Magnitsky Sanctions Expose Brazil’s Dollar Dependency Amid BRICS Push For De-Dollarization

By Uriel Araujo

Brazil’s financial sector is reeling after Justice Minister Flávio Dino warned banks against complying with US Global Magnitsky sanctions on Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The standoff underscores Trump’s neo-Monroeist push, raising questions about Brazil’s legal sovereignty, dollar dependency, and the future of BRICS de-dollarization.

Brazilian banks have been plunged into turmoil after Justice Minister Flávio Dino threatened to punish institutions that comply with US sanctions against Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. Shares of the country’s major banks fell sharply following Dino’s warning, as financial institutions suddenly found themselves caught in the crossfire of an escalating geopolitical dispute. The standoff illustrates how Donald Trump’s neo-Monroeist stance is dramatically reshaping US–Brazil’s relations, dragging not only Brasília’s highest court but also its banking system into Washington’s sanctions machinery.

At the heart of the matter are the so-called Global Magnitsky sanctions. Originally designed to target human rights abusers and corrupt officials, the Magnitsky Act was first passed in 2012 against Russian figures controversially accused of involvement in the death of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky. In 2016, it was expanded into a global instrument, granting the US Treasury the ability to freeze assets, block property, and cut off access to the American financial system of designated individuals worldwide.

The system has always been less a human-rights tool than a geopolitical weapon. To be “Magnitskied” today means being shut out of the world’s dominant financial circuits, given that virtually all international transactions pass through dollar-clearing mechanisms subject to Washington’s reach. This is one of the reasons why the BRICS group agenda of de-dollarization is seen by the US as a major threat, by the way: it would greatly undermine American leverage power.

When Trump’s Treasury placed Moraes and other Supreme Court ministers under Global Magnitsky designations, the Brazilian judiciary responded defiantly. The Supreme Court announced it would “void” the sanctions domestically, effectively ordering national banks to ignore Washington’s dictates. Yet, sanctions are not something a foreign court can simply erase. Financial institutions operate globally, with compliance systems that cannot pick and choose jurisdictions. For banks, defying Washington means risking access to the dollar system itself — a non-option, as of now.

Interestingly enough, Moraes had already entered the global spotlight back in 2024 during his feud with Elon Musk, when the Justice briefly made Twitter (now X) illegal in Brazil. With Musk later emerging as Trump’s influential ally, Moraes’s position was always bound to draw Washington’s ire. Even after Trump and Musk eventually severed ties, the political and economic weight of Big Tech (4) continues to loom large over such disputes, as I’ve noted elsewhere.

Now Justice Dino is warning banks that if they comply with Magnitsky rules, they will face sanctions at home. The Supreme Court has hinted at its own “card up the sleeve” should Trump escalate things further. But the financial sector remains sceptical: despite political-legal threats, top Brazilian bankers admit they will ultimately have to yield to Washington’s demands. Suffice to say, this tug-of-war highlights the fragile state of Brazil’s segurança jurídica — that is, its legal predictability or legal certainty. When institutions issue contradictory orders, banks are left in a state of insecurity.

The dilemma is not merely legalistic. Brazilian banks, like most in the world, rely on SWIFT messaging systems and dollar-clearing via correspondent banks in New York. These networks form the backbone of modern finance, and being locked out of them amounts to commercial asphyxiation. No domestic ruling can undo this reality, as of now. Hence the paradox: while Brasília proclaims sovereignty, its own financial sector quietly admits that it must bend to US rules. This disconnect erodes confidence in the stability of Brazil’s institutions and sends a chilling signal to investors.

The clash exposes broader realities. Trump’s tariffs of up to 50% on Brazilian goods, combined with the Magnitsky sanctions, show a deliberate effort to corner Brazil economically. Strangely enough, this pressure coincides with a renewed American push to dominate strategic minerals, echoing the resource-driven policies Trump applied to Greenland. The pattern is unmistakable: coercion, sanctions, and tariffs as tools to reassert hemispheric hegemony amid the New Cold War with China.

Yet Brazil is hardly alone in facing this kind of extraterritorial pressure. Washington has applied similar tactics to European banks dealing with Iran, to Chinese firms trading with Russia, and even to Canadian companies caught in the Huawei dispute. Each time, the lesson has been the same: no matter the domestic laws of a given country, US sanctions tend to prevail in practice because of the centrality of the dollar system. Brazil’s case thus becomes another chapter in a larger story of financial dependency and strategic vulnerability.

The implications stretch beyond banking. If Brazil is forced into compliance despite its Supreme Court’s rulings, its institutions will face a serious erosion of authority. The BRICS agenda of de-dollarization thus gains urgency in this light: only by building parallel mechanisms of trade and finance can emerging economies shield themselves from US extraterritorial power. Initiatives such as local-currency settlement systems, central-bank digital currencies, and alternative payment platforms are still in their infancy. But without them, Brasília’s defiance will remain rhetorical, and its banks will continue to serve as reluctant enforcers of Washington’s will.

For now, Brazil finds itself in an unenviable position: pressured by Washington, contradicted by its own courts, and with markets punishing its banks in real time. Trump’s neo-Monroeist offensive, blunt as it is, remains effective precisely because it exploits the architecture of global finance. As a matter of fact, it is this very architecture — more than diplomacy or military power — that secures U.S. dominance. Until Brazil and its BRICS partners can alter that architecture, they will arguably remain quite vulnerable to the next round of sanctions, tariffs, or diktats from Washington.

Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Voice of East.

7 Courses in 1 – Diploma in Business Management

Categories: Analysis, Economy, Geopolitics, International Affairs

Tags: Brazil, BRICS, Economy, Geopolitics, USA