U.S. Agriculture Tariffs

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden Says High-Level Washington Meeting Puts Fertilizer Industry on the Spot

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:10:02 GMT

The fertilizer market has been a growing point of tension in agriculture for years, but USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says recent meetings in Washington marked a more direct and wide-ranging confrontation between federal officials and the companies that dominate input supply. Those discussions, he says, were not limited to USDA alone but included a broader slice of the administration’s economic leadership, signaling how central fertilizer costs have become to the national conversation on food production and inflation.

Vaden says cabinet-level officials from the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative were present, alongside USDA leadership and state agriculture commissioners from Iowa and Georgia. Fertilizer executives were also in the room, making the meeting a rare setting where policy makers, regulators and industry leaders sat together to address pricing, supply constraints and long-term market structure.

He says the purpose was not simply informational, but confrontational in the sense of putting real-world farm impacts directly in front of industry decision-makers.

“It was an opportunity for those other cabinet officials to hear from the fertilizer company executives,” Vaden says, “and for those fertilizer company executives to hear from the secretary and me, as well as our two state counterparts who joined, about the real harm that farmers are facing from uncertainty in the market and, equally as importantly, years of elevated prices.”

Vaden says what often gets lost outside agriculture is that the current fertilizer environment is not a short-term disruption, but the continuation of a multi-year pricing trend that has reshaped farm budgets.

“For people who don’t pay attention to ag every day like your listeners do, they may think this fertilizer thing came out of nowhere,” Vaden says. “But American farmers know that we’re on year five or more of elevated prices for fertilizer, and questions about adequate supply of all fertilizer types.”

He adds that the timing of the discussions is critical, as global geopolitical tensions are only adding pressure to already strained markets.

“So I see this as an opportunity now that the attention of everyone is focused on fertilizer, not just agriculture, to begin to solve the problem that has taken years to develop and that has been exacerbated by the current situation in the Middle East,” Vaden says. “So that we don’t find ourselves in another long-term question about fertilizer supply going forward.”

USDA Pushes Industry: Bring Projects Forward or Explain the Bottlenecks

As discussions continue with fertilizer companies, Vaden says USDA is shifting the conversation from general concern to specific accountability. Rather than broad discussions about market conditions, he says officials are now asking companies to identify concrete projects that could increase supply and to explain why those investments have not yet materialized.

This approach, he says, reflects a broader strategy inside the department to move beyond analysis and toward action, particularly in areas where supply constraints have persisted for years without meaningful change.

In meetings held both jointly and separately with industry leaders, Vaden says USDA has been consistent in its message to fertilizer companies.

“We are saying the same thing to everyone who comes before the department,” Vaden says. “Be a part of the solution, don’t be a part of the problem.”

He says that includes detailed questions about whether expansion projects are already in development but stalled due to permitting delays, regulatory barriers or capital constraints. In some cases, he says, USDA is asking companies to identify where federal or state action could realistically speed up timelines.

“We are asking them what projects they have in the pipeline that they can bring on board to create new fertilizer supplies, hopefully here domestically, but if necessary, near-shoring overseas,” Vaden says. “And are there steps that we can take to make those projects move faster? Are there permits that are held up? Are there states or localities that are holding up their expansions? Are there investments that they are looking for with regard to needing capital to be able to expand their production capacity?”

He adds the department is not approaching the issue passively, but actively pressing for answers.

“We’re asking as many questions as we are making declarative statements, and we’re trying to see what levers we can pull to get more supply on the market,” Vaden says.

Market Concentration at Center of USDA Concerns

Beyond supply timelines and permitting issues, Vaden says one of the core structural concerns in fertilizer markets is the level of consolidation, particularly in phosphate production where a small number of companies control a dominant share of supply.

He says that level of concentration raises fundamental questions about how prices are formed and whether farmers are receiving signals that reflect true market conditions.

With that in mind, Vaden says USDA is focusing heavily on competition and price discovery as part of its broader review of input markets.

“With one of our fertilizer markets, there are two companies that control 90% market share,” Vaden says. “Anybody, I don’t care whether it’s fertilizer or what any other commodity you want to talk about, if there are only two major players, how can anyone be sure that the price you are paying reflects actual market conditions?”

He says the issue is not simply about individual price spikes, but about whether enough competition exists to keep pricing behavior transparent and responsive.

“In order to have adequate price discovery in a market, you need multiple players,” Vaden says.

That concern, he adds, is one of the reasons fertilizer investigations already underway by federal agencies predate recent geopolitical disruptions and continue to expand.

Vaden Details Heated Meeting With Mosaic: “A Different Tune in My Conference Room”

Among the most pointed parts of Vaden’s interview are his comments about a recent face-to-face meeting with Mosaic, one of the most influential players in the phosphate fertilizer market. He says the discussion, held in his conference room just this week, was direct and, at times, uncomfortable, focusing heavily on production decisions, capacity investment and the company’s role in a highly concentrated global market.

Vaden says he challenged Mosaic on why additional production capacity has not been brought online in the United States over a long period of time, and what barriers the company believes are preventing expansion.

He says he left the meeting with clear expectations for follow-up information from the company, describing it as an assignment rather than a casual discussion.

“I gave them a homework assignment,” Vaden says. “I told them what I expected to see, and I hope that they will get back to me as soon as possible.”

But what stood out most to him, he says, was not just what was said in the room, but how it contrasted with the company’s public messaging.

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

In his view, there was a noticeable difference between internal discussions and external communications, particularly on social media, where fertilizer policy debates have increasingly played out in public.

“And I will say, without being able to go into details, when they were in my office, they were singing a slightly different tune than they were signing on Twitter responding to the president’s Truth Social message that you noted,” Vaden says.

He uses that contrast to underscore what he sees as a broader disconnect between industry messaging and the realities USDA believes farmers are facing.

“We need more supply, we need answers, your company hasn’t provided either of those two things,” Vaden says. “It’s about time that you did.”

Industry Responses, Trade Policy Pressure and the Mosaic Question

While Vaden applies pressure to Mosaic, he notes that not all fertilizer companies are taking the same stance on trade policy and tariffs. He points specifically to Nutrien, which he says has indicated support for removing certain trade enforcement measures.

“I was very happy after I met with the Nutrien CEO that they came out and announced we don’t need this CVD order anymore,” Vaden says.

By contrast, he says Mosaic’s position on countervailing duties and phosphate trade enforcement remains unresolved, and that broader policy decisions are now effectively waiting on the company’s response.

He characterizes the situation as fluid but heavily dependent on industry input.

“Right now the question is in Mosaic’s court, if you will,” Vaden says. “And we’re waiting for an answer from them.”

He adds that regulatory or executive action is unlikely to be taken in a vacuum while negotiations and responses are still unfolding.

“One thing that I know as a lawyer is that there’s a whole lot more possible if you have consent of the parties than if you don’t,” Vaden says. “With consent, nearly all things are possible.”

Investigations Expand as USDA Seeks Farmer-Reported Data

Alongside industry meetings, Vaden says USDA is working with the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission on ongoing fertilizer market investigations, with a particular focus on pricing behavior and market transparency.

He says one challenge is the nature of pricing information itself, which often reaches farmers through informal channels and can change quickly.

“We’re asking questions and waiting for answers, and we need farmers’ help as part of our question asking,” Vaden says.

He describes a pattern many farmers have reported directly to USDA, where fertilizer prices are quoted in a way that encourages immediate purchase rather than delayed buying.

“I know in my own family’s operation that you get phone calls, and those phone calls tell you ‘Here’s what the price is now, and if you wait, here’s what the price will be later,’” Vaden says. “And that later price is never lower than the price that it is now.”

To address that, he says USDA is working on a confidential reporting system designed to protect farmer identity while improving data quality for investigators.

“If they trust us with their information, if they trust us with the facts that they have, they’ll be able to remain anonymous,” Vaden says. “And the companies under investigation will not know who shared what data with us.”

“This Has Been Going On for Too Long”

Vaden closes by emphasizing that fertilizer prices and supply constraints are not a new challenge for agriculture, but an entrenched issue that has persisted through multiple years and market cycles.

He says the administration is trying to shift both short-term supply conditions and long-term structural dynamics at the same time, adding that USDA’s goal is not temporary relief, but sustained changes in supply, competition and pricing stability.

“We are focused on getting new supplies here now, and not just now, but next year and the year after that and the years after that,” Vaden says. “So that we can have guaranteed new supplies over the long term.”

Vaden’s Message to Farmers: “We’re Saying the Same Thing in Public and in Private”

At the end of the conversation, Vaden returned to what he described as the central audience for everything USDA is doing on fertilizer: farmers themselves. He acknowledged frustration is not just growing, but it has become a defining sentiment across much of farm country as input costs remain elevated and supply questions persist year after year.

He emphasized USDA’s posture is not different depending on the room or the audience, whether speaking with industry executives, other federal agencies, or producers themselves.

“I want farmers to know that when I am sitting with representatives of other cabinet departments or when I am sitting with big fertilizer CEOs, I am saying the same thing in private that you hear me saying in public,” Vaden says. “I do not change my tune. I may be slightly more polite, but I am equally as direct in terms of telling them what I think the situation is.”

Vaden says that directness is rooted in what he believes farmers are already experiencing on the ground, particularly when it comes to fertilizer pricing volatility and uncertainty in purchasing decisions. He says producers are not misreading the situation — they are responding to real, long-running pressures.

He also acknowledges the emotional toll on producers is part of the reality USDA is hearing more frequently.

“I especially communicate to them that farmers have gone from exasperation to anger with the situation that we have now,” Vaden says. “They are not wrong to be feeling those emotions because they understand that this is not a new situation.”

Looking ahead, Vaden says USDA’s goal is not just to address short-term pricing spikes, but to change the underlying conditions that have kept fertilizer costs elevated for years. That includes expanding supply, increasing competition and improving long-term stability in input markets.

“This is an issue that has bedeviled American agriculture for at least five years, and it is time that it stopped,” Vaden says.

Trump Warns Fertilizer Giants Against "Price Gouging" as Costs Soar 40%

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:46:52 GMT

Fertilizer market volatility is once again taking center stage as geopolitical tensions disrupt global supply lines and push input costs sharply higher. New analysis shows the increase in fertilizer prices may not be over, even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens soon.

Even with the situation in Iran pushing prices even higher, the sharp increase in fertilizer prices from 2020 to now is catching attention in Washington. Not only did President Donald Trump take to social media to warn of ‘price gouging,’ but Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also posted on X Monday, specifically expressing frustration over Mosaic’s response to farmers.

While Rollins and USDA Under Secretary Stephen Vaden have raised concerns over fertilizer prices this year, the president posted on Truth Social over the weekend that he is closely monitoring fertilizer prices and pledged support for American farmers.

Trump said Saturday on his Truth Social platform he is “watching fertilizer prices CLOSELY” during what he described as the US “FIGHT FOR FREEDOM in Iran”, adding that the administration “will not accept PRICE GOUGING from the fertilizer monopoly”.

On Monday, Rollins posted on X, saying she was “So disappointed in this response” from Mosaic, “especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market.”

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

Mosaic announced last week the decision to shut down major phosphate operations in Brazil, a move the that will cut production, reduce jobs, and signal a *strategic shift in how the fertilizer giant deploys its capital.

Mosaic Company announced Thursday it will idle two phosphate facilities in Brazil as part of a broader effort to cut costs and shift capital. Mosaic expects idling of the facilities to reduce annual phosphate production by approximately 1 million tonnes. CEO Bruce Bodine says the decision reflects what he calls a disciplined focus on long-term returns.

.@MosaicCompany, you’re right that U.S. farmers are facing a difficult economic situation, only made worse by the extra $6.9 BILLION they have had to spend on fertilizer since you petitioned the government to place duties on imported phosphorus. This has played a major role in… https://t.co/UuOqjE0jBu
— National Corn (NCGA) (@NationalCorn) April 13, 2026

Mosaic and Simplot have also been in the cross hairs of the push to remove countervailing duties on Moroccan phosphate . Groups like the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) claim the CVDs are costing U.S. agriculture $1 billion each year.

The CVDs on Moroccan phosphate were put into place by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in 2021. As the sunset review begins, more than 50 state grower groups including the Texas Corn Producers Association, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce and the ITC to revoke the countervailing duties on imported phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia.

In separate filings by Mosaic and Simplot to the ITC and the Department of Commerce, both companies said the continuation is necessary to maintain a “level playing field.”

In a written response to Farm Journal, Mosaic said:

“American farmers depend on a strong domestic fertilizer industry, which in turn depends on strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws that ensure a level playing field. Mosaic is proud to support U.S. agriculture with high-quality, reliable products produced here at home.”

Iran War’s Current Impact on Fertilizer Prices

The message from the Trump adminstration comes as tensions escalate in the Strait of Hormuz, where the United States is weighing a potential full naval blockade. Ship traffic through the critical waterway has already dropped from roughly 135 vessels per day to the single digits. A complete shutdown could halt flows entirely, further increasing fertilizer prices.

The stakes are high as roughly one-third of global fertilizer shipments move through the strait, and the disruption is already sending prices higher, up more than 40% compared to a year ago.

It is the 6-week anniversary of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Fert price comparisons:

NOLA urea - +$230 or 49%
NOLA UAN - +$145 or 38%
Midwest NH3 - +$245 or 32%
NOLA DAP - +$130 or 21%
NOLA potash - +$10 or 3%

...corn - 2-cents or 0.5% higher#sickeningforfarmers
— Josh Linville (@JLinvilleFert) April 10, 2026

Market data shows the impact Iran is having on already high fertilizer prices. According to StoneX analyst Josh Linville says in the six weeks since the war started:

Urea prices have surged by $230 per ton, a 49% increase
UAN is up $145 per ton, or 38%
Anhydrous ammonia has climbed $245 per ton, a 32% jump.
In contrast, corn prices have barely responded, rising just two cents, or about half a percent. The divergence is putting additional pressure on farm margins.

DOJ Probe Into Fertilizer Costs Seeks Input From Farmers

The Trump administration is asking farmers to help provide information as part of an ongoing U.S. Department of Justice investigation into elevated costs for fertilizer, machinery and other key agricultural inputs, according to reporting from Bloomberg.

Bloomberg reported the effort is aimed at gathering more on-the-ground data as regulators examine whether fertilizer producers may have coordinated to raise prices. The DOJ investigation was first reported in early March, when Bloomberg said federal officials had begun looking into whether fertilizer companies engaged in price coordination.

According to the Bloomberg report, Vaden said he has already met with officials at both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to discuss potential lines of inquiry. He also noted that farmers could play a key role in the process.

Vaden said farmers “have a lot of information that might be relevant to these investigations.”

Bloomberg previously reported in early March that the Department of Justice is investigating whether fertilizer producers colluded to increase prices.

Speaking at the North American Agricultural Journalists’ annual conference in Washington on Monday, Vaden encouraged farmer participation in the probe, emphasizing confidentiality protections.

“We need farmers to help provide us with that information on a confidential basis, so that that can help inform the investigations that are ongoing,” Vaden said, according to Bloomberg. “I think we will have a mechanism in order to help encourage that exchange of information.”

NCGA Surveys Show Not All Farmers Have Fertilizer Secured for 2026

Against that backdrop, along with fertilizer prices climbing even higher in the six weeks after the conflict started with Iran, new surveys results from NCGA highlight how those market pressures are translating to on-farm realities.

Krista Swanson, chief economist for NCGA, says the organization conducted the survey to better understand fertilizer availability from the farmer perspective. Ag Secretary Rollins has told mainstream media that 80% of farmers have fertilizer locked in for 2026, but NCGA data contradicts that figure.

“We’re hearing that number being thrown around too, which is why we really wanted to find out directly from farmers what the status is for them,” Swanson says.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

A Significant Gap in Fertilizer Readiness

The surveys show that only 60% of farmers report having their nitrogen fully purchased or secured for the 2026 growing season, while 64% say the same for phosphate. That leaves a sizable portion of producers still working to lock in supplies.

“When you think about over 500,000 corn farmers in the U.S., this isn’t a small number,” Swanson says. “Our survey results indicate that over 200,000 farmers still need at least some fertilizer for this year.”

Nitrogen remains a critical input for corn production and is closely tied to yield potential. Any shortfall, whether driven by availability or cost, can directly affect productivity and profitability.

NCGA Grower Surveys

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

Younger Farmers Feeling the Pressure Most

The survey also points to uneven impacts across the farm sector, with younger farmers facing greater challenges in securing fertilizer.

Swanson says younger producers reported having more nitrogen left to purchase compared to older farmers.

“You think about younger farmers that have less capital already built up in their business, maybe tighter cash flow needs because of their equity position,” she says. “This does seem to have a disproportional impact on younger farmers.”

That dynamic raises concerns about financial strain among newer operations in a high-cost environment.

Corn Acres Likely Stable, But With Reduced Inputs

Despite the challenges, most farmers are not planning to reduce corn acreage. The survey found that 80% of respondents expect to maintain their planned acres.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

At the same time, fertilizer application rates may fall short. Half of the farmers surveyed say they do not expect to apply their full amount of fertilizer.

“Pairing these two together, it seems to me like we are still going to see a lot of corn acres get planted,” Swanson says. “But those corn acres will have less fertilizer than maybe what they would have otherwise had.”

That combination could limit yield potential if input reductions become widespread.

Growing Concern Shifts to 2027

While fertilizer availability remains a concern for 2026, attention is already turning to the next crop year. Fertilizer purchasing follows a rolling cycle, and planning for 2027 will begin soon.

Survey responses show that for every one farmer more concerned about fertilizer price and availability for 2026, nearly two are more concerned about 2027.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

“So farmers are concerned as we look ahead to next year,” Swanson says.

The shift reflects uncertainty about how long supply disruptions and elevated prices will persist.

Supply Chain Recovery May Take Time

Even if geopolitical tensions ease, relief may not come quickly. Swanson notes that the fertilizer market is still dealing with production disruptions and supply chain backlogs.

“A short-term ceasefire has limited immediate impact on this ongoing fertilizer crisis for farmers,” she says. “Even when a permanent end to the situation is reached, we’re still looking at recovery from supply chain backlogs and halted production that could take a long time to recover from.”

Damage to key inputs such as liquid natural gas and sulfur production could take years to repair, keeping pressure on supply.

A Tightening Outlook

The NCGA survey underscores a challenging environment for corn producers. Most acres are expected to be planted this year, but not all will receive optimal fertilizer applications. At the same time, concern is building for 2027 as farmers look ahead to the next purchasing cycle.

For many producers, the issue is no longer just securing fertilizer for this season. It is navigating a period of sustained uncertainty that could shape production decisions, costs, and risk management strategies across the U.S. corn sector.

Longstanding Concerns Over Market Concentration

In September 2025, USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice signed a Memorandum of Understanding, committing both agencies to jointly examine high and volatile input costs, which included fertilizer, by scrutinizing competitive conditions in agricultural markets and enforcing antitrust laws, particularly around price setting and market concentration.

While geopolitical tensions are the latest driver of volatility, many farm groups argue the root of the problem runs deeper. Matt Perdue, president of the North Dakota Farmers Union, says ongoing federal investigations into fertilizer pricing must lead to meaningful action.

“We appreciate the administration’s investigations into input costs,” Perdue says. “But investigations don’t do anything if they’re not followed by enforcement, and they don’t do anything if we don’t learn what came out of those investigations.”

Groups like the Texas Corn Producers Association have been raising concerns about fertilizer market concentration for years. Texas farmer Dee Vaughan says the organization began studying the issue in 2020, working with the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M to examine pricing trends.

“We’ve been very concerned about all of our input costs, but specifically fertilizer, because it’s the one that just keeps going up almost exponentially,” Vaughan says.

He adds those studies found a shift in how fertilizer prices are determined . Historically tied closely to natural gas costs, the study found nitrogen fertilizer pricing began tracking corn prices more closely after 2010, a change Vaughan says reflects deeper structural issues.

According to Vaughan, the small number of firms controlling the market have the data and market awareness to price inputs based on farmers’ revenue potential, rather than production costs.

“They all have economists on staff,” Vaughan says. “They know exactly what our costs are, what our income is, and they’re able to extract value based on what they see as the gross income of a farmer. It’s not based on cost of production any longer.”

The Next Guatemala? USMEF Sees Massive Upside for U.S. Beef and Pork in Ecuador

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:22:32 GMT

Ecuador recently became the ninth country to sign an agreement on reciprocal trade with the U.S. And while it will take some time to implement, once in place, the deal will greatly expand opportunities for U.S. beef and pork in Ecuador, according to U.S. Meat Export Federation Vice President for Economic Analysis Erin Borror.

Tariffs of 20% on beef and 45% on pork are mostly phased out, although there are exceptions on pork.
A 30% tariff on processed pork products which will remain in place.
The agreement recognizes all USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) inspected facilities as eligible for export to Ecuador, removing the need for individual facility approvals.

“The tariff on beef is basically 20% and that’s phased to zero in the agreement over three years,” Borror explains. “For pork, tariffs of 45% are mostly phased out. There are some exceptions on further processed products and sausages that will see tariffs remain at 30%.”

Borror says one of the key wins in these reciprocal trade agreements is getting countries to recognize FSIS, the U.S. food safety authority, as the competent authority.

“They will recognize all FSIS-inspected facilities as eligible to export, rather than going through onerous questionnaires, plant-by-plant audits and maintaining plant lists which have gotten to be unmanageable,” she says.

Borror expects export growth to be similar to what was seen in Guatemala after passage of the Central America Free Trade Agreement.

“Both of those countries have a population of close to 18 million people,” she says. “Their GDP per capita is somewhere close to $7,000, so very similar. And if we take Guatemala, U.S. beef export growth from 2006 to 2025, saw growth from $3 million to $105 million. For pork, the market went from $10 million to $148 million.”

In 2025, the U.S. exported virtually no pork to Ecuador and only $3 million in beef. She says there is great potential in Ecuador.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Use of Emergency Powers for Trump's Tariffs

Fri, 20 Feb 2026 15:32:46 GMT

In a landmark ruling with major implications for U.S. trade and agriculture, the Supreme Court has struck down President Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose sweeping tariffs. The 6-3 decision confirms that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not give the president authority to issue broad import duties.

The Supreme Court case known as “Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump” is an end to a legal battle that started nearly a year ago. The tariffs at issue, which were originally imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were first challenged in court in April 2025 when companies, including educational toy makers Learning Resources and hand2mind, sued in federal court shortly after the duties were announced. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

In the case Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump the court ruled, “We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.”

“IEEPA gives the president significant authority over transactions involving foreign property, including the importation of goods. But in that generous delegation, one power is conspicuously missing,” said the decision. “Nothing in IEEPA’s text, nor anything in its context, enables the president to unilaterally impose tariffs. And needless to say, without statutory authority, the president’s tariffs cannot stand.”

The Court’s ruling on Friday has major implications.

Initially, grain futures weakened after the ruling. Soybeans turned lower on fears the decision takes away a key bargaining chip ahead of Trump’s April meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, raising questions about whether Beijing will follow through on additional soybean purchases. The ruling, however, could be supportive in the event it prompts China to drop its tariff on U.S. soybean imports.

Stocks rallied, with major U.S. indexes extending gains after the ruling, while Treasury yields jumped and the U.S. dollar weakened against major rivals.

The decision is a blow to President Trump’s economic agenda. The president imposed what he called reciprocal tariffs on several countries in April 2025, calling trade deficits a national emergency.

What This Means for Trump’s Tariffs

Lower courts, including the U.S. Court of International Trade and the Federal Circuit, had previously struck down these tariffs as exceeding executive authority. The Supreme Court affirmed those rulings, which means tariffs imposed solely under IEEPA now lack a valid legal foundation. Importers could see injunctions halting collections, and companies that already paid duties may seek refunds, potentially putting billions of dollars of federal revenue at risk.

But not all Trump-era tariffs are affected. Duties imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which are deemed as national security tariffs, as well as the ones under Section 301 of the Trade Act, which are China-related tariffs, rely on separate statutory authority and remain intact unless challenged independently.

What This Means for Farmers, Agriculture and the Future of Trade

For agriculture, the ruling adds uncertainty to future trade leverage strategies. Many farm groups have viewed tariffs as both a negotiating tool and a source of retaliation risk.

The Court’s decision reinforces separation-of-powers limits, signaling that major shifts in tariff policy must originate in Congress, not through broad interpretations of emergency statutes.

Now that Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs has been struck down as exceeding executive authority, tariffs based solely on that law are unlikely to stand without congressional approval, while those enacted under other trade statutes remain in place, for now.

The ruling narrows presidential flexibility on trade and could reshape how future administrations approach tariff policy.

President Trump Reacts By Announcing New Tariffs

Speaking later in the day on Friday, President Trump announced he would issue a new 10% “global tariff,” while also arguing the Court’s decision limited one tool but clarified others, claiming the justices had effectively strengthened presidential trade authority by narrowing the scope of IEEPA rather than tariffs themselves.

In a swift response to the high court’s decision, Trump announced Friday that he will sign an executive order imposing a new 10% “global tariff,” just hours after the Supreme Court of the United States struck down his sweeping “reciprocal” import duties in a 6-3 ruling.

The new tariffs will be invoked under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and layered on top of other levies that remain in place following the court’s decision. Speaking during a White House press briefing, Trump called the ruling “deeply disappointing” and said he was “ashamed of certain members of the court” for lacking “the courage to do what’s right for our country.”

The court’s ruling invalidated the legal foundation underpinning many of the tariffs Trump has argued are essential to strengthening the U.S. economy and rebuilding domestic manufacturing capacity. Despite the setback, Trump signaled he will pursue alternative avenues to maintain and expand tariffs without congressional approval.

“I don’t have to,” Trump said when asked why he would not work with lawmakers. “I have the right to do tariffs.”

His remarks grew increasingly pointed, including criticism of Justices he nominated who joined the majority. Trump said he believed their decision was “terrible” and “an embarrassment,” underscoring his frustration with the outcome.

Tariffs imposed under Section 122 can remain in effect for up to 150 days. Any extension beyond that period would require approval from Congress.

Reaction to Supreme Court Ruling on Tariffs

Farmers for Free Trade quickly weighed in following the Supreme Court’s decision striking down the President’s authority to impose global tariffs under IEEPA.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision is an important step toward restoring predictability and the rule of law in American trade policy,” says Brian Kuehl, executive director of Farmers for Free Trade. “Tariffs imposed under IEEPA have been devastating for American farmers, driving up costs for inputs like fertilizer, equipment, and parts while triggering retaliatory tariffs that cut off critical export markets. Farmers have been caught in the crossfire, paying more for what they need while losing access to the customers they depend on.”

Kuehl notes while the ruling removes one source of uncertainty, concerns remain that new tariffs could be imposed through other legal avenues.

“Any new approach would likely invite the same retaliation from our trading partners that has already caused so much damage to American farmers. Tariffs hurt farmers on both ends, raising what they pay and reducing where they can sell,” he says.

The priority should now be stabilizing trade relationships and expanding market access for U.S. agricultural products, Kuehl adds, urging the administration to work with Congress on comprehensive trade solutions that “open markets rather than close them.”

According to Olu Sonola, head of U.S. economics at Fitch Ratings, the Court’s ruling is a material rollback because more than 60% of the 2025 tariffs effectively vanish. The U.S. effective tariff rate drops from about 13% to around 6%, removing more than $200 billion in expected annual tariff collections.

“Call it Liberation Day 2.0 — arguably the first one with tangible upside for U.S. consumers and corporate profitability,” he says. “However, the bigger macro takeaway is not just ‘lower tariffs,’ but ‘higher tariff-regime uncertainty.’ The odds that tariffs reappear in a revised form remain meaningful. Layer on potential tariff refunds, and you introduce a messy operational and legal overhang that amplifies economic uncertainty.”

In response to the ruling, the American Soybean Association (ASA) issued the following statement from Scott Metzger, ASA President and Ohio farmer: “The case at the Supreme Court has been closely followed by soybean farmers who have seen the cost of inputs rise over the past year due to tariffs. U.S. soybean growers are reliant upon imports for critical farming tools like fertilizer, seeds, pesticides and agriculture equipment. Moving forward, certainty and dependable market access are essential for U.S. soy to remain competitive globally. Because farmers are caught in a cost-price squeeze and ag input costs remain high, we urge the President to refrain from imposing tariffs on agricultural inputs using other authorities. We look forward to working with the Trump Administration and Congress to strengthen market opportunities and support a stable farm economy for generations to come.”

The International Fresh Produce Association (IFPA) welcomes the Supreme Court’s decision clarifying the limits of IEEPA and reaffirming that broad, country-specific tariffs fall outside its intended scope.

“While targeted tariffs can be a tool for addressing inequities between trading partners, the broad application of this blunt instrument can disrupt markets, raise consumer costs, and place unnecessary strain on growers and producers across the supply chain,” IFPA said in a statement. “IFPA does not believe tariffs should be used as a default response to every trade concern facing the United States, nor should this ruling simply prompt a shift to other tariff authorities. Instead, IFPA hopes this ruling allows policymakers to move beyond broad tariff actions and continue working toward lower trade barriers that ensure affordable access to fresh produce and floral products.

“While tariffs have been one challenge for the fresh produce and floral sectors, IFPA appreciates the administration’s commitment to easing regulatory burdens and supporting American agriculture and looks forward to working with policymakers on long-term solutions — such as equitable trade agreements, regulatory reform and workforce stability — that strengthen food security and ensure affordable, accessible produce for all families.”

What Now? Exploring Alternatives to IEEPA Tariffs

While the Supreme Court’s ruling removes the legal foundation for tariffs imposed under IEEPA, it does not mean U.S. import duties are going away anytime soon. According to a recent op-ed , President Trump still has options when it comes to using tariffs as a tool. However, trade experts say while there are other options, statutory guardrails may limit some of the more rapid changes seen under IEEPA.

According to the recent analysis, the possible alternatives include:

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974: The basis for existing China tariffs. This gives the U.S. Trade Representative broad authority to target “unfair” foreign trade practices, allowing for unilateral action once investigations conclude.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: Used for national security tariffs on cars, steel, aluminum, and other goods. Courts have been deferential to the administration’s claims, and new tariffs under this authority could generate revenue comparable to IEEPA tariffs.
Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974: Intended to address balance-of-payments deficits through import surcharges or quotas. While the statute has never been used for this purpose, it allows short-term tariffs of up to 15 percent, which could be reimposed in cycles without a congressional vote, though this strategy would likely face legal challenges.

As the op-ed points out, the Supreme Court ruling eliminates one controversial path for tariffs, but Washington still has multiple avenues to impose import duties, and legal challenges are almost certain to follow any new moves.

Trump Confirms Support for Year-Round E-15 Deal

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 15:48:12 GMT

President Donald Trump made a planned visit to Iowa — his first since July 2025 — on Tuesday, focusing on affordability, saying Iowa families are “winning” again under his leadership. Standing in front of a packed crowd in Clive, Iowa, with signs posted on the stage and scattered throughout the crowd that said “lower prices” and “bigger paychecks,” the visit unofficially kicked off the midterm elections where costs for consumers are expected to be one of the main political talking points.

While in Iowa, President Trump highlighted what the White House calls improving economic conditions for Iowa families, pointing to lower fuel prices, tax savings and agriculture-driven growth as signs the state is “winning again.” The President touted all the trade wins, including China buying soybeans and the EU agreeing to buy U.S. ethanol. He says by removing those trade barriers, exports are starting to flow to countries that had stopped buying U.S. ag goods before he took office.

But the reality is agriculture is at a crossroads, especially on the row crop side. Even with the recent trade deals, current economic pressures are creating a crisis in agriculture. Trump did briefly mention that crisis, blaming it on former President Joe Biden.

Trump Pushes Year-Round E15 During Iowa Visit

During his speech in Iowa, President Trump reaffirmed his campaign promise to support year-round E15, signaling a major win for corn growers and the ethanol industry.

“But I’m also working hard to expand your markets domestically,” Trump says. “In the campaign, I promised to support E15 all year round. I did. E15 all year round if I get elected, and I want to let you know, we’ll start right now.”

The statement sparked applause as Trump emphasized that efforts are underway in Congress to finalize approval, calling on House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Leader John Thune to deliver a deal that benefits farmers, consumers, and refiners, including small and mid-sized operations.

“I’m trusting Speaker Mike Johnson, who’s great, and Leader John Thune, who’s great, to find a deal that works. They’re very close to getting it done,” he says. “And I will sign it without delay.”

The president framed year-round E15 as a key part of his broader strategy to expand markets for U.S. corn, support rural communities, and strengthen domestic energy production.

🚨 BREAKING: President Trump announces Congress is actively working on a deal to allow E15 ALL YEAR ROUND that works for farmers, consumers, & refiners.

"Congress is working on a deal, and when they send it to my desk — I will sign it without delay."pic.twitter.com/TOpo3VUDI4
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 27, 2026

Trump Highlights “Historic Turnaround” for U.S. Manufacturing, Touts Deere’s Stock Hitting All-Time High

During his Iowa visit, President Trump touted what he called a historic one-year economic turnaround, pointing to manufacturing growth and new investments across the country.

“And America is respected all over the world like they’ve never been respected,” Trump says. “I thought it would take us two years. This has been the most dramatic one-year turnaround of any country in history in terms of the speed.”

Trump spotlighted John Deere as an example of American manufacturing success. He welcomed the company’s chairman at the event and praised the expansion of production facilities, including what he called two massive new plants.

“You’re opening one in North Carolina, one someplace else, and then you’re expanding all over the place. You’re doing a great job,” he says. “I bought a lot of John Deere stuff. Great country, great company, it’s an honor to have you here.”

The president attributed much of the growth to tariffs and economic policies aimed at attracting investment back to the U.S.

“It is because of tariffs and it is also because of the fact that we had such a tremendous November 5th. That November 5 brought spirit back to our country,” Trump says.

Trump then said that proof in the growth is in the stock market’s performance, including Deere stock hitting an all-time high of 529.51 on January 21, 2026.

But with strains in the farm economy, farm equipment sales saw a steep decline in 2025. Deere and Company, which has a large footprint in the Quad Cities and Des Moines, has laid off over 3,500 employees since October 2023. That downsizing, which the company says is driven by decreasing demand and lower sales, has hit the company’s manufacturing facilities hard, including locations in Waterloo and Ankeny.

John Deere Expands U.S. Manufacturing with Two New Facilities

President Trump highlighted John Deere’s plans to open two major U.S. facilities, marking a significant boost for American manufacturing and rural jobs. The president saying Deere’s decision was due to tariffs.

After the president’s remarks, the company sent out a press release, with John Deere announcing a major expansion with two new U.S. facilities coming soon to the U.S .

Dere says it will build:

A state-of-the-art distribution center near Hebron, Indiana, and a $70 million excavator factory in Kernersville, North Carolina, both set to open within the next year.
The North Carolina factory will bring excavator production back from Japan to the U.S., making John Deere the top domestic producer of excavators.

Together, Deere says the projects are expected to create hundreds of new American jobs, strengthen local economies, and advance John Deere’s commitment to $20 billion in U.S. manufacturing investments over the next decade.

John Deere executives emphasized the expansion as a continuation of their mission to “build America”, enhance innovation, and support the nation’s agriculture, construction, and manufacturing sectors.

The Strong Push for E15 to Help Turn The Ag Economy Around

As corn growers pressed for year-round E15 ahead of the president’s visit, ethanol advocates say the issue is no longer about executive action. It’s about Congress finishing the job.

Emily Skor, CEO of Growth Energy, says the Trump administration has already taken every step available to it through regulatory action.

Leading into Tuesday’s talk, biofuels leaders pushed for the president to focus on E15, saying rural America’s financial stress is colliding with a narrow policy window to get things like E15 done, and that could generate more demand, quickly changing the outlook for corn and soybean growers.

“What we hear from the team around the president is he did what he could,” Skor told Chip Flory during “AgriTalk” on Tuesday. “He issued an executive order. EPA gave us the summer waivers for last summer. We all know that what we need right now is an act of Congress.”

Skor says the White House wants lawmakers to deliver a bill that can be signed into law and end the seasonal E15 debate for good.

“The conversation has to be ‘Congress, do your job,’” she says. “The White House wants to see Congress get something done so they can bring a bill to his desk, so he can sign it and we can be done with this once and for all.”

That urgency is being echoed across agriculture, she says.

“I’ve got CEOs of all kinds of agriculture trade groups calling me saying: ‘What can we do to be helpful? We’ve got to get this done,’” Skor says. “All of agriculture is supportive of this.”

Iowa’s Reality: Corn Prices Below Cost of Production

Ahead of Trump’s second visit to Iowa in less than a year, corn growers and renewable fuels advocates used the moment to renew pressure for nationwide, year-round access to E15. Corn groups say the timing is critical, as lawmakers continue to stall on permanent E15 access despite strong Midwestern support. To make the push even more visible, Iowa Corn and the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) released an open letter on Tuesday , thanking the president for his past support of E15 and urging him to help push the policy across the finish line in Congress, while also running a full-page ad in Tuesday’s “Des Moines Register”.

ICGA and @iowafuel today released an open letter thanking @POTUS for his constant support of nationwide, year-round #E15 and asking for his help to finally push E15 access through Congress @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/cxACXijKMN
— Iowa Corn (@iowa_corn) January 26, 2026

According to the letter, corn growers across the country, and especially in Iowa, are struggling as prices remain well below the cost of production. That pressure, they say, is rippling through the broader state economy.

The groups cite recent data from the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank, which ranked Iowa 50th among states for economic growth. They say expanding E15 is one of the fastest ways to reverse that trend.

“The best way to boost corn prices and create meaningful market demand is the immediate authorization of nationwide, year-round E15,” the letter states.

After Trump’s announcement on Tuesday, saying a deal is close, Iowa Corn Growers Association Vice President and farmer from Knoxville, Iowa, Steve Kuiper, expressed Iowa Corn’s appreciation, while highlighting what this could mean for farmers at a critical time.

“Iowa’s corn growers appreciate President Trump shining light on E15 and recognizing the weight this legislation holds to us as corn growers. Farmers are struggling with low commodity prices, high input costs and lack of markets. Passage of year-round E15 is the lifeline many of us need to be able to continue farming,” says Kuiper. “A recent study by Iowa Corn and the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association shared the positive effects year-round E15 would mean for corn growers. This is a goal we have been working towards for over a decade and getting this issue to the president’s desk and across the finish line is a win we all desperately need. The fact that the President sees this problem and promises a solution is coming is very encouraging and valued by us as farmers.”

Fun fact: today when @realDonaldTrump referenced supporting year-round E15 on the campaign trail, that started on January 19, 2016 at the Iowa Renewable Fuels Summit, where he was a speaker.

The next Summit is on February 5th and is FREE and open to the public. You might want to… https://t.co/g0G57UWrbF
— Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (@iowafuel) January 28, 2026

Leading up to today’s statements by Trump, both Iowa Corn and Iowa Renewable Fuels reminded the Trump administration that year-round E15 would immediately expand domestic demand for corn at a time when farmers are under intense financial pressure. Even with the latest round of financial aid through the Farmer Bridge Assistance Program payments, 92% of agricultural economists surveyed in Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor said the row crop side of agriculture is in a recession. More than 90% said that will accelerate consolidation in agriculture — something Iowa agriculture is seeing firsthand.

Biofuels Seen as Economic Pressure Point and Opportunity

Kurt Kovarik, vice president of federal affairs at Clean Fuels Alliance America, appeared on “AgriTalk” before Trump’s talk on Tuesday. He says the group sent a letter to the president earlier this week urging the administration to focus on two immediate policy opportunities.

“We’re excited to see him head to Iowa,” Kovarik says. “We were briefed that the purpose of the conversation was to highlight economic opportunity, perhaps domestic energy dominance.”

Kovarik says Clean Fuels asked the administration to spotlight progress on renewable fuels, particularly finalizing renewable volume obligations under the Renewable Fuel Standard and issuing long-awaited guidance on the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit.

“I’m sure you’ve had a lot of conversations around E15 — that’s in the hands of Congress,” he says. “So, what we want to do is highlight for the president the EPA’s efforts to finalize the renewable volume obligations under the RFS as an opportunity to provide market certainty and growth for our industry, as well as finalizing the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit guidance, which we do not yet have.”

That certainty, Kovarik says, has been missing, and the consequences have been felt across rural America.

“Our industry had a really, really tough 2025,” he says. “Following a really great ’24, ’25 was really poor, as it was along the farm economy.”

He says the downturn wasn’t driven by demand alone, but by uncertainty around federal policy.

“It was a lack of profit, lack of margin, which meant reduced capacity,” Kovarik says. “In fact, we’ve had a lot of plants idling.”

After producing more than 5 billion gallons of clean fuels domestically in 2024, Kovarik says output dropped sharply in 2025. Plants across the industry operated at just 60% to 70% of capacity.

“In some cases that may be a plant dialing back to 80%,” he says. “In a lot of cases, particularly the smaller plants, maybe in Iowa, those that don’t produce their own feedstock came offline entirely.”

But it’s not just corn at a crossroads. He says that slowdown directly affects farm demand, especially for soybean oil.

“If our industry got those two things in the near term, we would flip around this industry nearly immediately,” Kovarik says. “Turn these plants back on, buy more soybean oil, add value to the soybean farmer and get this fuel to the consumer.”

Kovarik points to renewable volume obligations as a key pressure point. Under the Biden administration’s final three-year RFS rule, biomass-based diesel volumes for 2025 were set at 3.35 billion gallons — well below what the industry was capable of producing.

“We produced over 5 billion gallons in 2024,” he says. “So, that’s part of the reason our industry had a tough year.”

Looking ahead, Clean Fuels, petroleum refiners and agriculture groups asked EPA to raise 2026 volumes to 5.25 billion gallons. EPA’s proposal came in even higher.

“EPA actually proposed an estimate around 5.6 billion gallons,” Kovarik says. “They were even above ours.”

If final numbers land near that range, Kovarik says it would send a powerful market signal.

“Our feeling is if it comes down anywhere in the neighborhood between what we asked and what EPA proposed, it’s going to be a very, very strong market signal,” he says.

Timing matters, too. Kovarik says EPA has indicated the rule could be finalized soon.

“Our expectation is EPA is committed to have it done within the first quarter of 2026 — that means the end of March,” he says. “Hopefully early- to mid-March.”

As corn growers push for year-round E15 and broader biofuels support during Trump’s Iowa visit, Kovarik says optimism is returning, even after a difficult year.

“Although most folks are really feeling bad about how ’25 was, they’re also very optimistic about 2026,” he says. “Because of what we feel we’re on the cusp of.”

Corn Growers Disgusted as Congress Leaves E15 Out of Government Spending Bills

Just last week, E15 and corn groups were dealt a blow. That’s because year-round E15 was left out of the latest spending package , something corn and renewable fuels groups had been pushing to get included in the latest bill.

When asked how year-round E15 failed to advance earlier this year, Skor points to political realities inside the House.

“Parochial politics,” Skor said on AgriTalk Tuesday. “It’s incredibly frustrating.”

Despite broad ag support and mounting corn supplies, Skor says narrow vote margins and competing interests stalled progress.

“We have been a chorus saying, ‘We want markets, not handouts. We want markets,’” she says. “Look at how much corn we’ve grown in the U.S. We need to find markets.”

Skor says House leadership ultimately pulled the issue from budget negotiations due to concerns over securing enough votes, particularly from members tied to small refinery interests.

“He knew that he could not get the votes he needed to pass the budget,” she says. “So he said, ‘We’re going to table this. We’re going to create a council. We’re going to deal with this separately.’ And that’s what happened.”

Looking ahead, Skor says attaching year-round E15 to a must-pass spending bill remains possible, but unlikely in the near term.

“I’m never going to say never,” she says. “But I think the realistic, immediate path for us is trusting our champions.”

She points to Rep. Randy Feenstra of Iowa as a key leader on biofuels policy.

“He’s fantastic on our issues,” Skor says. “He proved to be very, very strong in advocating for the Clean Fuel Production Tax Credit, 45Z.”

Skor says biofuels groups are now unified behind a legislative compromise that protects liquid fuels while expanding growth opportunities for American ethanol.

“We have the vast majority of liquid fuels united behind a legislative proposal,” she says. “We’ve done a really good job coming up with a compromise that has a future for liquid fuels and growth opportunities for American biofuels.”

As farmers look for demand-side solutions amid tight margins and large corn supplies, Skor says the message to Washington during Trump’s Iowa visit is straightforward: permanent E15 isn’t a wish list item. It’s a market fix agriculture needs now.

In the letter Iowa Corn and IRFA sent this week, both also pointed to Congress’ decision to sidestep E15 language in recent spending bills, instead creating a task force to study the issue. That task force, which is co-chaired by Feenstra, is scheduled to take action by February 28.

“Without permanent access to this market, the long-term viability of our state’s largest economic driver is at serious risk,” the groups wrote. “Today, we are asking for your help to finally push E15 access through Congress.”

It’s that same sentiment that was relayed in a statement from National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) president Jed Bower last week, who said corn growers “were disgusted, disappointed and disillusioned” after spending years of calling on Congress to pass E15.

“I met with Speaker Johnson back in November. He said he was frustrated because DOGE had pulled this out last year. He said he would get something done, and here we are again,” said the Ohio farmer. “The same thing we get all the time. Let’s step on and push on the farmers because there’s not very many of them and we can get away with it.”

Small Refiners Still a Roadblock to Year-Round E15

Even with support from major oil groups, Skor says a small group of refiners continues to wield outsized influence in Washington — enough to stall year-round E15 despite broad backing from agriculture and much of the energy sector.

“Well, enough that they could hamstring the speaker and they could hold up the votes on the budget,” Skor says, responding to questions about whether small refiners still carry weight in Congress.

Skor says the current proposal on the table represents a significant compromise, one she believes should be moving now.

“Let’s get year-round E15. Let’s reform the small refinery program so fewer refiners get it and we have more clarity,” she says. “We are supportive of that.”

She argues the small refinery exemption program has been abused, pointing to a growing number of legal challenges.

“There are over 15 lawsuits that have been filed in 2025 because of these small refiners. They’re greedy,” Skor says. “They’re whiny. They claim and allege hardship, and then they get on investor calls and talk about all the money they made in the quarter. You can’t have it both ways.”

Skor says the ethanol industry and its allies are now focused on exposing what she calls that hypocrisy while maintaining pressure on lawmakers.

“We have a very strong coalition now that should win the day,” she says.

Corn Growers Argue E15 Is a ‘No-Cost’ Solution

Iowa Corn and IRFA frame E15 as both an economic and regulatory fix, calling the current restrictions outdated and unnecessary.

“Removing the outdated regulatory hurdle for E15 is exactly the type of government efficiency you’ve worked for,” the groups wrote, urging Trump to continue applying pressure as Congress debates the issue over the coming weeks.

They also emphasize permanent E15 access would come at no cost to taxpayers, while strengthening American energy dominance and providing a critical lifeline to corn producers.

“Permanent nationwide access to E15 is a common-sense, no-cost solution,” the letter sent earlier this week concludes. “Now is the time.”

With the task force deadline looming and the president back in Iowa, corn growers hope the renewed push will translate into action and finally deliver year-round E15 access they’ve been seeking for more than a decade.

Trump Defends Tariffs, Says Farmers Will Be “Biggest Beneficiary”

Ahead of his Iowa talk, President Trump made an appearance at the Machine Shed restaurant in Urbandale, where he had an exclusive interview with Fox News. During that interview, Trump strongly defended his use of tariffs, calling them “indispensable” to economic growth and long-term benefits for farmers.

“Tariffs have been indispensable toward success,” Trump says. “We’ve taken in $600 billion in tariffs.”

Trump says some of that revenue has already been directed back to agriculture, including the Farmer Bridge program payments, which are scheduled to be in farmers’ bank accounts by the end of February.

“I gave the farmers $12 billion last week and took them out of tariff money,” he says.

When asked about concerns from Iowa farmers who worry tariffs could hurt exports and commodity prices, Trump says the benefits will take time to materialize.

“It’s going to take a little while to kick in,” he says. “But I think the farmers are going to be the biggest beneficiary.”

Trump points to protections against foreign crops being sold into the U.S. at below-market prices.

“When you used to have people coming in and dumping their crops into the United States, you guys were hurt,” he says. “They’re not allowed to do that because we’re tariffing those crops.”

He also draws parallels to his first-term trade battles, particularly with China.

“The farmers stuck with me the first time, and I was right,” Trump says. “We gave them $28 billion then. Now we gave them $12 billion, sort of a minimal payment.”

While acknowledging legal challenges could arise as the Trump administration awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling, Trump still signaled tariffs, or similar tools, will remain part of his strategy.

“If the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs, we will find something — some other way of doing a similar thing,” he says. “But it’ll be more inconvenient.”

As Trump delivers his message in Iowa, tariffs remain a flashpoint for rural America, balancing promises of long-term protection with near-term uncertainty for farmers navigating tight margins and volatile markets.

UPDATE: Supreme Court Did Not Issue Ruling on Tariffs Case, Decision Still Pending

Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:45:24 GMT

UPDATE: The U.S. Supreme Court chose not to release its ruling on President Trump’s global tariffs Wednesday. A decision is still pending.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue one or more rulings on Wednesday in cases already argued before the justices as major legal disputes remain pending, including litigation testing the legality of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs.

The court is set to release rulings at about 10 a.m. ET (1500 GMT). The court does not announce ahead of time which rulings it intends to issue. The court issued one ruling last Friday but did not act in the tariffs case, which was argued on Nov. 5.

The challenge to Trump’s tariffs marks a major test of presidential powers as well as of the court’s willingness to check some of the Republican president’s far-reaching assertions of authority since he returned to office in January 2025. The outcome will impact the global economy.

During arguments in the case, conservative and liberal justices appeared to cast doubt on the legality of the tariffs, which Trump imposed by invoking a 1977 law meant for use during national emergencies. Trump’s administration is appealing rulings by lower courts that he overstepped his authority.

Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on goods imported from individual countries — nearly every foreign trading partner — to address what he called a national emergency related to U.S. trade deficits. He invoked the same law to impose tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico, citing the trafficking of the often-abused painkiller fentanyl and illicit drugs into the U.S. as a national emergency.

The challenges to the tariffs in the cases before the Supreme Court were brought by businesses affected by the tariffs and 12 U.S. states, most of them Democratic-governed.

Other cases awaiting rulings include disputes concerning voting rights, religious rights, Trump’s firing of a Federal Trade Commission member, LGBT “conversion therapy” and campaign finance limits, among others.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

Trade Barriers Limit Vital Export Opportunities for Pork Producers

Tue, 04 Nov 2025 16:54:40 GMT

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) submitted comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on its 2026 National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, which details significant barriers to U.S. exports of goods and services, U.S. foreign direct investment, and U.S. electronic commerce in important export markets.

Published annually since 1986, the NTE looks at agricultural trade barriers such as tariffs, burdensome facility registration requirements, sanitary-phytosanitary regulations, import licensing requirements not based in science, and other measures that lack adherence to international science- and risk-based standards, NPPC says.

“The NTE Report helps U.S. negotiators in their efforts to reduce or eliminate trade barriers and is a valuable tool for enforcing U.S. trade laws and agreements,” NPPC says in a statement. “Trade barriers limit U.S. agricultural exports, which are vital to America’s farmers, ranchers and the overall U.S. economy, supporting about a million U.S. jobs.”

Pork exports contribute significantly to a producer’s bottom line. Last year, producers shipped more than $8.6 billion of pork products to foreign destinations.

In its comments for the most recent report, NPPC listed 22 countries and the European Union as having varying tariff and/or non-tariff barriers limiting U.S. pork exports.

Key points NPPC made in its comments include:

Brazil: De facto ban on U.S. pork imports that lacks scientific justification. It requires U.S. pork to be frozen or tested for trichinae.
China: Ban on the feed additive ractopamine despite an international standard allowing its use. China also has an onerous facility registration system.
India: Proposed additional export certificate with additional attestations that are not relevant to food safety or based on science.
South Africa: Prohibition on pork offal and trichinae-related freezing of pork.
Thailand: De facto ban on U.S. pork imports and a ban on ractopamine use.

Read More:
No Trade Agreement Can Boast the Success of USMCA, The Meat Institute Says

China Tariff Reduction is a Win for U.S. Pig Farmers

Setting the Record Straight: What China Actually Agreed to Buy—And When Those Ag Purchases Will Happen

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 23:05:31 GMT

The White House announced a sweeping new U.S.–China trade agreement late last week that includes substantial commitments from Beijing to purchase U.S. agricultural products — marking what officials call a “breakthrough” in restoring and expanding trade flows between the two countries.

According to the White House fact sheet , China will buy 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of 2025 and 25 million metric tons annually through 2028. The deal also restores trade in sorghum, hardwood logs, and a range of other commodities while lifting retaliatory tariffs on U.S. beef, pork, dairy, wheat, corn, cotton, and other farm products.

Yet, with mixed messages from the White House and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, there was some confusion on whether China would purchase an additional 12 million metric tons of soybeans, of if it was 12 million total.

As AgMarket.Net’s Jim McCormick pointed out, the U.S. already sold China 5.9 million metric tons earlier this year, before the trade war broke out. Comments from Bessent made it sound like China would be 12 million metric ton total, which would have equated to only buy an additional 6.1 million metric tons yet this year.

However, the White House Fact Sheet released over the weekend cleared the air, saying, “China will purchase at least 12 million metric tons (MMT) of U.S. soybeans during the last two months of 2025 and also purchase at least 25 MMT of U.S. soybeans in each of 2026, 2027, and 2028. Additionally, China will resume purchases of U.S. sorghum and hardwood logs.”

What This Means for U.S. Farmers

For U.S. row-crop producers and livestock farmers alike, the agreement could spell renewed demand from one of the world’s largest agricultural importers. The 25 MMT annual soybean commitment alone represents a major market opportunity for U.S. producers, especially in key states such as Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota — and for U.S. sorghum growers in the High Plains. The lifting of tariffs on beef, pork and dairy also opens additional channels for livestock- and dairy-product exporters.

At Kansas State University, Dr. Allen Featherstone, head of the Department of Agricultural Economics, calls the deal an encouraging sign for U.S. farmers — especially after years of market turbulence.

“It certainly is a bright spot and big news,” Featherstone says. “Traditionally, China has been buying between 25 and 34 million metric tons. So certainly, the 25 million for the next three years will put that in the range of what historically has been done. The 12 million between now and January certainly is a heavy lift but also a big buy.”

Timing And The Broader Picture

According to the White House, the buys start immediately: 12 MMT in the last two months of 2025 and then on into each of the next three years. The scope of the deal also signals more than agriculture: China has agreed to suspend retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods announced since March 4, 2025 and to remove its “unreliable entity” and end-user listing measures.

Featherstone says that timing matters, since late fall and early winter are when China typically turns to U.S. soybeans before switching to Brazil in February and March.

“Based on current prices, it’s about a $4.5 billion deal between now and January,” he explains. “If you look at where we are the next three years, it’s about a $10 billion deal — and that’s good news.”

He points out that soybeans remain the No. 1 U.S. export to China, making the commodity a central part of trade negotiations.

“For the last three years, soybeans are the number one import in China from the U.S.,” Featherstone says. “As they’re trying to get leverage over the U.S., the soybean market is one of the places where they can have leverage.”

The Next Hurdle? Tracking the Purchases Amid a Government Shutdown

While the commitments are substantial, Featherstone cautions that verifying China’s purchases will be more difficult due to the ongoing U.S. government shutdown, which has delayed USDA export reporting.

“Tracking will be important,” he says. “Last week they purchased three vessels — about 180,000 metric tons. There are sources besides the government, but certainly not having the government data is a problem.”

Without weekly USDA export reports, private-sector analysts are relying on commercial shipping data and trade wire confirmations to track shipments. Economists warn that these unofficial estimates often vary widely, adding uncertainty to market reactions.

Opportunities and Caveats

Agribusiness groups, U.S. exporters and farm economists will be tracking how the commitments translate into actual purchases and shipping logistics. The upside is clear: large volume commitments from China boost U.S. export potential, may help stabilize or raise soybean, sorghum and other commodity prices, and can provide relief to ag sectors hard-hit by prior trade disruptions.

But there are caution flags too. Commitments do not always guarantee immediate shipments. Market conditions, logistics, currency movements, and China’s domestic production may influence actual demand and timing.

Exporters will want to monitor how quickly China follows through, whether the buys are genuinely incremental (vs. simply re-directing existing purchases) and how U.S. logistics chain handles increased volumes.

How This Will Impact Farmers and Ranchers in the Months Ahead

According to the White House fact sheet, here’s how the trade and economic deal, reached between President Donald J. Trump and President Xi Jinping of China, China committed to buying large amounts of soybeans, but China also said it would start purchasing sorghum again. On the livestock front, tariffs were suspended on beef, pork, dairy and more.

So, what should farmers and ranchers watch in the months ahead?

Soybeans: Given the huge volume — 12 MMT in 2025, then 25 MMT annually — soybean exporters will want to watch new crop availability, global competition (e.g., Brazil, Argentina) and U.S. export origination points.
Sorghum & hardwood logs: These categories were specifically called out for resumption of trade, suggesting new or renewed market access in China.
Livestock, dairy & other ag products: With tariffs suspended on beef, pork, dairy, and aquatic products, U.S. meat and dairy exporters may gain longer-term access to Chinese markets.
Tariff & non-tariff measures: The removal of retaliatory tariffs and other counters means fewer barriers for U.S. ag exports, but exporters should still watch for regulatory or sanitary measures that often influence trade.
Supply chain & logistics readiness: Meeting large volume commitments will test U.S. export capacity, shipping, port access and coordination between exporters and farmers.

Looking Ahead

The China-U.S. deal marks a potentially significant turning point for U.S. agricultural exports in 2025: large-scale Chinese commitments, tariff relief, and expanded access could open new markets and relieve pressure in certain ag sectors.

But the real story will be how fast, how reliably, and how fully China follows through with purchases — and how U.S. producers, exporters, and logistics systems respond.

China Tariff Reduction is a Win for U.S. Pig Farmers

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 22:10:58 GMT

U.S. pork exports to China in the first seven months of the year were down 13%, largely due to retaliatory tariffs. Last week in the Republic of Korea, President Donald J. Trump reached a trade and economic deal with President Xi Jinping of China that includes suspending retaliatory tariffs set in March.

This historic agreement includes Chinese commitments to halt the flow of precursors used to make fentanyl into the U.S., effectively eliminate China’s current and proposed export controls on rare earth elements and other critical minerals, end Chinese retaliation against U.S. semiconductor manufacturers and other major U.S. companies and open China’s market to U.S. soybeans and other agricultural exports.

“In a win for U.S. agriculture and America’s pork producers, China has suspended its retaliatory tariffs set in March,” says National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) president Duane Stateler, an Ohio pork producer. “We are very pleased to see the Trump administration answer the widespread call of agriculture, including persistent requests from the National Pork Producers Council, to negotiate for tariff removal and allow business with China to return to a more market-driven norm unburdened by these costly taxes.”

The U.S. Meat Export Federation said in a statement on Monday that they are encouraged by the progress being made in trade negotiations with China, and appreciate the Trump administration’s emphasis on restoring market access for U.S. agricultural exports.

“If China follows through on its commitment to suspend all retaliatory tariffs announced since March 4, and to suspend or remove all retaliatory non-tariff countermeasures taken since that date, this puts U.S. pork in a much more competitive position in the Chinese market,” USMEF president and CEO Dan Halstrom said in a statement. “If the removal of non-tariff barriers means that China will promptly renew the U.S. beef plant and cold storage registrations it has allowed to expire over the past nine months, this will restore access to a critical beef export market. China’s recent delisting of some U.S. beef plants for technical violations is also a retaliatory measure that must be addressed. We are anxious to see further details on these issues.”

Here’s a look at the actions that have been agreed to by China and the U.S., acccording to Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Strikes Deal on Economic and Trade Relations with China :

CHINESE ACTIONS:

China will suspend the global implementation of the expansive new export controls on rare earths and related measures that it announced on Oct. 9.
China will issue general licenses valid for exports of rare earths, gallium, germanium, antimony and graphite for the benefit of U.S. end users and their suppliers around the world. The general license means the de facto removal of controls China imposed in April 2025 and October 2022.
China will take significant measures to end the flow of fentanyl to the U.S. Specifically, China will stop the shipment of certain designated chemicals to North America and strictly control exports of certain other chemicals to all destinations in the world.
China will suspend all of the retaliatory tariffs that it has announced since March 4, 2025. This includes tariffs on a vast swath of U.S. agricultural products: chicken, wheat, corn, cotton, sorghum, soybeans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy products.
China will suspend or remove all of the retaliatory non-tariff countermeasures taken against the U.S. since March 4, including China’s listing of certain American companies on its end user and unreliable entity lists.
China will purchase at least 12 million metric tons (MMT) of U.S. soybeans during the last two months of 2025 and also purchase at least 25 MMT of U.S. soybeans in each of 2026, 2027, and 2028. Additionally, China will resume purchases of U.S. sorghum and hardwood logs.
China will take appropriate measures to ensure the resumption of trade from Nexperia’s facilities in China, allowing production of critical legacy chips to flow to the rest of the world.
China will remove measures it took in retaliation for the U.S.’s announcement of a Section 301 investigation on China’s Targeting the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance, and remove sanctions imposed on various shipping entities.
China will further extend the expiration of its market-based tariff exclusion process for imports from the U.S. and exclusions will remain valid until Dec. 31, 2026.
China will terminate its various investigations targeting U.S. companies in the semiconductor supply chain, including its antitrust, anti-monopoly, and anti-dumping investigations.

AMERICAN ACTIONS:

The U.S. will lower the tariffs on Chinese imports imposed to curb fentanyl flows by removing 10 percentage points of the cumulative rate, effective Nov. 10, and will maintain its suspension of heightened reciprocal tariffs on Chinese imports until November 10, 2026. (The current 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect during this suspension period.)
The U.S. will further extend the expiration of certain Section 301 tariff exclusions, currently due to expire on November 29, 2025, until Nov. 10, 2026.
The U.S. will suspend for one year, starting on Nov. 10, the implementation of the interim final rule titled Expansion of End-User Controls to Cover Affiliates of Certain Listed Entities.
The U.S. will suspend for one year, starting on Nov. 10, implementation of the responsive actions taken pursuant to the Section 301 investigation on China’s Targeting the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance. In the meantime, the U.S. will negotiate with China pursuant to Section 301 while continuing its historic cooperation with the Republic of Korea and Japan on revitalizing American shipbuilding.

Prop 12, Trade and MAHA Top Pork Producer Conversations in DC

Fri, 12 Sep 2025 20:18:06 GMT

Although this wasn’t Lori Stevermer’s first Legislative Action Conference (LAC) in Washington, D.C., she says it was certainly a memorable one. Pork producers from 21 states gathered to call on Congress to deliver an urgent legislative fix to California’s Proposition 12 in Farm Bill 2.0, to open up trade access and to discuss the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) report.

“I always leave our legislative action conferences energized,” says Stevermer, National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) immediate past president and a Minnesota pig farmer. “It’s great to see all the producers fly in from all the states. They’re eager and excited to go talk to their legislators.”

She says this was one of the largest conferences she remembers with 24 first-timers in attendance. The feedback was positive overall. She credits this to the state of the pork industry with many producers seeing some profitability now.

Farm Bill 2.0 was a key point of emphasis in conversations between producers and legislative staff.

“We had a variety of responses,” Stevermer notes. “The Republicans are generally optimistic that a Farm Bill 2.0 will happen. Chairman Thompson is still very much advocating for it. From our Democratic members of Congress, the response was more varied. Some are cautiously optimistic something could happen yet this fall and some are less optimistic.”

With pork exports down slightly this year, she says retaliatory tariffs were also a big topic of conversation.

“Some countries are up, but exports to some of our long-time trading partners like Japan and South Korea are down,” Stevermer says. “That’s concerning. We are always asking for market access and new market access.”

MAHA on the Mind
Other topics including U.S.-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA) being up for renewal in 2026 and labor shortages with a request for labor reform legislation that provides year-round access to the H2-A visas were also discussed. Stevermer says producers also engaged in many conversations about MAHA throughout the fly-in.

“As pork producers, the definition of ultra processed foods is on our mind,” she says. “If bacon and sausages are classified as ultra-processed foods, that could hurt that breakfast food market.”

Of course, she loves the fact that protein is having a moment. It’s a nuanced topic, she admits. When it comes to wholesome, nutrient-dense proteins, pork and beef win.

“We’ll lean into that,” Stevermer says. “But if you read through that report a little bit further, there’s some discussion on moving from a risk-based science that we here do in the U.S. to more of a hazard-based science. When we started explaining these concerns, the legislators and staff did sit up and take notice.”

Bacon-Lined Walls and Food Trucks
NPPC also hosted its popular Baconfest reception, which brought together congressional leaders, staff and industry stakeholders to celebrate America’s pork producers and showcase the vital role pork plays on dinner plates across America.

With close to 1,000 people attending the event held at the Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building, Stevermer says it was an awesome showcase of bacon and pork.

“It’s always great to see what the chefs come up with,” she says. “But the best part was hearing staffers say, ‘I hear a lot about Baconfest. I want to be there.’ I think the event generates a lot of positivity and awareness for pork. Plus, it gives us another chance to talk to those members of Congress or their staff.”

NPPC also rolled out a food truck on Capitol Hill, serving breakfast to lawmakers, staff and media. Branded with the message “Breakfast is Essential. So is Fixing Prop 12,” the truck spotlighted how a patchwork of state laws, spurred by Prop 12, threatens affordable access to everyday staples like bacon, ham and sausage.

“America’s pork producers take pride in providing safe, nutritious, and affordable pork to families across the country,” NPPC president Duane Stateler, an Ohio pork producer says. “The patchwork of laws set in motion by California’s Proposition 12 threatens our mission by raising prices for consumers, reducing choices, and putting thousands of family farms at risk. Congress must act now to ensure a patchwork of regulations does not further threaten this industry we have worked so hard to build.”

China Slaps Initial Duties on EU Pork Imports

Fri, 05 Sep 2025 15:20:12 GMT

China on Friday placed initial anti-dumping duties of up to 62.4% on pork imports worth over $2 billion from the European Union, deepening trade tensions that spiked when the bloc imposed tariffs on China-made electric vehicles.

The Ministry of Commerce’s preliminary investigation into pork products found evidence of dumping that damaged the domestic industry and approved duties starting on September 10, according to a release on Friday.

Companies that collaborated with the investigation, among them Spanish, Danish and Dutch firms, received duties ranging from 15.6% to 32.7%. All other firms were assigned 62.4%.

(Reuters)

Launched in June last year, the investigation is widely seen as retaliation for EU tariffs on electric vehicles and has hit major producers such as Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark.

The European Commission said the investigation was based on “questionable allegations and insufficient evidence” and that it had not yet determined its response.

“But I can categorically assure you that we will take all the necessary steps to defend our producers and industry,” a spokesperson said.

China also has an anti-subsidy case looking into EU dairy exports and anti-dumping measures on EU brandy, which allows exporters to avoid duties if they commit to sell at no lower than a set minimum price.

Beijing has pressed Brussels to replace EV tariffs with a similar price commitment by China-based producers, but negotiations between the two sides have failed to yield an agreement.

Friday’s decision is bad news for producers who had hoped Beijing’s decision to extend the investigation for six months in June this year meant a deal over the bloc’s electric vehicle tariffs was in the offing.

A significant portion of the bloc’s pork shipments to China consists of offal - including pig ears, noses and feet - highly valued in Chinese cuisine but with few alternative destinations.

“This is worrying news for us. We’re concerned about the impact this will have on prices on the European market,” said Anne Richard, director of French pork industry association INAPORC.

The decision is only preliminary and could theoretically be changed when the investigation ends in December. There is also precedent for China extending investigations after levying tariffs, as in the case of Canadian canola.

Even Rogers Pay, an analyst at Beijing-based Trivium China who specialises in agriculture, said with just a few months left the odds of finding a negotiated solution were “increasingly slim”.

(Reporting by Beijing Newsroom, Gus Trompiz in Paris, Philip Blenkinsop in Brussels; Editing by Kevin Liffey, Alexandra Hudson)

'A Bit of Relief' Follows Japan Trade and Investment Agreement

Tue, 12 Aug 2025 19:30:40 GMT

Japan’s lead tariff negotiator was in Washington, D.C. this past week seeking to finalize details of the U.S.-Japan Trade and Investment Agreement that was recently announced by the White House .

“I think there was a bit of relief in the Japanese trade, having met with several importer distributors and member exporters while I was there,” says U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) President and CEO Dan Halstrom who was in Tokyo when the agreement was announced. “I think the fact that a deal had been done on autos, which is obviously one of the big sticking points with Japan, and laid to rest any concerns there might have been on possible retaliation from the Japanese side, should a deal not have been reached.”

U.S. red meat exports to Japan were put on a level playing field with other competing nations under the 2020 U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement, signed during the first Trump administration, Halstrom notes.

“Most pork is imported at zero tariff,” Halstrom says. “While Japan’s beef tariff is currently the highest of any major import market at 21.6%, it is level with other suppliers and is scheduled to phase to 9% by 2033.”

He says the 2020 agreement put the U.S. on a level playing field, even though U.S. duties are higher than some other countries.

“The fact that we got this deal done, at least at the minimum, maintains that level playing field,” Halstrom adds. “I think that’s important to remember, because it wasn’t that long ago where we were at a severe disadvantage tariff wise.”

Industry Hopeful for U.S.- Indonesia Trade Deal to Expand Red Meat Markets

Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:58:53 GMT

With the announcement of the U.S. and Indonesian framework for a trade agreement, more access for U.S. beef and pork could become a reality.

U.S. Meat Export Federation Vice President of Economic Analysis Erin Borror says the U.S. has had limited access to Indonesia. While tariffs are low at 5%, significant non-tariff trade barriers that have also been in place. These include import licensing regime, the commodity balance and facility registration, or plant-by-plant approvals for U.S. beef.

“Those kind of three pillars of market access barriers are how Indonesia has really managed imports for decades at this point,” Borror says.

Removing all non-tariff barriers would open the doors for beef demand in Indonesia.

“The opportunity there is $250 million annually,” Borror says. “That’s a short run estimate. If we remain out of that China market, having Indonesia compete on these short plates, short ribs, chuck short ribs, a number of the offal items, would be tremendous.”

In addition, U.S. pork faces similar trade barriers in Indonesia, a country with 30 million non-Muslims who have shown a growing demand for U.S. pork. Exporters and importers have seen that barrier in action so far this year.

“Trying to manage those pork imports through its variety of commodity balance and import licensing regimes, we’ve already had a doubling in our volumes to Indonesia on the pork side, albeit from a small base, but you see that strong growth,” Borror adds. “African Swine Fever remains rampant kind of in the region.”

She sees potential as Indonesian customers keep asking for more U.S. pork.

How Termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement Affects You

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 18:33:59 GMT

The U.S. Department of Commerce announced its withdrawal from and termination of the 2019 Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico on July 14, the final day of the 90-day review period.

With the termination of the agreement, the Commerce Department issued an antidumping duty order, resulting in duties of 17.09% on most imports of tomatoes from Mexico. The department said antidumping duties are calculated to measure the percentage by which Mexican tomatoes have been sold in the U.S. at unfair prices.

“Mexico remains one of our greatest allies, but for far too long our farmers have been crushed by unfair trade practices that undercut pricing on produce like tomatoes. That ends today,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in a release. “This rule change is in line with President Trump’s trade policies and approach with Mexico.”

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) recently joined over 30 business groups and agricultural organizations to express concern over suspending an antidumping investigation on tomatoes from Mexico, a move that could negatively affect U.S. food prices and American jobs.

The agricultural organizations shared that a decrease in tomato imports resulting from tariffs would lead to food price inflation, with a 25% decrease causing an average 13% price increase for U.S. consumers. Jobs in both the agriculture and food sectors would be adversely affected.

“Nationwide, the import and sale of Mexican tomatoes generate an estimated $8.3 billion in economic impact,” NPPC wrote in Capital Update. “U.S.-owned companies employ nearly 50,000 workers in jobs supporting the movement of tomatoes from Mexico into regions around the country.”

Agricultural groups pointed out in the letter to Lutnick that U.S. growers and distributors import more than 2 million metric tons of tomatoes each year to meet U.S. demand and 90% comes from Mexico. The groups also pointed out that domestic tomato production has decreased because of adverse weather, labor shortages, high production costs and other factors, “making trading partners like Mexico especially crucial.”

Tom Stenzel, executive director of the Controlled Environment Agriculture Alliance shared with The Packer that the past five Tomato Suspension Agreements did not fail, but rather benefited American consumers.

The CEA Alliance expressed disappointment that the Commerce Department chose to proceed with termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement with Mexico, despite multiple U.S. agriculture and business stakeholders urging renegotiation of the agreement.

President Trump Threatens New Round of Tariffs Over the Weekend: Here’s the Latest

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 13:39:37 GMT

U.S. commodity markets were down to start the week in Sunday night trade as the markets digested the latest tariff announcement by President Donald Trump. On Saturday, President Trump threatened to impose 30% tariffs on Mexico and the European Union starting on August 1. The announcement came after a string of new tariff threats last week, as the Trump administration’s deadline for trade deals came due.

On Monday, President Trump continued with tariff talk, saying he would implement “severe tariffs” on Russia unless a peace deal is reached with Ukraine within 50 days.

He provided few details on how they would be implemented but described them as 100% secondary tariffs, meaning they would target Russia’s trading partners in an effort to isolate Moscow in the global economy.

The latest tariff threats weren’t good news for farmers looking to price fertilizer for fall, as StoneX Group says Russia is the United States’ top destination for both urea and UAN imports. StoneX points out Russia’s market chair has “grown substantially in recent years.”

Monday’s news follows a week where many anticipated trade deals. Instead, President Trump made a series of announcements with new tariffs. The new tariffs on Mexico and the European Union, which Trump announced Saturday, capped off a week of sweeping tariff threats.

Earlier in the week, Trump warned of a possible:

50% tariff on all copper imports
50% tariff on all goods from Brazil
35% tariff on Canadian goods
25% tariff on goods from Japan
25% tariff on imports from South Korea
200% tariff on imported pharmaceuticals

The positive side of the announcements is the Trump administration says any products covered under the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement (UMCA) won’t face the new tariffs.

President Trump also sent letters to both Japan and South Korea last week, saying their goods will be taxed at 25% starting August 1st.

The President posted the two letters he sent to those countries’ leaders on his Truth Social site. In the letter to South Korea, he stated when it comes to Korea’s tariff and non-tariff polices and trade barriers, the relationship between the two countries has been far from reciprocal. He added the 25% tariff was far less than what he says is needed to eliminate a trade deficit disparity.

The letter to Japan added if Japanese companies decide to build or manufacture a product within the U.S., there will be no tariffs. Japanese and U.S. negotiators have been working for several weeks to try and reach a deal.

Lack of Progress Impacts Commodity Prices
The lack of trade announcements last week was just one factor that caused corn prices to tank, according to AgMarket.net’s Matt Bennett. While rain in the upper Corn Belt was also bearish for the markets, little to no movement on trade is also pressuring prices.

“We had no trade announcements, and then we continued to talk about tariffs. The unfortunate reality right now is it appears the administration is playing the long game, trying to get people to come to the table with better trade deals than what we currently have seen. But it certainly isn’t doing any favors for the corn market,” Bennett said on U.S. Farm Report this weekend. “I think something like a big trade agreement certainly could tilt the tide more in the favor of the corn market moving higher. Until you get that, with weather being as good as what it is, there’s nothing there.”

It’s not all bearish, though. Arlan Suderman of StoneX Group says the 50% tariff on Brazil is actually bullish for beef.

“We already have a shortage of protein in America with the cattle herd being shrinking over recent years because of lingering drought in the western half of the country, and supplies are tight. We’re just getting to the point of trying to rebuild those supplies, which holding back heifers, tightens up the supply of meat even more. We’re feeding to record-high carcass weights to try to fill the void. We’re increasing imports to record levels. Brazil is the primary supplier of those imports: 27% of our imports come from Brazil in the first five months of the year, according to the latest data we have available, that’s 666 million pounds. That’s 4% of consumption,” Suderman says.

If you think 4% doesn’t sound like a big deal, Suderman says it is - especially considering meat demand in the U.S. has turned out to be inelastic.

“We’ve been shifting from a starch-based diet more heavily toward protein-based. And as the prices go up, we’re actually increasing demand for beef and the other proteins - but we don’t have the supply of it. I think that could be a real problem going forward for the meat industry and the meat supply. We will have to find somewhere else to get that meat,” Suderman says.

Are Trade Deals Close?

While President Trump initially stated he had reached trade agreements with 200 countries, only a few have been officially announced. These include deals with China, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam, however. Negotiations with other countries are ongoing, with the administration extending the deadline for tariff-related negotiations to August 1.

The European Union says it was working on sealing a trade deal with the U.S. by the end of this month, and the European Commission president says the EU was working closely with the Trump administration to reach a deal.

Trade Dominance or Trade Domino? Trump Announces Trade Deal with Vietnam

Wed, 02 Jul 2025 19:22:27 GMT

Less than a week before the Trump administration’s 90-day pause on many reciprocal tariffs with several countries is set to expire, President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam on Wednesday. The deal, according to Trump, allows the U.S. “total access” to Vietnam’s markets with a zero tariff on U.S. products exported to Vietnam.

A deal with Vietnam could benefit U.S. commodities that face higher tariffs, including fruits, nuts, pork and beef exports.

The president made the announcement on his Truth Social site, saying Vietnam will pay the U.S. a 20% tariff on any goods sent into the U.S. and a 40% tariff on any goods that originate in another country and then are transferred to Vietnam before coming to the U.S.

🚨 pic.twitter.com/i35oMvbEvW
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 2, 2025

When trade talks started with Vietnam last month, Vietnamese officials had pledged to boost purchases of American goods, including farm products and energy. However, no specific trade volumes were announced with the trade deal.

What’s the potential for agriculture? Dan Basse, founder and president of AgResource Company, says this could help gain greater access for fruits, nuts and horticulture products, which have tariffs ranging from 15% to 20%, versus corn, soybeans and soybean meal.

“In the case of corn and soybeans and meal and wheat, we’re talking about tariffs today that are 1% to 2%, that’ll go to zero, so it’s something, don’t get me wrong, it’s 5¢ or 10¢ in a bushel of corn, maybe 7¢ to 12¢ on beans, but it is not the panacea that’s going to get a lot of Vietnamese demand going forward,” Basse says.

The trade deal came as a bit of a surprise on Wednesday. Earlier this week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this week that while the focus of the administration is getting the One Big Beautiful Bill across the finish line this week, that focus shifts back to trade next week. Bessent warned countries could be notified of sharply higher tariffs as a deadline approaches.

Is this trade deal the start of a domino of trade deals that could fall ahead of next week’s deadline? It’s possible, but Stand Grain’s Joe Vaclavik says many more are needed to shift the sentiment in the commodity market to a bullish tone.

“Get a trade deal with China that mirrors Phase One, that includes large purchase agreements, then it’s a game changer,” Vaclavik says. “But anything less than that, as of right now, I don’t think is going be a market mover or a game changer from a supply and demand standpoint.”

Vaclavik agrees with Basse, in that Vietnam alone isn’t a huge demand story for corn and soybeans.

“I think you’re going to see a lot of these announcements like with Vietnam where it sounds great, but Vietnam consumed 16 million metric tons of corn last year. That’s not enough to really put them on the map as something that’s going to move the market. You need a China, a country who consumes 300 million metric tons of corn per year to come in and agree to agree and also agree to buy. And that’s how you move the needle.”

Push for More Protein?

Protein exports are also an area of opportunity. U.S. dairy exports have shown strong growth into Vietnam, with increases in nonfat dry milk powder, whey, and lactose.

As for meat exports, figures from the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) show shipments to Vietnam in 2024 included:

5,052 metric tons of beef and beef variety meat valued at $43 million
and 4,662 metric tons of pork and variety meat with a value of $10 million.

The U.S. current ranks fifth in top exporters to Vietnam, but it’s key to note the U.S. is the largest trading partner with Vietnam that does not have a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). With talks of tariff reductions, it could hep make U.S. pork more competitively priced compared to big competitors like Brazil, the European Union and Canada. Those countries currently have duty-free access to Vietnam.

The current tariff rates vary by product, including:

Chilled beef carcass/ ½ carcass: 30%
Chilled beef bone-in: 20%
Chilled beef boneless: 14%,
Frozen beef bone-in/frozen carcass 20%
Frozen boneless beef: 14%
Chilled pork: 22%
Frozen pork: 10%
Offal: 8%.

Fact sheet on meat exports to Vietnam

(USMEF )

Vietnam’s Growing Population

Farm Journal’s Michelle Rook visited Vietnam earlier this year and saw firsthand the potential growth. Vietnam has a 100 million people and a growing middle class looking to add protein to their diet. With limited soybean crushing capacity, the country currently depends on soybean meal imports for their livestock and aquaculture feed needs.

She reports the country’s soy processing industry is small with only four plants, which import 2 million tons of soybeans annually, including from the U.S. According to Rook’s reporting, that could be an area where soybean exports could grow, fueling Vietnam’s growing aquaculture and livestock production.

You can read and watch Rook’s in-depth reporting here .

Diversification in Pork Export Market Gives Stability Amidst Tariff Talks

Mon, 09 Jun 2025 14:55:33 GMT

There was an elephant in the room during the Global Protein Update Pork Academy session at World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa. When discussing exports, tariffs trailed the discussion like a shadow.

Dan Halstrom, president and CEO, U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) explains in January 2025, Chinese tariffs on pork were 37%, which skyrocketed to 172% in April after “Liberation Day,” and eased back down to 57% in May.

While no one really knows how things will look moving forward, Halstrom is hopeful.

“There’s one important thing to remember. Back in 2020, during Trump’s first administration, there were quite a few things that happened in our part of agriculture that worked to our benefit from the China Phase One Agreement. Business between then and now was pretty good, increasing every year on pork. I think something will happen,” he says.

Global pork markets in better shape than we think

The rest of the export story in recent history remains bright. Last year was a record year in both pork volume and value globally. This year, through the first quarter at least, “we’re basically steady with last year’s record pace,” Halstrom says.

Pork export value per head has increased by 24% in the last five years. The value added to each hog from the export market is a record $66 per head.

While China is obviously on producers’ minds, they are not the biggest players in American pork exports.

“The goal of the industry — packers, traders, us as a trade association — is to diversify these markets as much as possible, not be relying on any one or two markets, particularly not relying on China,” he emphasizes.

Mexico gives the most export value per head, adding $19.90. Emerging markets, including Southeast Asia and Central America, are the fastest growing sector, accounting for $15.42 in value. Japan is next at $9.51, followed by China at $8.88, Canada at $6.28, and Korea at $5.83.

Developing relationships and access to American pork

Market growth is developed with strategic partnerships and hard work from USMEF’s global boots-on-the-ground team, including tactics like a Meat on Wheels truck, new U.S. processed pork snack products, promotions and giant industry events.

“These events connect buyers with U.S. pork suppliers. We put the buyer and seller together,” he says.

The results of these relationships are obvious in the record export volume and value.

The quality shared between our American sectors help, too. He says in some countries that already had a large beef demand have increased their pork consumption, and vice versa in pork-preferring countries.

Free trade agreements are also large players in growth. There has been enormous growth in regions with free trade agreements, like Korea and Central America. Zero or low duties and no non-tariff trade barriers are the key for successful export growth, Halstrom says.

Your next read: 3 Factors Fueling Americans’ Obsession with Protein

Sharp Drop in Beef and Pork Exports to China Causes April Meat Exports to Take a Hit

Fri, 06 Jun 2025 17:51:08 GMT

The ongoing trade dispute with China reportedly made progress this week. In what marked the first call since the trade conflict began in February, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that he held an hour-and-a-half conversation with President Xi Jinping, saying the conversation “resulted in a very positive conclusion for both countries”.

An in-person meeting between trade and economic leaders of both countries is on the calendar next. But as the negotiations play out, export demand is starting to take a hit, especially when tariffs hit their peak in April.

U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) says due in part to a sharp decline in shipments to China, April exports of U.S. beef and pork came in lower than a year ago. USMEF says a major headwind that showed up in the April numbers is China’s retaliatory duties on both beef and pork from the U.S.

But that’s not the only hurdle. Beef exports into China are also waiting for China to renew establishment registrations for U.S. beef plants and cold storage facilities, the majority of which expired in mid-March. This is a non-tariff trade barrier that is hurting beef exports.

According to USDA data, USMEF says April beef exports were 10% lower than April 2024. Value also fell, down 8% to $824.5 million. The biggest decline, by far, is China. Beef exports to China dropped 70% — that makes sense when you consider China’s total duties on U.S. beef peaked at 147% in April. At the same time, the fact that China hasn’t re-established U.S. plant registrations also caused exports to fall.

Overall, beef exports to Mexico also came in lower. However, USMEF says that was partially offset by larger exports to South Korea, Japan and Central and South America.

(USDA)

Pork exports fell 15% compared to a year prior, which is the lowest in 10 months. The value fell to 675.3 million, representing a 13% decline. USMEF says exports to China, which are mainly pork variety meats, dropped 35% during that time. Pork also faced a high tariff during April, peaking at 172%. But pork exports also slipped to Mexico, Japan and Canada — with exports to Canada down 45%.

The bright spots for U.S. pork exports in April were Colombia and Central Mexico — which are hitting a record pace.

U.S. Farm Report spoke to USMEF Dan Halstrom just hours after President Trump posted a more optimistic view of the relationship with China on social media. He says resolving issues with China will only fuel the strong start to the year.

(USDA)

“There’s no doubt outside of China, the rest of the business during the first part of this year and coming off records from last year is fantastic — record breaking in terms of demand,” Halstrom says. “China’s been the X factor. And through the first three months of this year before the disruption, things look pretty good. The April meat export stats just came out, and what’s down is China. We knew that would happen in April. So, this news couldn’t be more timely. We have to get people to the table. This was a necessary first step. And it’s great news the A-Team is going to get engaged and hopefully bring this back around to get some stability back into the market.”

The “A-team” Halstrom is referring to is key members from Trump’s cabinet. That includes treasury secretary Scott Bessent, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick and U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer.

“We need some sort of an agreement because there’s so many things going on. It’s not only tariff related,” Halstrom says. “In fact, on the beef side, it’s not tariff related. It’s non-tariff trade issues. We have approximately 400 beef establishments that have not been relisted in the China cipher system. So, it doesn’t matter what your duty is if your plants aren’t registered. This is at the top of the list on the beef side. On the pork side, the plants are listed, which is great news, but we still have a pretty hefty tariff. Uncertainty and instability in the market right now caused around China is a real headwind we have to get beyond.”

Halstrom says USMEF’s outlook for the remainder for 2025 is for exports to return to a strong pace, which was a theme during the first quarter of the year.

“For the pork side, our forecast, which assumes the current situation or something improved, shows we’re basically steady with a year ago — which was a record a year,” Halstrom says. “So, the demand is still very, very strong. Now, the caveat is what happens with China going forward on pork, and definitely on beef. On the beef side, our forecast is down 6% — but that’s with no beef plants relisted for China. Outside of China, beef demand is, in our opinion, fantastic — even at higher prices. Despite the uncertainty, we’re well positioned.”

Looking back at 2024, beef export value climbed 5% from 2023 despite a slight decrease in volume. Part of that was due to historically tight cattle supplies creating less meat for exports.

Pork exports to Mexico in 2024 totaled 1.15 million metric tons in 2024, up 5% from the enormous total exported in 2023. Export value climbed 10% in 2024 to $2.58 billion – more than doubling since 2020.

China Has A Big Appetite for Pig's Feet, Tails, Ears, Offal and Neck Bones But Tariffs Slow Trade

Thu, 05 Jun 2025 18:48:44 GMT

When it comes to trade and U.S. pork, China is incredibly unique, says Brett Stuart of Global AgriTrends, which advises companies all over the world on agriculture trade.

“The only time we’ve ever sent whole muscle cut pork to China was during African Swine Fever, when they killed two-thirds of their swine herd,” he says. “However, China loves feet, tails, ears, offal and neck bones — all that stuff we don’t have a home for and the only alternative is rendering or a landfill, which is tragic.”

When the tariffs escalated to 150%, shipments to China stopped.

“When Trump pulled those tariffs back, our ports are paying 57% tariffs in China,” Stuart explains. “You would think nothing’s going to go, but if you’re sitting on hog feet that are going to go in a landfill, you can pay 57% to send them. Just two weeks ago, China booked 7,500 tons of U.S. pork. We’re starting to see it go, but the tariffs are still a problem because of the packer margins.”

Even in the midst of a trade war, Stuart is confident deals will get made and the U.S. will have better access. Negotiations will take time, though.

“I’m betting we have a China deal, probably by the end of the year,” he says. “You have to remember the Phase One deal was signed with purchase commitments. Trump said you will buy 200 billion in U.S. goods, and it worked out to be almost 39 billion a year in U.S. agriculture. Rather than negotiating over [sanitary and phytosanitary] issues or tariffs, he said, ‘you just figure out how to buy it.’”

Stuart sees evidence of a similar scenario unfolding today.

“If you look at the notes from the Switzerland meetings two weeks ago with China, the U.S. mentioned purchase commitments,” he explains. “If we do a Phase Two deal with China with purchase commitments, we could see a scenario where all of a sudden, China is canceling Brazilian corn orders and booking U.S. corn orders. The biggest ag exports we ever sent to China were on the back of Phase One.”

To learn how China’s current economy gives the U.S. leverage for making deals, hear what Stuart has to say on “AgriTalk.” He also talks about non-trade barriers to pork exports to Australia and possible deals with the European Union.

Your next read: Why Cutting Corners Doesn’t Work in the Pork Industry

Pigs Can't Fly: U.S. High-End Livestock Breeders Lose Millions in China Tariff Fallout

Thu, 22 May 2025 13:33:21 GMT

Dr. Mike Lemmon’s pigs, each valued between $2,500 and $5,000, were supposed to be on a plane bound for Hangzhou, China, from St. Louis in April, where’d they spend the flight snoring, play fighting and snacking on oats and husked corn before taking up residence at Chinese hog farms.

Instead, many went to a local Indiana slaughterhouse for less than $200 each after the Chinese buyer canceled the order within a week of China implementing retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. in April.

China is one of the biggest importers of American breeding pigs and other livestock genetic material such as cattle semen. These lucrative niche export markets had been growing, but dried up since U.S. President Donald Trump started a trade war with Beijing.

U.S. farmers and exporters said the dispute has already cost them millions of dollars and jeopardized prized trade relationships that took years to develop.

Though Washington and Beijing agreed to pause tariffs last week, exporters said Trump’s unpredictable trade policy has caused their companies long-term damage and could encourage China and other major buyers to turn to foreign rivals like Denmark.

“We’ve got brand damage now. There’s not a week that goes by without clients asking what’s happening with the U.S.,” said Tony Clayton, owner of Clayton Agri-Marketing, a Missouri-based livestock exporting company.

(Clayton Agri-Marketing, Inc.)

“I don’t know how we can put this back together. This is long-term damage,” he said.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai said the administration was “working around the clock to secure billions of dollars in even more opportunities with our other trading partners.”

Some farmers raise pigs specifically for breeding, a niche business within the $37 billion U.S. hog industry. Farmers pay top dollar for these specialty pigs, which have favorable genetics to produce lots of healthy piglets that can eventually be processed into tasty, high-quality pork.

Lemmon, an Indiana veterinarian and farm owner, has been selling pigs worldwide for over 30 years. He said he spent more than a year working on the $2.4 million sale of the pedigreed pigs to China. He noted they were carefully bred for good health, litter size and high fat content that leads to richly marbled, tender meat when cooked.

“It’s devastating when it happens,” Lemmon said, referencing the sale he lost.

He said he plans to stay in the breeding business, and is working to rekindle the deal with his Chinese buyer during the tariff pause.

(Clayton Agri-Marketing, Inc.)

Roughly half of the world’s pigs live on Chinese farms. The country has purchased large quantities of breeding pigs from the U.S. since an outbreak of African swine fever, a virus with a near-total fatality rate, wiped out millions of the country’s hogs in 2018.

Shipping livestock is lucrative but time-consuming. Shippers must personally fly with the animals or hire an on-board attendant who can make the rounds to keep their pricey passengers well-hydrated and comfortable during a long flight. When not working, the attendants chat with the flight crew or sometimes lie in sleeping bags next to the animals in the chilly cargo bay, exporters and farmers said.

China has also been the biggest importer of semen from U.S. dairy cows, known for producing large amounts of protein-rich milk. But “Not one unit of semen is going to China right now,” Jay Weiker, president of the National Association of Animal Breeders, said, noting China had been importing one-quarter of all U.S. cattle semen, which they use to artificially inseminate their dairy cows.

The Chinese milk industry began importing large amounts of cattle semen to improve the genetics of domestic dairy cows after a deadly scandal over contaminated milk in 2008, Weiker said. At least six children in China died and nearly 300,000 fell ill after a Chinese manufacturer added melamine, a dangerous chemical, to milk powder to make the protein levels appear higher.

Brittany Scott, owner of SMART Reproduction Services, a sheep and goat genetics company, said several foreign customers had also pulled out of deals. This left many vials of semen sitting in her Arkansas facility, frozen in tanks of liquid nitrogen and waiting for buyers.“They are eager to do their jobs,” Scott said of her male goats and sheep. “They understand the assignment and they do really well.”

However, the work of selling their product has proven harder after Trump announced sweeping tariffs in April, and China retaliated.

The lost sales have been “a punch in the gut,” Scott said.

(Reporting by Heather Schlitz. Editing by Emily Schmall and Tom Polansek; Editing by David Gregorio)

Your next read: Is Tariff Pause First Step to Restore Access to China for U.S. Pork and Beef?

Brazil Meatpacker JBS Sees Slim Trade War Impact as Q1 Earnings Top Forecasts

Wed, 14 May 2025 13:53:25 GMT

JBS, the world’s largest meatpacker, reported a nearly 78% annual increase in net profit driven by its poultry and pork businesses in Brazil and the U.S., and said on Tuesday the global trade war has so far had little impact on its business.

Its net profit rose to 2.92 billion reais ($521 million) in the first quarter from 1.64 billion reais a year earlier.

In a financial statement, JBS said earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization, a measure of operating income known as EBITDA, came in at 8.92 billion reais, above the 8.77 billion reais forecast by analysts.

JBS said it had a strong quarter in a seasonally weaker period of the year, when winter affects consumption in the Northern Hemisphere and sales tend to slow compared with the end-of-year holiday weeks.

The company’s net profit rose 21.2% from the previous quarter.

“Quarter after quarter, our results prove that we made the right choices in building and managing our global multi-protein platform,” Gilberto Tomazoni, global CEO of JBS, said in a statement.

In an interview, he said the company would continue to benefit from its diversified production base, which includes Brazil, Australia and the U.S., adding that the impact on its operations from the global tariff war had so far been “insignificant.”

JBS’ Seara processed foods division in Brazil and its U.S.-controlled Pilgrim’s Pride PPC.O, which processes chicken, reported record high EBITDA margins for the period, the company said.

Net revenue rose 28% to 114.1 billion reais in the first quarter from the same quarter last year but was down 2.2% from the fourth quarter.

As expected, JBS’s North America beef business continued to reel from a severe cattle shortage in the United States. While that division reported net revenue of 37.5 billion reais, a 36% annual increase, operating earnings slid to a loss of 587.2 million reais.

In Brazil, rising cattle prices are also a concern because it can mean margin compression down the road, Genial Investimentos said in a note to clients before results were released.

Other potential risks for JBS include an escalation of the global trade war, which might impact commodities exports out of the U.S. and result in a potential oversupply of chicken and or pork in the U.S., according to Goldman Sachs.

Tomazoni told Reuters potential pork and chicken oversupply in the U.S. is not a concern in the short term.

China remained a key market for JBS, taking about 23% of the company’s $4.9 billion in exports last quarter.

Sao Paulo-based JBS is very close to listing its shares on the New York Stock Exchange, with trading slated to begin next month if minority shareholders give their approval for the plan in 10 days’ time.

(Reporting by Ana Mano; Editing by Leslie Adler, Lisa Shumaker and Sonali Paul)

Is Tariff Pause First Step to Restore Access to China for U.S. Pork and Beef?

Mon, 12 May 2025 21:43:15 GMT

The trade war that essentially closed the Chinese market to U.S. meat exporters eased on May 12 after the announcement of a 90-day reduction in tariffs while the U.S. and China continue negotiations.

This announcement does not include tariffs in place prior to April 2, including steel and aluminum. U.S. pork exported to China will still face a minimum total tariff rate of 57%. Previously, U.S. pork was tariffed at 172%, which makes it impossible for U.S. pork producers to compete in that market, says the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC).

U.S. pork producers welcome news of China tariff temporary de-escalation and thank the Trump administration for making progress. It is imperative that we have access to our second largest export market for U.S. pork products, such as offals.
— NPPC (@NPPC) May 12, 2025

“America’s pork producers are encouraged by the temporary tariff reduction agreement reached by the U.S. and China,” says NPPC President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “We look forward to the continued collaboration and engagement between both countries to further reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. No other country holds a candle to our export opportunities in China, as many of our exported pork products, such as offals, are not widely consumed in the U.S. and have nowhere to go.”

Brett Stuart, economist and founder of Global AgriTrends , says he expects a resumption of U.S. pork trade under the new tariffs.

“The 90-day pause is designed to lead to a negotiation that could lift more retaliation on U.S. pork,” Stuart says. “The comments about ‘purchase commitments’ could be leading to a Phase Two agreement.”

A Step Forward
The U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) says they greatly appreciate the efforts of U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to negotiate this agreement with their Chinese counterparts, says USMEF president and CEO Dan Halstrom.

“Although this is a temporary pause, we are hopeful that it is the first step toward restoring access to China for U.S. pork and beef,” Halstrom says.

The two officials told the Associated Press (AP) that the two sides had set up consultations to continue discussing their trade issues. Bessent said following two days of talks the high tariff levels would have amounted to a complete blockage of each side’s goods — an outcome neither side wants.

“The consensus from both delegations this weekend is neither side wants a decoupling,” Bessent told AP. “And what had occurred with these very high tariffs ... was an embargo, the equivalent of an embargo. And neither side wants that. We do want trade.”

NPPC’s No. 1 priority is to help producers have economic sustainability, explains Maria C. Zieba on The PORK Podcast.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty for our producers in key markets, and with the tariffs and pork product not going through, that’s caused a lot of work over the last few months just trying to wrap our heads around all these new tariff announcements and ongoing negotiations,” Zieba says.

Your Next Read: Panic Slowly: China’s Cancellation of 12,000 Tons of U.S. Pork Sends Loud Message

Smithfield Foods Says Tariffs Make China Unviable Market for its U.S. Pork

Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:59:49 GMT

China, the world’s biggest pork consumer, is no longer a viable market for top U.S. pork processor Smithfield Foods due to retaliatory tariffs by Beijing, company executives said on Tuesday.

The sales disruption shows how the tariff war escalated by U.S. President Donald Trump is upending global trade and forcing changes at a prominent food company that pays U.S. farmers to raise hogs that are slaughtered for meat.

China increased its levies on imports of U.S. goods this month, hitting back at Trump’s decision to single out the world’s No. 2 economy for higher duties.

Beijing’s additional tariffs pushed China’s effective duty rate on U.S. pork to 172%, according to industry data.

“With China no longer essentially being available, we really had to pivot our business,” Smithfield CEO Shane Smith said on a quarterly earnings call.

Smithfield posted a 9.5% rise in total sales to $3.77 billion in the first quarter that ended on March 30, above analysts’ expectations for $3.62 billion, according to LSEG data. Shares jumped 6%.

China represents about 3% of Smithfield’s revenue, Smith said. The company has said it ships variety meat to China, such as pig stomachs, hearts and heads that U.S. consumers generally do not eat.

Before the trade war escalated, Smith said in March that Smithfield believed China would still be the best market for variety meat with increased tariffs.

“While it’s important, we do believe we have other options,” he said on Tuesday. “We’re able to ebb and flow with different markets.”

Trump has repeatedly urged Chinese President Xi Jinping to call him for discussions about a potential deal after slapping 145% tariffs on most Chinese goods.

“China, at 145%, is not a viable sales market for us at the moment,” said Donovan Owens, president of Smithfield’s fresh pork business.

Smithfield ships pork to more than 30 countries, and exports accounted for 13% of its sales last year, according to the company.

Total U.S. exports of pork products to China were valued at about $1.1 billion in 2024, U.S. government data show.

“We can’t underestimate the importance that China has been to the overall industry,” Smith said.

(Reporting by Savyata Mishra in Bengaluru and Tom Polansek in Chicago; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli, Emelia Sithole-Matarise and Aurora Ellis)

Your Next Read: Panic Slowly: China’s Cancellation of 12,000 Tons of U.S. Pork Sends Loud Message

Panic Slowly: China’s Cancellation of 12,000 Tons of U.S. Pork Sends Loud Message

Mon, 28 Apr 2025 19:24:12 GMT

It’s a mad scramble to find a new home for 12,300 metric tons of U.S. pork produced for China that was cancelled last week in the latest trade war casualty, says U.S. Meat Export Federation vice president for economic analysis Erin Borror.

The impact of this cancellation is being felt throughout the entire red meat industry, she adds. These high duties have effectively halted trade and could result in billions of lost dollars for U.S. livestock producers.

USDA says this is the largest cancellation since May 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Although Trump administration officials suggested last week that a de-escalation of trade tensions between the U.S. and China could be coming soon, USMEF says neither side has adjusted recently heightened tariff rates.

“With China imposing retaliatory duties in response to U.S. ‘reciprocal’ tariffs, China’s effective duty rate on U.S. pork and pork variety meat has reached 172%, while U.S. beef and beef variety meat are tariffed at 147%,” USMEF explains.

For the US pork, beef and poultry industry, the Chinese market is effectively closed based on these tariffs, says Brett Stuart, economist and founder of Global AgriTrends.

Where Will China’s Canceled Shipment of Pork Go?
In 2024, Chinese customs shows that the country imported a total of $4.6 billion worth of pork, with most of it sourced from non-U.S. markets. Pork shipped from the U.S. to China totaled $859 million.

One of the biggest challenges with U.S. pork destined for China is that it’s produced with special China labeling, Borror says. This makes a cancelled shipment a challenge for many reasons.

“It’s ractopamine-free product with a China label, both on the bag and the box,” Borror points out. “So, it’s costly production specific for China and thus difficult to reroute or find a new home for this product. China has unique product needs that other destinations cannot fully replace. They buy specific items at premiums that other markets are unwilling to pay, certainly at the volume and at the price that China takes.”

As a dominant buyer of variety meats, Borror estimates without China on the pork side, losses of about $8 to $10 per head across that total industry for the year, which is around a billion-dollar loss.

Can the markets rebalance? Stuart says if one market slows down or closes, usually another market opens up and the markets find a new balance. But China is different.

“What makes China unique is what they buy,” Stuart says. “We ship neck bones, heads, feet, tails, intestine, all kinds of things like that, to China, because it’s really the only market that takes those things. The question now for exporters is, what do we do with this?”

Some of this product will come back and go into rendering. However, he says rendering prices are significantly lower than any price received from China.

“We’re talking about a big backlog of products that just don’t have a home with China closed,” Stuart says. “We can’t instantly flip the switch and send everything to rendering. We’re talking 35 to 40 million lb. a month. We don’t have that rendering capacity. We can use some for pet food. We can find alternative markets for some cuts. But really, the impact is devaluation of a lot of underutilized cuts.”

Who is the Biggest Loser?
Stuart says the packer margin is hit the hardest in this situation. When offal drops, that goes right back against packer margins.

“Anyone who’s sold hogs to a packer knows you’re better off when packers are making money than when packers are not making money,” Stuart says. “That margin pressure at the packer is going to push back into the hog markets.”

Is this enough to wreck the pork market? Stuart doesn’t think so.

“It’s going to tighten the belt, especially for packers/processors, for their margins,” he says. “This does have a carry-through effect, ultimately back into hog prices.”

Challenges for Beef Producers
Meanwhile, on the beef side, China is a top customer for short plate, short rib, chuck short rib, rib finger, tiger tail, honeycomb -- very China specific products.

“Without that China bid, we’re looking at $150 to $165 per head industry loss and added up over a year that would be about a $4 billion lost opportunity on the beef side,” she says.

China’s failure to renew registrations for 400 U.S. beef facilities presents an additional barrier for U.S. exports, as the majority of U.S. beef production is currently ineligible for China, regardless of the applicable tariff rate, Borror says. Registrations for most U.S. pork facilities were renewed in March, but China has not yet renewed nine establishment registrations that expired April 20.

Will China Go All the Way?
The billion-dollar question is what next? Although President Trump made it sound like negotiations or progress are taking place, the Chinese recently came out and said, ‘we’re not even talking yet.’

“My personal opinion is that something gets done here in the next week, maybe two weeks at most,” Stuart says. “One, because these tariffs, as painful as they are for the U.S., are absolutely debilitating for China. In China you’re already seeing factories that are pulling back and slowing down, containers backing up, ships that are not sailing.”

Though this may be a “black eye to the U.S.,” Stuart doesn’t believe the Chinese economy can operate under these tariffs.

“You start closing plants on the eastern seaboard of China, and that is not just a piece of their economy, that’s the heartbeat of their economy,” he says. “The fact that these tariffs are completely untenable for both sides tells me somebody’s going to make a phone call, something’s going to break loose here. But again, it’s politics, and we’ll just have to wait and see.”

China is going after American imports across an increasing number of areas in today’s trade war, Andy Xie, an independent Chinese economist based in Shanghai, told the South China Morning Post .

“There’s no more targeting any more – it’s everything – China has to go all the way,” Xie said in the South China Morning Post. “When push comes to shove, China can ramp up production. It’s not totally self-sufficient, but even with imports cut, China won’t starve.”

It’s Time to Panic…Slowly
What should producers do in light of this chaos?

“Panic slowly,” says Brett Stuart, economist and founder of Global AgriTrends. “This story is not over yet. If you look at Trump’s negotiating style, it is the art of the deal. He lobs a grenade and blows everything up. This scares the market, scares everyone, and then ultimately he pulls back, gives the 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs and carves out some exemptions with China. What I’m saying here is this is a negotiation and it’s ongoing. I don’t think this is a reason to knee-jerk react and completely change your risk management strategy.”

He says the devaluation of offal due to the loss of the Chinese market is a little painful.

“USMEF numbers said that could be as much as $10 a head in total devaluation, but that’s not right off the hog price,” Stuart says. “That goes through the exporters, packing margins, everything. There are some shock absorbers in the system.”

Looking ahead, he says the pork industry has reason to be optimistic. With the recent rally in hog futures, he believes this will be a decent year for U.S. pork.

“We’re going to see tweets and posts back and forth about this trade war,” Stuart says. “My advice to producers is stay the course. Look at your costs. Manage your costs. Look at risk management. We haven’t upset the apple cart yet with pork exports. There’s still demand out there. The U.S. are very competitive producers and I truly think, over the next two to three months, we’re going to see some new trade deals.”

He’s hopeful better access into Vietnam and the Philippines, and maybe even with Australia on their cooking requirement on U.S. pork, will help.

“I think there’s a silver lining out there,” Stuart says. “The question is, how do you just navigate this pounding media noise of negativity? My advice is panic slowly. Maybe I’m an eternal optimist, but I see a decent year for us in the pork industry.”

Your Next Read: Millennials and Protein Craze Boost Meat Sales to Record High

Another Sign of Trouble in the Ag Economy: Farm Bankruptcies Are on the Rise

Wed, 23 Apr 2025 14:09:23 GMT

It’s no secret there’s trouble in the ag economy. As AgWeb reported in March , the Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor found 62% of ag economists think the row crop side of agriculture is currently in a recession, and 85% think the situation will accelerate consolidation on farms and among agribusinesses. A new report from Bloomberg Law shows family farm bankruptcies are also on the rise.

Bloomberg Law’s Alex Wolf and Skye Witley recently reported that family farm bankruptcies had already increased by 55% last year compared to 2023. And there’s no sign of that slowing down, as Wolf and Witley report bankruptcies are trending even higher this year. That’s as farmers continue to grapple with depressed agricultural commodity prices and high input costs.

Farm bankruptcies are on the rise in the U.S.

(Bloomberg)

“And while much of the industrywide distress predates his second stint in the White House, (President Donald) Trump has quickly nudged more farmers closer to the brink of going under and created turbulence for producers trying to make ends meet,” Wolf and Witley reported in the Bloomberg Law story. “Unpredictable tariffs, immigration overhauls, federal program cuts and frozen Agriculture Department funding are now part of the discussions farmers are having as they seek financial help.”

The report shows the last time farm bankruptcy filings soared was in 2019, which was the height of the previous trade war with China. The previous Trump administration sent farmers more than $20 billion in Market Facilitation Program payments (MFP) to help cover export losses.

Following that financial aid to farmers, the report shows family farm bankruptcies, filed under Chapter 12 of the U.S. bankruptcy code, declined each year until 2024.

According to court records, the number of new cases in 2024 jumped to 216 from a near 20-year low of 139. The report also shows those filings have continued to speed up this year, with 82 cases filed over the first three months of 2025, which is nearly double the figure for the same period a year ago.

$10 Billion in ECAP Money to Farmers

More help is on the way, if not already on farm. That’s because the American Relief Act of 2025, which was passed by Congress late last year, authorized the $10 billion for ECAP payments to help offset losses growers incurred during the 2024 crop year. Those payments are being dispersed now, and farmers have until August to sign up.

According to Joe Glauber, former USDA chief economist and a current emeritus fellow with the International Food Policy Research Institute, direct payments have helped farmers. But the threat of farm bankruptcies, and the reality of financial pain if markets don’t improve, is still there

“Remember, we are getting a ton of money put into the sector this year from the bill that was passed by Congress in December,” Glauber told “AgriTalk’s” Chip Flory. “So that’s $31 billion coming in with $10 billion of that going out to farmers as direct income support to offset low margins. So, I don’t think we’ll see a lot of farms going out of business. But certainly, if these short, tight margins persist for a long time, then that’s going to affect people.”

Rural Bankers Show Concern

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the number of farm loans at risk of defaulting is the highest it’s been since 2020 as demand for non-real-estate farm loans has surged while repayment rates dropped. The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago serves the Seventh Federal Reserve District , which includes Iowa, and most of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Ag lenders are also concerned. The most recent Rural Mainstreet Index (RMI) shows for the 19^th time in the past 20 months, the RMI sank below the 50.0 growth reading in April. This specific index surveys bank CEOs in rural areas of a 10-state region dependent on agriculture and/or energy.

While tariffs and Trump’s focus on trade are causing uncertainty, Ernie Goss, MacAllister chair in regional economics at Creighton University, says ag lenders are actually supportive of Trump’s tough stance on trade.

“The economic outlook for 2025 farm income remains weak, according to bank CEOs. Despite the negative fallout from tariffs, 75% of bankers support the tariffs on China, and 79.2% back the 90-day pause on other tariffs,” Goss told “AgriTalk’s” Chip Flory. “I’m an economist and we economists, we’re not very keen on tariffs and trade restrictions. Nonetheless, the bankers, three out of the four bankers are supportive of what the president’s doing there, and I would argue that the farmers are on the president’s side as well.”

The RMI also found rural bankers remain pessimistic about economic growth for their area over the next six months. The April confidence index increased to a weak 36.0 from March’s 30.4.

“Weak grain prices and negative farm cash flows, combined with downturns in farm equipment sales over the past several months, pushed banker confidence lower,” Goss said.

Cotton Hit Especially Hard

Cotton farmers are especially feeling the pain with younger farmers already having difficulty getting financed for this year. Cheap cotton prices and dwindling demand are just part of the problem. Input costs have climbed, and there’s no safety net to be found from a new farm bill. One Georgia farmer told Farm Journal that the current farm bill is irrelevant and worthless, and if a new one doesn’t get passed this year, the cotton industry is doomed.

“We’re going to plant cotton and don’t even have a clue if we’re going to get our money back,” says Franz Rowland, who grows cotton in Boston, Ga. “There’s no farm bill to support us, and the reference price is so low that it’s not anything that we can depend on. So, we’re going to put several million dollars in the ground and don’t even know if we’re going to get it back.”

As president and CEO of National Cotton Council (NCC), Gary Adams sees and hears the somber situation for U.S. cotton farmers from coast to coast. Adams says the outlook for 2025 is even worse than 2024.

“We’ve gone beyond just losing money now that we’re to the point of losing the farm,” he says. “Unfortunately, where the industry is, that’s what it looks like as we’re going into 2025.”

Darren Hudson is the Larry Combest endowed chair for agricultural competitiveness and director of the International Center for Agricultural Competitiveness at Texas Tech University. Hudson focuses on cotton, and on “AgriTalk” this week, he described why cotton farmers, and the entire cotton industry, is feeling the pinch.

“Cotton is fairly input intensive anyway, and so urea, nitrogen costs, all these chemical costs, they’re facing those just like every other farmer out there, but we’ve had three consecutive really bad moisture years,” Hudson told “AgriTalk.” “So, we have a long way to go to get back to what you think of as normal growing conditions.”

Hudson says three consecutive years of declining production due to drought isn’t just a problem for producers, it’s also the cotton infrastructure that relies on that crop.

“We’ve had three years, you know, that processing infrastructure all that stuff is strained and disappearing, and it’s getting harder and harder to farm as a cotton farmer out here,” says Hudson, who’s based in Lubock, Texas. “We’re not unusual compared to everybody else. We don’t want to sing a sad story, but I think all of ag is in a squeeze at this moment with [commodity] prices versus inputs.”

Is the Ag Industry Ripe for Consolidation?

Another reality for U.S. agriculture, while the majority of farms in the U.S. are small family farms, that sector doesn’t represent the majority of farm production today.

USDA ERS data shows while 88% of U.S. farms are considered “small family farms,” those farms only represent18.7% of the total U.S. value of farm production.

(Ben Brown, University of Missouri )

USDA ERS data shows while 88% of U.S. farms are considered “small family farms,” those farms only represent 18.7% of the total U.S. value of farm production.

On the other hand, while 3.4% of U.S. farms are “large-scale family farms,” that sector represents 51.8% of the total value of U.S. farm production.

U.S. Beef Off the Menu as Trade War Hits Beijing's American-Style Restaurants

Mon, 21 Apr 2025 13:30:29 GMT

At Home Plate BBQ, an American-style restaurant in Beijing, staff are reprinting menus. The U.S.-China trade war means American beef - once the star ingredient - will soon be off the table.

Home Plate’s beef, previously sourced entirely from the U.S., is increasingly Australian. The restaurant uses about 7 to 8 metric tons of brisket each month, and when the U.S. beef in the freezers is used up in a few weeks, the southern-style BBQ restaurant will only serve meat from Australia.

U.S. beef is one of thousands of casualties in the trade war between the world’s largest trading partners. Even before the battle began, American beef was expensive. Beijing’s 125% retaliatory tariffs, on top of the existing 22%, made it unaffordable.

“It’s essentially just made it very hard for us to continue using U.S. beef,” said Home Plate’s operations director, Charles de Pellette.

While the $125 million a month in U.S. beef exports to China is a sliver of the mammoth goods trade, beef’s disappearance from menus in Beijing is a glimpse of the fate to come for thousands of goods on both sides of the Pacific.

“Once we deplete our stocks, we’ll be switching fully over to Australian M5 ... We still think that it’s the same taste and quality and flavour, but we’ve had to switch just due to market pressures and the tariffs,” de Pellette said.

The pork ribs, too, are a-changing. They’ll now come from Canada, he said.

The experience of the restaurant chain, which has three branches in China and was co-founded by a Texan, is being repeated across Beijing restaurants, according to a beef supplier based in the capital who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of discussing tariffs.

“They have to switch to Australian beef - even the American steak restaurants,” the beef supplier said.

De Pellette declined to disclose how much Home Plate is paying for Australian beef.

U.S. beef was getting expensive before the trade war began in part because of shortages caused by years of dry weather that shrank herds to their smallest since the 1950s. Those higher prices were hard to swallow in China where a weak economy has made consumers especially price conscious.

U.S. brisket prices rose by nearly 50% between last May and March before skyrocketing further after the tariffs - leaving supplies depleted or costs almost double what they were a year earlier.

Australia is looking to fill the gap, including with brisket that’s 40% cheaper. And at Home Plate they’ve had success. Come May, diners will be tucking into Australian beef ribs, brisket, and sausages smoked long and slow in the traditions of Texas and the American South.

“We’ve tested it for a few months and we found that actually it’s just as good and our customers are pretty happy with it,” said de Pellette.

(Reporting by Ella Cao and Josh Arslan in Beijing; Editing by Lewis Jackson and Sonali Paul)

China Increases Tariffs to 125%: What Ag Exports Will Be Most Impacted

Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:38:50 GMT

China announced Friday it’s hitting back with more tariffs on U.S. goods. The new tariff rate is 125%, up from the 84% announced earlier this week.

This is in response to President Donald Trump’s announcement on Wednesday that the U.S. would be pausing reciprocal tariffs on most countries for 90 days, but upping the ante on China with a tariff of 125%.

Given that US exports to China are already commercially unviable at current tariff levels, any further US tariff hikes on Chinese goods will simply be ignored. pic.twitter.com/clFdSIzAsH
— Lin Jian 林剑 (@SpoxCHN_LinJian) April 11, 2025

The U.S. and China have been trading blows with tariff hikes for a while now. Just last week, President Trump headlined what he called “Liberation Day” by announcing tariffs on more than 180 countries. That included a 34% tariff on all Chinese goods. In response, China imposed 34% tariffs on U.S. goods two days later. With tariffs already in place, that brought the total rate to 60%.

More recently, the U.S. said on Tuesday that 104% duties on imports from China would take effect shortly after midnight. China fired back with an additional 50% tariff on U.S. goods.

Now China has raised the rate on U.S. imports to 125% starting Saturday. It’s a tit-for-tat with tariffs impacting some exports more than others.

The new tariff rate is likely 155.73%, up from the 114.73% we reported earlier this week . The American Soybean Association is still trying to confirm this new rate.

“Whether the tariffs are 50% or 100%, it really doesn’t matter. Either one shuts down trade until it doesn’t anymore,” says Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist for StoneX Group. “It does hurt some of our energy exports to them. It hurts our cotton exports, our beef and our pork.”

U.S. Meat Exports Face Hefty Tariffs to China

Farm Journal reached out to U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) Friday morning to nail down what the new tariff rate is on U.S. meat exports to China. While USMEF is still reviewing the details of China’s action, as of Friday morning, USMEF says its new calculations are assuming the higher tariff is applied to the same range of goods that has been covered by other tariff hikes:

USMEF says these rates represent the sum total of China’s 12% most-favored-nation tariff, plus retaliatory duties previously imposed by China, plus the new 34% duty that took effect April 10, the additional 50% duty that was announced a couple of days ago, plus the increase announced Friday morning.

(Lori Hayes )

“The additional tariff will push China’s effective duty rate on U.S. pork and pork variety meat to 172% and beef and beef variety meat will be tariffed at 147%,” USMEF vice president of communications Joe Schuele told Farm Journal.

Schuele says these rates represent the sum total of China’s 12% most-favored-nation tariff, retaliatory duties previously imposed by China, the new 34% duty that took effect April 10, the additional 50% duty that was announced a couple of days ago and the increase announced Friday morning.

China is Still Buying Soybeans

According to Suderman, the weekly export sales report from USDA showed China is still buying soybeans. Suderman says China was again the featured buyer of U.S. soybeans in the week ending on April 3, and he says that buyer was likely Sinograin.

The company bought 5.2 million bushels, although 4.9 million of that was a previous purchase by “unknown destinations.” Suderman says the purchase is likely for reserve beans, which are unaffected by the tariffs.

China was again the featured buyer of US #soybeans in the week ending April 3 (likely Sinograin) at 5.2 million bushels, although 4.9 million of that was a previous purchase by "unknown destinations." These are likely reserve beans, unaffected by the tariffs for Sinograin. #oatt
— Arlan Suderman (@ArlanFF101) April 10, 2025

“Most of the recently announced purchases have been changes from unknown destinations. So, in other words, they just didn’t declare who they were initially or where it was going,” Suderman says. “Sinograin is a state grain agency. In other words, if they pay the tariff, it’s the right-hand paying the left-hand. Tariffs don’t really matter. They buy for the reserves. So in theory, they could buy a lot of soybeans and then auction them out of the reserves. We also saw during Trump 1.0 when they truly needed soybeans that they waived the tariffs.”

Sinograin Group was established in 2000 upon the approval of the central government. The company is responsible for the management and operation of central reserve stocks of grain, oil and cotton.

Nothing like waking up to news China raised tariffs on U.S. goods to 125%

At this point 34%, 84%, 125% or even 1250% are one and the same because they all leave US #soybeans priced way out of the market pic.twitter.com/IQ5MQpJqIp
— Susan Stroud (@SusanNOBULL) April 11, 2025

However, Suderman says China was buying Brazil’s soybeans over those from the U.S. already. They were cheaper even before the tariffs took place.

“When it comes to soybeans, I checked this morning and soybeans delivered to the port in China were $0.47 cheaper if they came from Brazil than if they came from the US. Gulf,” Suderman says. “That’s the bottom line. That’s before any retaliatory tariffs. That’s going to remain the case for a while. Based on the size of South America’s production, probably until we get to the fourth quarter. And then how many beans will they need from us?”

Suderman says he’s been telling clients for two years to be cautious about China, as the country looks to build up its reserves. He points out China is importing more than they’re crushing, which is another sign China is building up reserves. It is a bucket of grain they can tap into while the trade war plays out.