(O Popular – Goiânia, 6th June 2014)
At the Brazil-France Economic Forum 2014, held a fortnight ago in Paris, topics related to urban development, energy, trade and investment were discussed. Created by the governments of both countries, the forum has established itself as a platform for dialogue on sustainable solutions with a view to increasing reciprocal investment and bilateral trade. Despite mentioning the success stories of direct investments already implemented in both countries, the difficulties still faced by French investors in our country were highlighted.
The high cost of taxes, the intricate labour law, infrastructure that is still lacking, uncertainty about the availability of energy for large projects, lack of planning for urban mobility and excessive bureaucracy were some of the aspects raised by the French as negative points in Brazil.
Some representatives of companies already present in Brazil confirmed that a safer way forward is to invest jointly with local companies (joint venture). This would avoid surprises when it comes to laws that are difficult to interpret. The need to increase Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Brazil was also mentioned, as this is a path that creates opportunities for long-term investments.
A common wish of businesspeople from both countries is to have the agreement between Mercosur and the European Union signed promptly.
As an example of bureaucracy, the fight against which is independent of changes in legislation, unlike tax reform, there was heated testimony from a French investor in the audience. Having set up his pharmaceutical products factory in the south of Brazil, he protested that he was facing barriers that he considered to be purely protectionist. He said that he had applied to Anvisa for regularisation and that he had been unfairly denied, given that the same product has been authorised in other parts of the world. He has been waiting for the regulatory body to analyse his appeal for some time and said he knows it won’t be answered soon, since the appeals currently being analysed date back to 2011. The investor said he was reviewing his investment strategy.
However, the delay in analysing the appeal filed with Anvisa is not a protectionist barrier at all. Several industries with exclusively Brazilian capital, many of them from Goiás, suffer from the same obstacles and bureaucracy, which was explained to the French investor by the executive director of policies and strategies at the National Confederation of Industry (CNI), José Augusto Coelho Fernandes, who commented that there is a CNI commission in discussions with Anvisa to improve the agency’s procedures which, if not optimised, could cause Brazil to lose out on potential foreign investment. It should be noted that Anvisa is just one of the many bureaucratic agencies that regulate the day-to-day activities of entrepreneurs.
When discussing the level of legal certainty in Brazil, the president of the Latin American and Caribbean Commission of the French National Committee for Foreign Trade, Frenchman Charles-Henry Chenut, drew attention when he said that Brazil does not know about technology licences, applying only technology transfer, which makes many businesses with France unviable. This statement is too general. Many technology licence contracts are signed between Brazilian and foreign entrepreneurs, with the preservation and guarantee of interests. This also happens for the application of Brazilian technology and know-how abroad.
The realities of each country need to be mutually learnt so that we can combat what really hinders assertive investments. At the end of the panels, the businesspeople signalled that discussions on increasing business between France and Brazil will continue in earnest. In short, the CNI and other business organisations have an important role to play in discussions and in finding solutions for a more competitive environment.
