Ex-tariff.
The reduction of the Import Tax for machinery with no domestic equivalent — and what changes in 2026.

What an ex-tariff is

An ex-tariff is a specific exception to the Common External Tariff (TEC): for a specific NCM code and a specific good description, the Import Tax is reduced — as a rule to 0% — for a fixed term. The name comes from that: it is a “tariff exception”, an “ex” from the full tariff. It exists for a stated industrial-policy goal: to make cheaper the entry of machinery and equipment that Brazilian industry needs but that is not manufactured in the country, without giving up on protecting what is already produced here.

The point that most confuses those coming to the subject: the ex-tariff attaches to the good, not to the company. Once published in the Official Gazette for a given NCM and description, the benefit applies to any importer that brings in a good matching that description exactly — the so-called erga omnes effect. It is not an individual license: it is a rate reduction that becomes part of the tariff structure of that item while it is in force.

The regime reaches two classes of goods: the BK — capital goods (machinery, equipment and installations of the productive asset base) and the BIT — information technology and telecommunications goods. And it has clear boundaries: GECEX Res. 512/2023 prohibits the grant for used goods, consumer goods, integrated systems and auto parts (the latter follow their own regime). It is not, therefore, a generic import-discount coupon — it is a surgical mechanism, with technical requirements and documentary proof.

It is worth distinguishing the ex-tariff from neighboring figures. It is not a tariff quota (LETEC/LEBIT), which opens a volume at a reduced rate until it runs out; it is a specific exception in an NCM code, with no quantity ceiling. And it is not to be confused with drawback, which suspends taxes on inputs tied to exportation — the ex-tariff reduces the II on asset goods. They are complementary instruments, as the TaxUp team details below.

What the ex-tariff’s tax benefit is — and how much it is worth

In practice, the benefit is arithmetic: the importer swaps the full TEC rate for the ex rate — 0% — on the good’s customs value. But the real effect goes beyond the II, because, at clearance, one tax enters the base of another. Zeroing the Import Tax also reduces what is paid in IPI and ICMS on entry, in a cascade effect that the TaxUp team always measures in full.

The chain is this: the base of the IPI on imports includes the II (National Tax Code, art. 47, I); the base of the ICMS on imports includes II + IPI + the ICMS itself (Complementary Law 87/1996, art. 13, V). Therefore, when the II falls to zero, the bases of IPI and ICMS due on nationalization also shrink. Only the PIS/COFINS on imports does not change — its base is only the customs value (Law 10.865/2004, art. 7, I, as worded by Law 12.865/2013, after the STF in RE 559.937). That is why the gain from a well-structured ex-tariff usually far exceeds the nominal saving of the II itself.

An honest caveat about “how much is saved”. There is no single percentage. The full rate of each BK/BIT NCM varied a great deal in 2026 — after GECEX Res. 852/2026, the structure began to operate in three tiers (7.2%, 12.6% and 20%), as detailed in the realignment section. The MDIC institutional page still mentions the historical levels of 14% (BK) and 16% (BIT), but that text is out of date. For that reason, the actual saving depends on the concrete NCM and on the rate in force in the TEC/Siscomex Consultation at the time of import — any number set without checking the NCM would be a guess.

How to obtain an ex-tariff: the SEI/MDIC claim, step by step

The ex-tariff claim is free of charge and runs exclusively by electronic means, in the SEI system of the MDIC, as an external user (registration approval takes, on average, about three business days). There is no paper filing or counter: the claimant fills out the specific form — in the types Grant, Renewal, Wording Amendment, Revocation and Domestic Production Statement — and instructs the case with the technical dossier. The procedure and the deadlines are in GECEX Res. 512/2023.

The heart of the claim is the technical dossier. The good’s description must follow the TEC standard, written in the plural and without brands or models, with the main technical and functional parameters; it is accompanied by original catalogs, a proforma invoice, technical literature translated into Portuguese and an investment project explaining the equipment’s function, the schedule, the place of use and its essentiality. A practical recommendation from the MDIC itself avoids a common mistake: the file submitted with the catalog may be published in full in the public consultation, so no sensitive data in that PDF.

The processing has stages with defined deadlines. After the preliminary analysis by the SDIC, a 30-calendar-day public consultation opens (art. 9), in which domestic manufacturers may contest by alleging equivalent production. If there is a contestation, the claimant is notified and has 10 business days to challenge it in a specific and detailed manner (art. 11); silence is read as presumed withdrawal, with immediate dismissal (art. 12). Once the submissions are concluded, the SDIC issues a technical opinion and the GECEX deliberates, publishing the resolution in the Official Gazette. The average analysis term reported by the MDIC is approximately 180 days — a figure that rose with the wave of renewals from the collective expiry of 12/31/2025.

On the practical side, a well-instructed claim is defined in the detail: the description in the right standard, a clean catalog, a complete translation and an investment project demonstrating the good’s essentiality. This is where the TaxUp advisory concentrates its work — because a poorly drafted claim falls to a domestic competitor’s contestation or stalls on a requirement not answered on time.

Does my good qualify? The proof of the absence of equivalent domestic production

Before assembling any dossier, there is a single question: does the good qualify? The gateway is the nature of the good — it must be BK or BIT, new, and cannot be a used good, a consumer good, an integrated system or an auto part. Once that screening is passed, the decisive criterion is the absence of equivalent domestic production (art. 14 of Res. 512/2023).

This is where the regime’s most sensitive concept comes in: the “essential function”. The definition is set out in the sole paragraph of art. 14 of GECEX Res. 512/2023 itself and delimits what is compared in the equivalence analysis: the “end-purpose activity of the equipment necessary to the productive process”, excluding monitoring resources, maintenance conveniences, interoperabilities, operating cost, finishing, layout and other auxiliary characteristics. In other words: what distinguishes (or not) the imported good from the domestic one is the central function it performs — not add-ons. If a domestic manufacturer delivers a good that fulfills the same essential function, equivalence tends to be recognized and the claim denied.

Two recent amendments tightened this test. GECEX Res. 760/2025 swapped the “and” for “or” in the equivalence proof: now an actual sale OR a technical-commercial proposal from the domestic manufacturer is enough to sustain the existence of equivalent production — which makes contestation easier. And GECEX Res. 853/2026, published in February 2026, added art. 8-A to the resolution (an exceptional window addressed below). An important warning to avoid repeating a mistake that circulates out there: the definition of “essential function” was not created by Res. 853/2026 — it was already in the text of 512/2023 from the outset.

The 2026 turn: the tariff shock and the exceptional window

February 2026 was the busiest month in the regime’s recent history. First, GECEX Res. 852/2026 (published on 02/05/2026) raised the Import Tax on more than a thousand BK and BIT NCMs, consolidating the rates into three tiers: what was below 7.2% rose to 7.2%; the intermediate band went to 12.6%; and the top, to 20%. It took effect on 02/06/2026 for most items and on 03/01/2026 for those that had a 0% TEC.

Because the Import Tax is an exception to the annual and ninety-day anteriority rules (Constitution, art. 150, §1) and its rates may be changed by an act of the Executive within the legal limits (Constitution, art. 153, §1), an increase like that of Res. 852/2026 produces an almost immediate effect. That is what happened — and it is what explains why the security of the machinery importer depends on the published ex and its term of validity, not on the stability of the full tariff.

In parallel, GECEX Res. 853/2026 (of 02/06/2026) added art. 8-A to 512/2023, creating an exceptional window: claims filed between 02/09 and 03/31/2026, for NCMs that had a 0% TEC and were raised by 852, could receive a provisional grant of the II for up to 120 days, revocable in that period if a lack of merit was found. The window has already closed on 03/31/2026 — this is historical context, not an open door today.

And the retreat came. On 02/27/2026, GECEX reassessed 120 products of BK/BIT: 105 had their II zeroed via ex-tariff and 15 had their previous rates restored (smartphones went back to 16%, for example). It is important to read this figure correctly: the 120 products are the total reassessed in the retreat — not “120 items with the full tariff kept because of domestic production”, as is sometimes reported.

The paradox is the central point for those who import BK/BIT: by raising the full tariff, the 2026 realignment made the ex-tariff more valuable, not obsolete. Where the difference between the tariff and zero used to be small, it can now reach 20 percentage points of II — with the cascade effect on IPI and ICMS on top.

Will the ex-tariff end?

No. The ex-tariff does not end with the Tax Reform. The Import Tax is a regulatory tax and remains outside the IBS/CBS merger: Constitutional Amendment 132/2023 keeps the II as an autonomous federal tax (Constitution, art. 153, I). What happened in 2026 was the tariff realignment (GECEX Res. 852/2026), which made the regime more valuable — it did not extinguish it. Grants continue to be published: in the 235th GECEX meeting alone (March 2026), the II was zeroed for 970 items of BK/BIT.

More than surviving, the ex-tariff gains strength with the Reform. Complementary Law 214/2025 (arts. 69 to 71) provides that the IBS/CBS calculation base on the importation of tangible goods is the customs value increased by the II, the Selective Tax, the Siscomex Fee, the AFRMM and other charges. The consequence is direct: if the II is zeroed by an ex-tariff, it also does not inflate the base of the IBS/CBS on imports. This is the so-called multiplier effect — a single benefit reduces the II and, next, the base of the new taxes.

That said, the regime faces three real trade-policy risks — which are not the end, but require monitoring. First, the tightening of criteria: Res. 512/2023 is more protective of domestic industry, the “or” of Res. 760/2025 makes contestation easier and the “essential function” of art. 14 narrows the proof of the absence of a domestic equivalent. Second, the tariff increase of Res. 852/2026 (which, in the paradox already noted, raises the value of the ex). Third, and most structural, the term of the Mercosur approval: CMC Decision 08/21 authorizes Brazil to apply a rate different from the TEC — including 0% — for BK/BIT only until 12/31/2028; continuity after that depends on a new decision by the bloc. It is the milestone to watch closely.

Validity, renewal and revocation: how long my ex lasts

Every ex-tariff is temporary. The validity is set case by case in the granting resolution (art. 7 of Res. 512/2023) — the standard reported by GECEX is up to two years, with the final term customarily on December 31. There is no single guaranteed term for all exes: the validity is, in the words of the gov.br portal itself, a “discretionary decision of the Public Authority”. A concrete example of a recent horizon: GECEX Res. 895/2026 extended until 12/31/2027 the validity of BIT ex-tariffs listed in Res. 781/2025. The practical rule, therefore, is to check the granting resolution of each NCM — never to presume a single date.

The renewal requires attention to the calendar. It must be filed within the validity period and no more than 180 days before expiry (art. 5), with a complete dossier and a description identical to the ex in force — if the description or the NCM changes, the request becomes an amendment, not a renewal (art. 5-A, added by Res. 760/2025). It was precisely the collective expiry of 12/31/2025 — inherited from GECEX Res. 322 and 323/2022, which had extended the stock of exes — that generated the 2025/2026 wave of renewals and pressured the average analysis term.

There is also the risk of early revocation (art. 7). An ex may be revoked before its term if supervening equivalent domestic production arises or if the aspects of art. 15 change (isonomy, investments in progress, industrial policies). In that case, where the importer has an investment project underway, the SDIC “will propose a term for the revocation to take effect” — a transition, save in exceptional situations. It is a relevant point of legal tension, addressed in the following section.

Legal certainty: use at clearance, the declaratory nature and the classification risk

The ex-tariff only delivers value if it is used correctly at clearance. In the import declaration — today still in the DI, increasingly in the DUIMP —, the importer marks the collection regime, adjusts the ad valorem rate to the level of the ex and highlights it in the goods record (in the DUIMP, in the Product Catalog of the Single Portal). The Federal Revenue verifies the exact correspondence between the good and the description of the ex: if the good diverges, the benefit falls and the full TEC applies, with differences and penalties. That is why an impeccable description and classification are not a detail — they are what protects the saving.

There is a relevant defensive thesis about the timing of the right. The STJ held, in REsp 1.174.811/SP (1st Panel, Rapporteur Justice Arnaldo Esteves Lima, judged 02/18/2014), that the act granting the ex-tariff has an eminently declaratory nature: the GECEX resolution does not retroact, but its effects extend to clearance when the claim was filed before the import — the publication merely gives publicity, it does not constitute the right. In practice, this reinforces the golden rule: file the claim before shipping the goods. As for invoking Precedent 544 of the STF (exemptions under an onerous condition) against early revocation, it is by analogy and controversial — a taxpayer’s argument, never a clear and certain right, since the ex is a discretionary rate reduction, not an exemption.

Finally, a related risk the TaxUp team always maps: the classification error. CARF Precedent 161 (binding) holds that the error in indicating the NCM in the declaration, on its own, gives rise to the 1% fine of art. 84, I, of Provisional Measure 2.158-35/2001 — a direct risk for those who use an ex-tariff with a divergent classification (it is Precedent 161, not 163, which circulated wrongly). There is a development in 2026: the legal basis of that fine was addressed by Complementary Law 227/2026, which opened a discussion of benign retroactivity in the ongoing proceedings — a matter that requires reading the text at the Planalto case by case, without conveying the idea of a “fine-free zone”. The dispute over classification error is conducted in administrative litigation — the terrain of the CARF.

Ex-tariff in the import strategy: combining with drawback and RECOF

The ex-tariff rarely appears alone in the planning of an industrial project. It combines with other customs regimes by scope, not by accumulation on the same good. The ex reduces the II on asset goods (the machine). Drawback suspends or exempts taxes on inputs tied to exportation. And RECOF is the industrial bonded warehouse that suspends taxes on inputs under an admission regime. The typical engineering of a capex: the machine enters with an ex-tariff at 0% II and the inputs of the production to be exported enter via drawback or RECOF.

This complementarity is the basis of any serious customs planning for those investing in productive capacity in Brazil — above all in sectors intensive in imported machinery. The correct valuation of the good and the consistency between the ex’s description and the declared classification also connect the subject to the discipline of customs valuation, which sets the calculation base on which the II itself is levied.

A dimension figure to give context — and presented with due caution: an IPEA study (with data from the 2000s) estimated that imports via ex-tariff represented about 8% of external purchases of capital goods. The number is old and serves as a historical order of magnitude, not a current statistic; the current grant data are in the MDIC panel of ex-tariffs in force. To gauge the scale of the regime, the stock of exes with the collective expiry on 12/31/2025 — inherited from the extensions of Res. 322 and 323/2022 — exceeded tens of thousands of items; any count must be read with its cut-off date and confirmed in the dynamic panel, which moves at each GECEX meeting.