more complex: to what extent does the current design maximize collective benefits without internalizing permanent costs on the sector that sustains the fund?
The competitiveness of Mato Grosso soybeans is not defined by a single factor. It results from the interaction between the global market, exchange rate policy, logistical capacity, agricultural technology, and tax structure. In a state whose annual production exceeds 50 million tons, a volume greater than that of many producing countries, small variations in cost can produce relevant impacts on margins and international competitiveness.
The discussion, therefore, is not merely accounting. It is strategic. Sectoral financing instruments need to dialogue with market cycles, price fluctuations, and international dynamics. As new harvests succeed each other and the regulatory environment evolves, permanent monitoring of economic effects becomes indispensable.
Between linking revenues and the pursuit of competitiveness, the challenge lies in calibrating incentives. Infrastructure financing is a necessary condition for regional development. At the same time, the international insertion of soybeans requires attention to each component of cost formation.
The FETHAB ultimately reveals a classic dilemma of contemporary public policies: how to sustain structural investments without compromising the productive base that finances them. The answer lies not in simplifications, but in the continuous analysis of its economic, logistical, and federative effects.
If Mato Grosso continues to lead national production, the question that remains is how to dynamically balance revenue collection and competitiveness. The debate does not end with the existence of the fund, but with its design and how it dialogues with a sector increasingly integrated into the global market.
| To access the references of this text click here |
Who wrote this column
Bruna Esteves
