Brazilian supplier due diligence: the full source checklist

The fourteen public sources that make up a real due diligence process for a Brazilian supplier, grouped by risk area, with what each one covers and misses.

Last reviewed 2 August 2026

There is no single source that answers the question

No one dataset answers “is this supplier safe to buy from”. Real due diligence means cross-referencing several independent public sources, each covering a different risk — environmental, labour, fiscal, sanctions, traceability — and keeping that current rather than checking once at onboarding. This is the full list.

Environmental and land

Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) — the declaratory baseline for any rural property. Deforestation via INPE — PRODES for consolidated history, DETER for recent alerts. IBAMA embargoes — live administrative sanctions against the property or the tax number. Overlap with indigenous lands and federal conservation units — a signal none of the previous three captures on its own.

Labour

The Lista Suja forced-labour register, maintained by the Ministry of Labour. Administrative inclusion, no final court conviction required, and no advance notice to anyone already buying from the listed supplier.

Fiscal and sanctions

CNPJ registration status with the federal revenue service — the most basic check there is, and still the one most often skipped. Federal sanctions CEIS and CNEP — disreputability, bidding suspension, Anti-Corruption Law penalties. Leniency agreements — negotiated admissions of corruption or cartel conduct, often made explicitly in exchange for staying off CEIS/CNEP, so checking both is checking two different instruments rather than the same fact twice. International sanctions, OFAC and UN — matched on name only, relevant to any supplier with US or EU buyer exposure.

Traceability

GTA cross-referenced against NF-e for cattle — the check that closes the paper-cattle gap. DOF cross-referenced against NF-e plus scientific species verification for timber — the data point the US Lacey Act requires and which is most often missing.

Supply chain transparency (EUDR context)

Soy and beef export data from Trase.earth, with deforestation exposure by season. This is not a violation register — being an exporter is normal and legal — but direct context for the EU Due Diligence Statement filed through TRACES, required from 30 December 2026.

Running this in practice

For one supplier this checklist is feasible to run manually in an afternoon. Across a portfolio, repeated continuously — because every one of these sources changes without notice — it stops being a checklist and becomes a process that needs automation to stay trustworthy. That is what BrazilTrace runs, per supplier, across all fourteen sources.

Common questions

Do we need all fourteen for every supplier?

It depends on the sector. GTA×NF-e traceability applies only to cattle; DOF×NF-e only to timber. The other twelve — environmental, labour, fiscal, sanctions and supply chain transparency — apply to any Brazilian supplier regardless of product.

Does this checklist count as a formal due diligence statement?

No. It is a guide to which sources to check, not a legal document. We organise the evidence from those checks into an exportable report, but any formal declaration or submission to an authority remains the responsibility of your compliance officer, broker or importer of record.

How current does each source need to be?

Different sources move at different speeds. The Lista Suja republishes a few times a year; IBAMA embargoes and federal sanctions update continuously. The practical answer is that a check is only as good as its date, which is why every finding we produce carries the timestamp it was retrieved.

Every figure we publish carries its source and the date we retrieved it — see the methodology, or check a company against the forced-labour register directly. This guide is general information, not legal advice.