Trade

New Data: Is U.S. Agriculture Facing a Typical Cycle or a ‘Geopolitical Reset’?

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:56:49 GMT

The latest Farm Journal Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor shows a bit more pessimism from respondents on the current state of the ag economy as well as how the present compares to one year ago.

Farm Journal regularly reaches out to a vetted list of 80 ag economists from across the industry. Providing directional insights, 10 of the 16 economists who responded to the April survey believe the ag economy is in a worse state than it was a year ago. Slightly fewer than half expect conditions to be “somewhat better” in 12 months, while one-third still anticipate further decline.

“I just haven’t really changed my level of pessimism regarding this year. This is going to be a tough year. There’s no doubt about it,” says Michael Langemeier with Purdue University.

The conflict in Iran weighs heavy on economists’ minds; high fertilizer prices and high energy costs dominate concerns. This overshadows the previous looming concerns of the trade fragility and export deficit. The previously announced government payments are in the rearview mirror.

Wes Davis from Meridian Agribusiness Advisors agrees that profit margins squeezed by high input costs are the top concern.

“When we talk about the more pessimistic view of the ag economy, fertilizer prices driven by the outbreak of war in Iran is certainly top of mind,” he says.

But Davis says there have been some positive tailwinds for commodity prices over the past few months, and there’s ‘no slowdown’ in demand for animal proteins.

“Those tailwinds continue to be present,” he says.

A Fundamental “Structural Shift”

Three-quarters of the economists believe U.S. agriculture is undergoing a permanent structural shift rather than a typical cyclical phase. They cite increased competition from Brazil, changing trade policies and the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence as factors reshaping the industry for the long term.

(Farm Journal Survey, April 2026)

“I’m thinking of this one as the geopolitical and input reset,” Davis says. “What I mean by that is, where things go and how we interact with the global ag economy when this cycle or when this shift is over will be different. The way that farmers get their agrichemicals, their fertilizers, their vitamins/trace minerals for feed, their tractors will all be different.”

Davis brings up the farm bill as another example. He questions whether the structural shift in policy is moving away from supporting “commercial farm preservation” and more toward “rural economic development.” This distinction could change the long-term framing of ag policy.

While Davis’ perspective is in the majority, Langemeier offers a counterpoint. He says this today reminds him a lot of the 2014 to 2019 period when there were about six years in a row of relatively low crop margins.

“I know there are a lot of changes going on, and certainly we’re worried about the competitiveness of U.S. agriculture compared to Brazil, particularly for soybeans,” he says. “As one example, I think the AI developments actually could be positive, and so I don’t necessarily see why that would necessarily mean a structural shift that would be negative.”

Geopolitical Impacts on Input Costs

The conflict in Iran and broader Persian Gulf instability are identified as primary drivers of agriculture’s economic health. Economists are specifically concerned about how these tensions are “pinching margins” by driving up the costs of energy and fertilizer while commodity prices remain relatively low.

“The negative impact of the Iran conflict has been increased fertilizer and energy prices. I did some crop budget calculations: If you hadn’t bought your fertilizer and most of your fuel is yet to be purchased prior to the Iran conflict that’s a pretty large effect on corn break-even price. I calculate it to be 25 cents a bushel. And when your break-even price is already at $5, which is way above what the futures price adjusted for basis is this fall, that’s certainly not helping matters,” he says.

It’s not just fertilizer and fuel. It’s other input categories in row crop agriculture and livestock production as well.

Noting input prices are 15% to 20% higher than pre-COVID levels, Davis points out that prices for active ingredients have gone up 20% to 30% since the conflict in Iran started.

“This continues to exacerbate that question around how long are we going to continue to see input prices increasing?” Davis says. “The other things that are less talked about but are starting to show up in pricing data are things like low inclusion additives for livestock feeds, so things like vitamins and trace minerals are starting to show up in pricing increases as well as they are being disrupted in trade flow and a slowdown of exports from China.”

Langemeier adds to the question around input pricing increases, saying it’s unknown if the uncertainty and elevated costs will go into 2027.

Strategic Deferment of Capital Expenses

To manage tight margins, farmers are expected to prioritize paying down debt over investing in land, equipment/technology, capital improvements and labor. Machinery and equipment purchases are the top items likely to be reduced or deferred in 2026, with half of economists also warning that cuts to fertilizer and crop protection could start impacting yields.

(Farm Journal Survey, April 2026)

“The number one thing as always is farmers want to be paying down debt,” Davis says. “Equipment is going to continue to be in a trough, and my expectation is that tractor sales year over year are still going to be 10 to 15% lower this year versus last year.”

He also foresees a continued transition to generic crop chemicals for the next two years.

Davis makes a distinction regarding which farms could survive this pinch on profitability. He describes a “tale of two economies” where disciplined farms with high liquidity can still find financing to grow, while those who grew aggressively at the peak of the cycle are facing a “pullback” from lenders. This adds a layer of nuance to the “commercial viability” discussion.

Langemeier provides a sobering warning about how farmers are managing the third year of low margins. He notes a trend of farmers starting to borrow against their land (non-current debt) to cover operating expenses — a pattern seen during the 2014 to 2019 downturn. He emphasizes the urgent need for “contingency planning” and a “Plan B” for debt repayment this fall.

“Usually, farms will try to cover their owner withdrawals and repay debt before they even think about making down payments on machinery. Capital expenditures always get squeezed when cash flow is tight. That’s just the way it works. We’re in one of those situations where capital expenditures are just going to be lower, primarily machinery and buildings,” Langemeier says.

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.

Pork in the Crosshairs: NPPC Responds as Mexico Launches Double Trade Case Against U.S.

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 19:51:53 GMT

The relationship between the U.S. and Mexican pork industries is facing its most significant test in years. According to Maria Zieba, vice president of government affairs at the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), the Mexican market is unlike any other—and it is currently under threat.

In 2024, exports to Mexico were over $2.6 billion. In addition, Mexico’s geography creates the possibility of land exports, which is a unique export market condition for the U.S. pork industry. Mexico is a major consumer of pork, and the U.S. pork industry has decades-long partnerships with buyers there to satisfy demand for high quality, readily available pork products.

The Allegations: Dumping and Subsidies

The Mexican government accepted two petitions from the Mexican pork industry in December 2025. Mexico then initiated two cases on U.S. pork in December. The first case alleges that the U.S. was dumping product (selling below fair value) during a three-year time period (2022-2024) into Mexico on hams and shoulders specifically.

The second case alleges that the federal government and five state governments (Indiana, North Carolina, Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota) gave subsidies to grain producers and pork producers and processors. They claim this created an unfair advantage to the U.S. because producers may have received funds from the federal government and packers may have received some benefits to modernize a packing plant, which went on to lower the price of U.S. pork hams and shoulders exported to Mexico.

“We are compiling all the evidence to show that’s not what happened,” Zieba says. “The Mexican government will receive all of these responses we gather, and from there, they will review the responses and figure out whether there was harm done to their domestic industry on both the cases.”

If Mexico reaches an adverse determination, they could start putting tariffs on U.S. hams and shoulders.

A Bull’s Eye on U.S. Agriculture

It is unfortunate, Zieba says. The U.S.-Mexico market is highly integrated and shares several common interests such as animal health.

“It’s important that we come together and push back on these cases, not only from the industry side, but from the broader context of the U.S. government,” Zieba says. “If we don’t push back, then there’s a possibility that other countries will attempt to do these things not only to our industry, but also to other agricultural industries.”

She says it’s almost natural for foreign trading partners to put a bull’s eye on agriculture because the U.S. does such a great job of exporting.

“It’s certainly important to be on the record that this is not how the U.S. pork industry operates, but we also are not going to let other countries bully us around,” Zieba says.

Together with the U.S. Meat Export Federation, NPPC will be filing an industry petition in response to these allegations. They are working with the exporters listed in the petition, in addition to exporters in general and importers in Mexico, USTR and USDA.

A Complex Situation

It’s been years since the U.S. pork industry has had a trade case filed against it on its exports. She says it’s complex because there are now two cases, many players and political aspects as well.

“Domestic producers across the board in Mexico are the ones that went to the government asking for assistance in curbing the imports,” she adds.

The U.S. and Mexico are experiencing trade tensions, Zieba points out. Essentially, there are many issues geopolitically between the two countries outside of agriculture.

Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum wanted to have a resolution on the tomato suspension agreement , a separate agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that was terminated in 2025, Zieba says. Sheinbaum had said if it wasn’t resolved, then pork would be on the list to retaliate against. Zieba believes U.S. pork is being used as leverage.

“We are free traders through and through,” she adds. “That is our position and has continued to be our position the last 30 years. The industry believes that to lower all barriers, whether tariff barriers or nontariff barriers to trade, would be trade limiting. Our industry would not be supportive of something like that. It would go against our policy that we’ve had on the books for decades.”

How Does This Compare to Chicken Anti-Dumping?

The pork anti-dumping case is very similar to the poultry case that the Mexicans launched a number of years ago. The Mexican government, the arbitrator in both cases, found fault with U.S. poultry exports, but they never imposed duties.

“You can still export product from the U.S. to Mexico without having to pay that dumping duty,” Zieba says.

They aren’t imposing the duty because it would be negative for Mexico consumers.

“Mexico is dealing with some high food price inflation already, and it is not in the best interest for those consumers to be paying higher prices at the grocery store,” Zieba says. “That’s a pretty big argument for why this is quite silly to be initiating a case on U.S. pork at a time where the Mexican industry and Mexican consumers need a reliable source of U.S. pork.”

Unfortunate Timing with USMCA Review Ahead

With the review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) coming up this summer, the timing of these cases is challenging. If Mexico reaches an adverse determination, U.S. producers and/or the U.S. can appeal through the dispute settlement mechanisms of the USMCA and/or the World Trade Organization agreements.

“We have a very collaborative working system where we are highly integrated,” Zieba says. “This pushes against that work we’ve had. If you look at the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. pork industries and our producers, we’ve been growing. Our three industries are a great success because we are integrated. We help each other out, but we also are able to be competitive in the international market and domestically.”

NPPC filed initial comments earlier this month in what is an ongoing process. Pending outcome, Zieba says preliminary duties could be assessed as early as late spring or early summer. The final case will be determined in early 2027, but duties can be implemented in a preliminary phase.

“If the final decision goes against the U.S. pork industry, the worst-case scenario is facing two tariff rates on U.S. pork hams and shoulders as we go into the summer, and those temporary duties assessed,” she says. “We are doing everything we can at NPPC and with USMEF to prevent that from happening. But that’s certainly on the spectrum of possibilities.”

USTR and Ag Groups Align on USMCA Importance Ahead of July Review

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:21:30 GMT

There’s no question the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is incredibly important to agriculture, acknowledged Ambassador Julie Callahan, who serves as the chief agricultural negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).

“The USTR published a Federal register notice to inform the USMCA review. One thing I love about ag stakeholders, no one is shy at all,” she said at the National Pork Industry Forum. “We received copious input from ag stakeholders across the board. What we learned from this exercise, which was not a surprise to us, is that stakeholders want the USMCA to be maintained.”

However, there are areas within the agreement that stakeholders thought they would get more benefits than they actually received in practice, she added.

“That is what we’re looking at — where are the sectors that require a tweak to the agreement itself?” Callahan said.

One of the USTR’s focuses right now is the trade deficit at USTR.

“The deficit with Canada in agriculture is also ballooning,” Callahan said. “In 2020, the U.S. had a $3 billion ag trade deficit with Canada. Last year, in 2025, it was $11 billion. We went from a $3-billion to an $11-billion deficit while the USMCA was enforced. We really want to look at which sectors are losing out.”

USMCA is Foundational to Economy

Nearly 70 U.S. agriculture and business organizations sent a letter on March 3 to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. In the letter, the groups—including the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC)—described Canada and Mexico as “foundational to our economic strength and resilience.” The push comes ahead of a high-stakes review scheduled for July, which will determine if the trade deal is renewed for a 16-year term.

The coalition is urging the USTR to maintain “sustained and meaningful engagement” with industry stakeholders throughout the review process.

“We strongly support concurrent efforts to resolve tariff and non-tariff barriers and to ensure existing,” the authors wrote. “USMCA commitments are fully implemented and adhered to. Maintaining duty-free treatment for USMCA-compliant goods throughout this process is an indispensable prerequisite for North American stability. To strengthen the U.S. manufacturing and industrial base, we urge the Administration to avoid imposing any new duties on Canada or Mexico and to restore duty-free trade.”

The organizations requested that the Trump administration focus on:

Full Implementation: Resolving pending disputes and ensuring all parties meet their commitments.
Market Predictability: Restoring certainty in North American trade flows.
Tariff Prevention: Maintaining duty-free treatment for USMCA-compliant goods and avoiding the imposition of new tariffs on Canadian and Mexican products.

Agriculture Needs Certainty of USMCA

“For U.S. farmers and businessowners, maintaining a rules-based agreement with binding commitments protects their industries,” NPPC said in Capital Update. “Without the economic might USMCA provides, incomes would be affected by additional, burdensome costs related to transportation and compliance measures. Without the certainty guaranteed by USMCA, U.S. entities would face unreliable markets, and their global competitiveness would be weakened.”

The pork industry, in particular, has a significant stake in the negotiations. According to the NPPC, USMCA has been instrumental to long-term success. In 2025, Mexico remained the No. 1 export market for U.S. pork with nearly $2.85 billion in sales, while Canada ranked as the No. 4 market at approximately $759 million.

“NPPC is one of the stakeholder groups that we are continually reaching out to as we move forward bilaterally or regionally,” Callahan shared in her comments. “NPPC calls us when there’s an issue and a concern with a trading partner. We also call them when there’s specific issues that may affect pork access and we need to know, at a granular level, what will be helpful and what is needed to address this issue.”

Callahan said USTR will be working with members of Congress and with stakeholder organizations as it moves forward.

“There won’t be surprises as we move forward, because we will be having these constant communications with stakeholders,” she said.

Reciprocity and Balance: The New Blueprint for U.S. Agricultural Trade Agreements

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 21:01:53 GMT

Ambassador Julie Callahan is the chief ag negotiator at the U.S. Trade Representative, and she reports positive momentum toward rebuilding trade agreements equating to a positive U.S. ag trade balance.

“We came into a situation in January 2025 where the US ag trade deficit was ballooning in a really unsustainable manner,” she says.

At the beginning of 2025, USDA forecasted a $50 billion deficit for U.S. agricultral trade.

“Compare that to an agricultural trade surplus in 2020 when President Trump left office, of a $6 billion surplus. So we were $56 billion in the hole, you might say, at the beginning of the administration, but through the efforts of the president ensuring trading partners understand they need to treat U.S. farmers and ranchers right, we are seeing real shifts in our trade balance and chipping away at the deficit toward a surplus.”

Trade Wins Highlighted by Government Officials

Callahan points to eight signed trade agreements with: Malaysia, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Argentina, Bangladesh, Taiwan and Indonesia. She says these are binding agreements, where the foreign governments are:

lowering tariffs for U.S. ag products
removing unfair trade practices
and lifting regulatory barriers

“These are serious binding trade agreements that will deliver real value for U.S. farmers and ranchers,” Callahan says. And when asked if Congressional action to codify agreements is necessary, Callahan says that action would be supported but should not be necessary.

“These foreign governments have made binding commitments in terms of adjusting tariff schedules, they are also making regulatory changes. USTR will be enforcing these agreements. They are enforceable.”

Examples of enforceable commitments include:

Indonesia removes its import licensing requirements
Malaysia accepts facilities on their registration list as long as FSIS has them on their list

The Future of the U.S./China Trade Relationship

At the 2026 Top Producer Summit, Lyu Jiang, minister for economic and commercial affairs at the Chinese Embassy in the U.S., characterized the U.S. and Chinese relationship being a phase of stabilization.

When prompted to react, Callahan agreed saying, “We very much want a stable, predictable, transactional relationship with our Chinese counterparts. We do want to normalize, bring reciprocity and balance back to our trade relationship and ensure that U.S. farmers, and ranchers can benefit from the Chinese market again.”

She says her office is balancing the agricultural stakeholders wanting access to the large-scale Chinese market with a strategy to also diversify trade partnerships as to not be too reliant on a single country.

“We are working through the agreement on reciprocal trade to diversify our markets so we don’t overly rely on China,” she says. “We are looking to address that very serious situation where China may see agriculture as a pain point for the United States.”

With the upcoming meeting of President Trump and President Xi in April, Callahan says her team and the larger U.S. trade team is working to prepare and set the stage for a positive outcome. Callahan points to specific issues to be worked through and market focuses spanning crops and livestock.

“Both sides want the meetings to be a success,” she says. “Certainly, in the meetings leading up to the president level discussion, we will be having open and frank conversations with China where we need to see areas of improvement. That’s not limited to soybeans to sorghum. Our beef producers don’t have access to China due to China’s unfortunate actions that are not renewing facility registrations.”

The Review of USMCA

With a goal of “reciprocity and balance across north America” the trade team is working on its review of the North American trade deal.

“We absolutely understand the importance of USMCA for U.S. farmers and ranchers,” Callahan says.

Describing this as a “comprehensive review” she says that spans:

Look at what is working
Maintain what is working
Improve on areas not be delivering the benefits U.S. farmers and ranchers expect

She brings up the overall trade balance with Canada and specifically, Canadian dairy.

“With Canada, we went from a $3 billion deficit in 2020 and now we have an $11 billion ag trade deficit. So there are certainly areas for improvement, and we’re taking all of our stakeholders’ comments into consideration,” Callahan says.

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.

A Trade Win for Beef and Pork: U.S. and Taiwan Sign Agreement on Reciprocal Trade

Fri, 13 Feb 2026 15:31:21 GMT

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced the signing of an Agreement on Reciprocal Trade between the United States and Taiwan that includes significant market access gains for U.S. red meat.

“The Agreement on Reciprocal Trade with Taiwan will eliminate tariff and nontariff barriers facing U.S. exports to Taiwan, furthering opportunities for American farmers, ranchers, fishermen, workers, small businesses and manufacturers,” Ambassador Jamieson Greer said . “This agreement also builds on our longstanding economic and trade relationship with Taiwan and will significantly enhance the resilience of our supply chains, particularly in high-technology sectors.”

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins praised the agreement on X, saying this will open up real markets and boost opportunities for rural communities.

New trade deal with our partner, Taiwan!
🇺🇸🤝🇹🇼

THANK YOU @POTUS and @USTradeRep. Under the new U.S.–Taiwan Reciprocal Trade Agreement, Taiwan is cutting or eliminating tariffs on nearly all U.S. agricultural exports — from animal protein like beef, pork, and dairy to corn,… https://t.co/44xmlzP04o
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) February 13, 2026

U.S. Beef’s Potential to Grow Export Opportunities
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) says this will strengthen one of the most important and fastest-growing markets for U.S. beef. Taiwan is the fifth largest market for U.S. beef, with exports valued at about $650 million, and the U.S. is the largest supplier of beef to Taiwan.

“There is still potential for further growth with the increased access for all U.S. beef products, including those in high demand for yakiniku barbecue and trendy burger concepts,” U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) said. “The elimination of tariffs on U.S. beef will definitely improve our competitiveness.”

Foreign markets play a critical role in producer profitability with beef exports accounting for more than $415 per fed cattle processed in 2024, NCBA President Gene Copenhaver explained.

“Strong, science-based trade agreements are essential to adding value for U.S. cattle producers, and Taiwan has emerged as one of the strongest international markets for U.S. beef,” Copenhaver said. “Duty-free access improves competitiveness and provides long-term certainty for producers who depend on export markets to maximize the value of every animal. American cattle producers look forward to this expanded market access for years to come thanks to the work of President Trump and U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer.”

Securing Greater Market Access for U.S. Pork
It’s also a step forward for the U.S. pork industry as U.S. pork has been “widely disadvantaged in Taiwan,” USMEF said. The EU and Canada currently dominate Taiwan’s pork imports.

“USMEF is optimistic that reducing both tariffs and nontariff barriers will help enable larger U.S. pork exports to Taiwan, as USMEF remains focused on regaining Taiwanese consumer trust in U.S. pork,” USMEF said.

Organizations say this trade deal reinforces science-based standards consistent with the World Organization for Animal Health and Codex Alimentarius.

“I would like to thank President Trump and Ambassadors Greer and Callahan for their hard work,” said Lori Stevermer, a Minnesota pig farmer. “This agreement stands to boost U.S. pork exports by cutting tariffs in half. It also requires Taiwan to follow maximum residue levels (MRLs) set by Codex for ractopamine in pork fat, kidney, liver and muscle. While not always as obvious as a tariff reduction, by accepting USDA FSIS inspections, audits and export certificates, this agreement reduces the nontariff barriers we face and allows opportunities for more plants to export pork. Overall, U.S. pig farmers will have greater market access to a country that loves pork and that’s good for our farms and businesses.”

Additionally, within six months Taiwan must recognize the African swine fever protection zone established by the U.S.

“Our 15-plus year endeavor to break down trade barriers in the high-value market of Taiwan has paid off,” said NPPC president Duane Stateler, an Ohio pork producer. “This means more U.S. pork on international tables and more opportunities and prosperity for American producers.”

Read the Fact Sheet on U.S.-Taiwan Agreement on Reciprocal Trade

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.

Economists Forecast Farm Economy to Stabilize, But High Costs and Policy Uncertainty Block a 2026 Rebound

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 18:26:39 GMT

As 2026 ushers in a fresh start, agricultural economists say the U.S. farm economy has stopped sliding, but it’s far from fully healed.

The December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor shows month-to-month sentiment is improving, but deep structural strain remains — especially in row crops. Meanwhile, livestock markets continue to provide strength. Crop producers face another year of tight margins driven by high input costs, weak prices and unresolved trade and policy uncertainty.

“There’s cautious optimism,” the economists say, “but very little belief that 2026 will bring a meaningful rebound without cost relief or stronger demand.”

Those themes mirror the perspective of Seth Meyer, former USDA chief economist and now director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at the University of Missouri. In a recent interview, Meyer connected the dots between narrow margins, policy responses and what might actually move the dial for U.S. agriculture heading into 2026.

Stabilizing, Not Recovering

December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Economists see the ag economy holding its ground — but not gaining strength.

54% say the ag economy is somewhat better than one month ago.
Compared with a year ago:
- 42% say conditions are worse
- 33% say they are better
Looking ahead 12 months:
- 46% expect conditions unchanged
- 38% expect improvement
- 15% expect conditions to worsen

“Momentum has improved since mid-2025,” Meyer notes, “but tight margins have been with us for a long time. Turning that around requires demand growth, not just price stabilization.

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Grant Gardner, assistant Extension professor at the University of Kentucky, tells AgriTalk’s Chip Flory: “I think as we move into kind of this next marketing year, you’re looking at what looks like a breakeven and not a loss, but breakeven still doesn’t look great after three years of breakeven or losses.”

He says even with the $11 billion in Farmer Bridge Program payments , it won’t drastically change the outlook for the farm economy.

“Purdue had a good survey about a month ago, where they looked at what were these payments going to go to, and research would show that a lot of these payments go into long-term assets, and so land tractors, but I think over 60% of producers right now are in such a tight cash crunch that you’re going to see a lot of these payments go into that short-term debt,” Gardner says.

Consolidation a Growing Threat

Economists are nearly unanimous that the crop sector remains under extreme financial stress. 83 percent say row crops are currently in a recession. That isn’t about production declines — acres and yields haven’t collapsed — but about persistently weak profitability.

“Negative returns for at least the third consecutive year across nearly all row crops,” one economist wrote in the survey.

Another said: “Margins remain below full costs of production for many producers.”

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

Meyer traces that back to how abruptly agriculture moved from the high prices of 2021 and 2022 into today’s tighter margins.

“We moved very quickly from a very high price environment and good profitability in 2022 to very tight margins,” he says. “That usually happens coming off price peaks, but this time it happened really rapidly.”

A minority of survey respondents argued farms are “treading water,” supported by strong land values and government aid rather than eroding further, which Meyer acknowledged aligns with how risk and safety nets have interacted this year.

But when you look at how the current stress in the farm economy could impact consolidation, the ag economists say it’s the economic pressure combined with demographic trends causing the acceleration. In fact, 92% of them say consolidation is underway and unavoidable.

“Markets go to the lowest-cost producers,” one economist wrote. “That sorting is consolidation on the production side.”

Aging producers exiting and rent-heavy operations under pressure only add fuel to that trend, with one economist saying: “Consolidation happens because producers have to exit, not because they want to.

What’s Driving the Farm Economy Right Now

When economists were asked to identify the two most important factors shaping agriculture’s economic health today, their responses clustered around a familiar, but increasingly sharp, divide: strong demand in livestock and the protein sector versus persistent oversupply and cost pressure in crops, all layered with trade and policy uncertainty.

Several economists pointed to continued strength in beef demand, both domestically and through export channels, as a key stabilizing force. While the dairy sector is an area that shows signs of weakness for 2026.

“Livestock revenues are a bright spot,” one respondent noted, underscoring why the livestock sector continues to outperform crops financially.

Looking to 2026, economists overwhelmingly point to input costs, not interest rates, as the biggest barrier to profitability. Nearly 70% cited input prices as the largest challenge as well, far ahead of trade concerns or capital availability.

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

“We have too much supply and not enough demand for row crops,” one economist wrote.

Another said: “Input costs are still too high.”

Trade remains a central wild card, especially relationships with China and uncertainty around global supply. Several respondents cited trade disputes and agreements as critical factors, along with questions about the size of South American crops and how that could shape global competition in the months ahead.

Policy uncertainty was also featured prominently, with economists pointing to domestic biofuels policy, government payments and broader market signals as factors influencing both short-term cash flow and longer-term demand growth.

Overall, economists say the ag economy is being pulled in opposite directions: strong livestock demand providing support, while crops struggle under high costs, oversupply and unresolved trade and policy questions — a dynamic that helps explain why the broader farm economy feels stable, but far from healthy, as 2026 approaches.

Livestock: A Continued Bright Spot

Livestock continues to stand out as the most financially healthy segment of the ag economy. Every economist surveyed rated beef as above average or excellent, supported by strong domestic demand and tight supplies. Dairy and pork were viewed as stable to moderately strong.

That success creates a stark contrast with row crops, where corn and cotton were cited by 38% each as the commodities most at risk financially in 2026.

What Could Move Crop Prices in the Next Six Months

Looking ahead to the first half of 2026, economists say crop prices will hinge less on domestic fundamentals and more on global supply, trade flows and policy clarity.

Across responses, South America emerged as the dominant influence, with economists repeatedly citing Brazilian weather, the size of the South American harvest and how those supplies compete with U.S. exports. Several noted that clarity around South American production will be critical in setting price direction for corn, soybeans and wheat.

Trade, particularly with China, remains another key swing factor. Economists emphasized not just the announcement of trade agreements, but whether purchases translate into actual shipments.

“China purchases of U.S. crops, but also if and when actual shipments occur,” one respondent noted, adding that details within any trade deal, including purchase commitments, will matter just as much as headlines.

Domestic factors still play a role, but economists see them as secondary in the near term. Input prices, early U.S. planting conditions and assumptions about 2026 acreage were all cited as important — especially as markets begin to trade expectations for next year’s crop mix.

Policy uncertainty also hangs over the outlook. Economists pointed to ongoing questions around trade policy, biofuels policy and broader economic conditions as variables that could amplify or mute price moves.

Economists say crop prices over the next six months are likely to be driven by how global supply unfolds, whether export demand materializes and how quickly policy uncertainty is resolved, rather than by any single domestic production shock.

Biofuels Policy: A Potential Turning Point?

One of the clearest themes Meyer highlights as a possible game changer for demand, and ultimately prices, is biofuels policy.

For economists, policy levers like year-round E15, Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volumes, 45Z investment tax credits and how small refinery exemptions are handled could meaningfully influence demand for corn and soybeans in 2026 and beyond.

“It’s one of the places where policymakers actually have levers to help with tight margins in the row crop sector,” Meyer says.

He emphasizes that final rules on RFS volumes and how biobased credits are implemented could impact feedstock demand.

“For the next couple of crop seasons, RVO (Renewable Volume Obligations) and how EPA reallocates small refinery exemptions are big factors,” Meyer says. “Should we raise the RVO to soak up that pool like a sponge? Should imported feedstocks get full 45Z credit? Those decisions could move demand.”

On year-round E15, a long-sought policy priority for corn growers, Meyer is cautiously optimistic.

“I do think it matters,” he says. “Maybe it’s not a huge swing this year, but offering certainty and building demand over multiple seasons is supportive. Other countries like Brazil are ramping up their biofuels production too, so this isn’t happening in a vacuum.”

Policy Uncertainty Still Looms

Economists also flagged top priorities for 2026 policy action:

Year-round E15 (row crops)
Trade policy clarity (row crops & livestock)
Labor reform and regulatory issues (livestock)

They also highlighted under-covered risks, which include pressure on land rents and values, labor shortages, biofuels policy details (such as 45Z credits) and slower population growth affecting long-term demand.

What Could Move Livestock and Dairy Prices in the Next Six Months

When economists look ahead to livestock and dairy markets in early 2026, they see a mix of strong demand signals, supply-side risks and policy uncertainty shaping price direction.

Consumer demand remains the cornerstone of the outlook, particularly for beef. Several economists pointed to continued buying interest from U.S. consumers as the primary support for cattle prices, even as affordability pressures rise. At the same time, some warned that a more “K-shaped” economy could begin to shift demand, pulling some consumers away from beef and toward pork.

Supply dynamics and herd trends are another major focus. Economists cited herd size, potential herd expansion and the availability of feeder cattle as critical variables. The expected resumption of feeder cattle imports from Mexico was highlighted as a key factor that could influence cattle supplies and pricing, depending on timing and volume.

Animal health risks also remain on the radar. Issues such as avian influenza, screwworm and other disease threats were mentioned as potential disruptors that could quickly alter supply conditions in both livestock and dairy markets.

Policy and trade uncertainty continues to hover over the sector. Economists pointed to ongoing questions around tariffs, restrictions on live animal trade with Mexico and the next steps under the USMCA as factors that could impact both imports and exports. Political uncertainty more broadly was also cited as a potential source of market volatility.

For dairy, economists noted that beef-on-dairy dynamics are likely to continue weighing on milk prices by increasing beef supplies while complicating dairy herd decisions.

Taken together, economists say livestock and dairy prices over the next six months will be driven by a delicate balance between strong consumer demand, evolving supply conditions and unresolved trade and policy questions, with any shift in one of those areas capable of moving markets quickly.

Acreage Expectations: Stress, Not Shock

Despite margin pressure, economists do not expect dramatic acreage pullbacks in 2026. Most expect:

Corn: 93 to 95 million acres
Soybeans: 84 to 86 million acres
Wheat: 44 to 45 million acres
Cotton: 9 to 10 million acres

Corn acreage expectations have edged lower since November, as economists backed away from another year above 95 million acres. At the same time, soybean acreage expectations have firmed, with 75% now targeting 84 to 86 million acres, suggesting stronger relative economics for beans.

“Export demand has helped keep corn acres supported,” Meyer says. “The question is whether that demand holds and whether policy supports it.”

As for acreage, the major impact on prices would be a large acreage reduction, which is unlikely.

“That’s what it comes down to, too. What I’ve been thinking about is what else can you use land for? And you’ve got the pushback on urban sprawl, you’ve got pushback on other uses for ag land. But right now, the simple fact is we’ve got way too much production. Without that slowing, or a drastic increase in demand, I don’t see prices improving to very lucrative levels,” Gardner says.

Overall, The Ag Economy Is a Grind, Not a Rebound

When you look at all the results from the December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, economists paint a picture of an industry that has stopped getting worse, but has not yet found a path to durable profitability.

Crops remain mired in margin compression; livestock continues to outperform but remains sensitive to policy decisions. Government aid is buying time but not addressing structural challenges, but it’s policy outcomes, especially around biofuels, trade and E15, that could be decisive in shaping 2026 outcomes.

For now, the farm economy has found a floor. The tougher question, economists say, is whether policy can help lift it, or if it will continue to grind forward without a genuine rebound.

Related News: As Screwworm Inches Closer, When Could the U.S. Reopen the Southern Border to Cattle Imports?

These Half-Dozen U.S. Ag Trade Missions Aim To Diversify Global Demand

Wed, 31 Dec 2025 16:46:10 GMT

Trump’s USDA team has announced its agribusiness trade missions for the year ahead.

“Our team certainly plays an important role in generating demand overseas for the products,” says Luke Lindberg, USDA undersecretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs.

Lindberg points to a three-point plan Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ team is deploying:

Get better trade agreements.
Build willing buyer and willing seller relationships.
Hold trading partners accountable.

According to Lindberg, the goal is it “helps to cultivate, it helps to diversify, so we’re not solely focused on one or two key buyers. I think if you go to many business owners and ask them, would you rather have one buyer that buys 80% of your products or would you rather have some diversification to lots of buyers who have ups and downs of their own, I think many of them would say they prefer the diversification model.”

So far, six agribusiness trade missions have been announced for 2026 with the goal of growing global markets, increasing exports and strengthening the agricultural economy.

The six mission destinations, and potential agricultural focus areas, include the following.

1. February 2026, Jakarta, Indonesia

Since 2020, annual U.S. ag exports to Indonesia have hovered between $2.75 billion and $3.25 billion. Overall, it’s the 11^th largest trade partner for U.S. ag goods.

Indonesia is the fourth-largest market for U.S. soybeans following China, the European Union and Mexico. According to U.S. Census Bureau trade data, in 2024 Indonesia imported from the U.S. $1.2 billion in soybeans, $198 million in wheat and $139 million in cotton. This past July, the Indonesia private sector and the U.S. wheat industry signed a memorandum committing to purchasing at least 1 million metric tons of U.S. wheat between 2026 and 2030 plus a minimum of 800,000 metric tons of wheat in 2025 (prorated).

The Trump administration has worked to address long-standing barriers to U.S. agricultural trade and expanding market access into Indonesia with a trade agreement eliminating tariffs on more than 99% of U.S. products.

2. April 2026, Manila, Philippines

U.S. ag exports to the Philippines have more than doubled since 2010. In 2024, the total value was $3.5 billion, making it the ninth-largest customer for U.S. ag trade.

With limited domestic production, the Philippines imports nearly all of its dairy products, and specifically $365 million comes from the U.S. Poultry exports to the Philippines totaled $187 million, with a majority of that in frozen chicken leg quarters.

The U.S. gained market share for ethanol imports into the Philippines, having doubled volumes in 2024 with a value of $138 million.

Beef and beef products are the sixth-largest group of ag products the Philippines imports from the U.S. This category has also experienced recent growth by increasing 58% from 2023 to 2024. The U.S. is second to Brazil in market share for beef imported into the Philippines.

In 2024, the Philippines imported $120 million of pork and pork products from the U.S. The country’s local supply has been declining because of African Swine Fever.

According to an announcement in July, the Trump administration said the Philippines will charge zero tariffs for U.S. exports into their market, while the Philippines will pay 19% tariffs to the U.S.

3. May 2026, Istanbul, Turkey

According to USDA analysis, Turkey has grown its strength as an importer of raw materials and then reexported finished products. This includes importing wheat for flour and cotton for apparel.

Because of its geographic location, Turkey has also grown as a strategic regional transshipment hub, connecting U.S. exporters with trade partners across the Caucasus region.

In September, Turkey lifted its retaliatory tariffs on some U.S. ag products: rice, tree nuts, distilled spirits and more. The Trump administration says a focus for the upcoming agribusiness trade mission will be to address nontariff barriers to trade, which includes import bans on U.S. animal protein.

4. August 2026, Australia and New Zealand

The Trump administration says its trade breakthroughs with Australia will give greater access to U.S. beef exporters. The U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement is structured to give comprehensive duty-free market access.

Other protein sectors have significant trade established with Australia. In 2024, $328 million worth of U.S. pork and pork products were imported. And $173 million of U.S. dairy products were brought into the country.

New Zealand imported $520 million worth of U.S. ag goods, including: soybean meal, dairy ingredients (lactose and whey), fresh fruit and distiller’s dried grains.

5. September 2026, Saudi Arabia

This agribusiness trade mission will focus on technical issues and nontariff barriers. Saudi Arabia is the 23^rd largest ag export market for the U.S., and it is a gateway to the $3 billion market for U.S. ag goods that is the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf.

Over the past 10 years, the country has increased its imports of U.S. hay by 540% to its recent total of $152 million in 2024.

Corn, tree nuts and rice are also key ag goods exported from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia, totaling $239 million, $169 million and $123 million, respectively.

6. November 2026, Vietnam

USDA says this trade mission will focus on preferential access for specialty cheese and meats as well as improved market access for U.S. peaches and nectarines.

U.S. ag exports to the country peaked in 2018 at $4 billion and in 2023 were around $3.1 billion. Ranked from highest value to smallest, the top five ag products exported from the U.S. into Vietnam in 2023 were: cotton, soybeans, distillers grains, soybean meal and tree nuts.

For meat and meat products, the key prospects include frozen/chilled beef (boneless and bone-in), frozen chicken (leg quarters, legs and paws), and turkey.

Dairy could be a growth market for U.S. exports into Vietnam as nonfat dried milk powder has led the segment to total $146 million of imports in 2023. Fresh cheese (for foodservice/restaurants) is in demand by younger generations despite not being part of a traditional diet in the country.

USDA also points to fresh fruit as a growth category for the country, namely apples, cherries and grapes.

USTR's Measured Approach on Nicaragua is Great News for U.S. Pork

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 17:55:17 GMT

Known around the globe as the “land of fire and water,” Nicaragua has more recently become known as a rapidly growing destination for U.S. pork.

Duty-free access through Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR has helped Nicaragua move up to 13th among all export markets this year. Exports will approach 20,000 metric tons (mt) in 2025, more than doubling over the past five years and up from less than 1,500 mt a decade ago. Export value is estimated at $68.5 million – up 180% since 2020, the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) said in its latest report.

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) recently announced that the U.S. will impose tariffs on all imported Nicaraguan goods that are not originating under the CAFTA-DR. The tariff will initially be set at zero, but is set to increase to 10% in 2027 and to 15% in 2028.

“This announcement represents a much more measured approach than some of the potential actions USTR proposed in October, which included possible suspension of Nicaragua’s CAFTA-DR benefits and tariffs of up to 100%,” USMEF reports. “This is great news for the U.S. pork industry.”

The U.S. holds about 95% of Nicaragua’s imported pork market, points out Lucia Ruano, USMEF Central America representative.

(Data: USDA, with USMEF estimate for 2025)

“Demand for U.S. pork in Nicaragua is being driven right now by a combination of improved market access, changing consumption habits and strong market development efforts,” Ruano says. “And a key factor was the full tariff phase out under the free trade agreement in 2020 which allows U.S. pork to enter the market at zero duty. That made U.S. pork more competitive and more accessible to importers and retailers.”

From the importer and consumer perspective, Ruano says what’s most appealing about U.S. pork is its consistency, quality and reliability of supply.

“Importers know exactly what they’re getting in terms of cut specification, yields and performance,” she adds.

Pork is becoming a center of the plate feature in Nicaragua. Popular cuts are the pork loin, the tenderloin, and all the ribs (baby backs, spare ribs, riblets).

“These cuts fit very well with local cooking styles, with family meals and restaurant menus, and they allow pork to compete directly with other proteins as the center of the plate,” Ruano says.

CAFTA has been absolutely critical in developing the Nicaragua market of U.S. pork, she says.

“Maintaining duty-free access is essential right now,” Ruano says. “Any disruption would immediately affect pricing, volumes and confidence in the supply chain.”

Farmers Need the Certainty Provided Under USMCA More Than Ever, Lawmakers Say

Mon, 24 Nov 2025 22:47:07 GMT

The benefits of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) are hard to deny. Kenneth Smith Ramos, a former lead negotiator for the Mexican government who was deeply involved in the negotiation and ratification of USMCA, discussed the mutual benefits USMCA has delivered for the agricultural sectors in both the U.S. and Mexico during the recent USMEF Strategic Planning Conference. Not only has the agreement enhanced food security in both countries, but he said it has also bolstered the profitability of many agricultural sectors through free trade.

The U.S., Canada and Mexico are scheduled for a joint review of the trade agreement in July. Smith, who is now a partner in the regulatory and trade consulting firm AGON, says the possible outcomes of the USMCA review range from a very limited review to the threat of “rupture” if the agreement is reopened and the U.S. threatens to withdraw. He said he anticipates something in between, with portions of USMCA – some of which may be contentious – opened up for renegotiation.

“We see a complex USMCA review, but we do not see a scenario where there is an imminent collapse of the agreement,” Smith said during the conference. “There will be turbulence, but we do not see the plane crashing.”

Smith added that it is critical for the U.S., Mexican and Canadian agricultural sectors to remain vigilant in explaining the benefits of USMCA and the importance of maintaining it as a trilateral pact.

Much Needed Certainty

Congressional Agriculture Trade Caucus cochairs Reps. Jim Costa (D-CA), Dusty Johnson (R-SD), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), and Adrian Smith (R-NE) led more than 100 members of the House of Representatives in urging the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to “carefully” examine changes to USMCA.

“USMCA was truly a landmark agreement for American Agriculture when it entered force, and its positive impact on U.S. agriculture has yet to reach its maximum benefit,” the members wrote. “At a time when economic challenges threaten the livelihood of family farms, producers need the certainty provided under USMCA more than ever.”

In the Nov. 20 letter to USTR Ambassador Jamieson Greer, the lawmakers said the outcome of the review should advance American agriculture and food production. They asked the trade agency to “work closely with Congress and consider the significant positive impact North American trade has on our communities. Any changes to the agreement should be carefully examined to ensure U.S. agriculture is not negatively impacted.”

Lawmakers pointed out that USMCA streamlined compliance measures and harmonized regulations, thereby generating cost savings for U.S. farmers, producers, and ranchers. In 2024, the U.S. was the world’s largest agricultural exporter, with total ag exports valued at $176 billion.

“The agriculture section of the USMCA provides much needed certainty within North America through its tough and effective rules on sanitary and phytosanitary measures, agricultural biotechnology, intellectual property, and technical barriers to trade,” the letter said. “U.S. agricultural exporters depend on the binding nature of these provisions to access our closest markets and make sales, which has directly benefited the farmers, ranchers, and producers that we represent. Further, these rules-based, science-driven commitments set a strong example for other trading partners hoping to achieve similar access to the U.S. market.”

Earlier this month, the National Pork Producers Council and more than 125 agriculture and food organizations also urged USTR to be cautious in making changes to USMCA, which they said has facilitated and streamlined the flow of commerce throughout the three countries. The positive impact USMCA has had on U.S. agriculture, they added, “has yet to reach its maximum benefit. At a time when economic challenges threaten the livelihood of family farms, producers need the certainty provided under USMCA more than ever.”

“U.S. pork producers export over 25% of their pork,” NPPC noted in Capital Update. “With Mexico and Canada as their first and fourth largest export markets, respectively, USMCA has provided continuity and removed market uncertainty in those markets.”

Gregg Doud, president and CEO of the National Milk Producers Federation pointed out that USMCA has delivered real value for America’s dairy farmers.

“While several dairy compliance issues remain to be addressed in the 2026 Joint Review, the duty-free trade into Mexico that USMCA preserved has allowed U.S. dairy exporters to partner with Mexico to meet growing demand,” Doud said.

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

Optimism Reigns Despite Volatility in U.S. Red Meat Industry

Thu, 13 Nov 2025 17:39:12 GMT

Demand for U.S. red meat remains robust in key destinations where customers crave the quality and consistency of U.S. pork, beef and lamb, despite significant obstacles in the international marketplace, explained U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) president and CEO Dan Halstrom at the USMEF Strategic Planning Conference in Indianapolis.

Pork exports are modestly below last year’s record pace, but he says the gap stems mostly from a period early in 2025 when China’s retaliatory tariffs increased and the U.S. industry faced uncertainty about plant eligibility.

“Although export data is only available through July due to the government shutdown, pork shipments are on record pace to leading market Mexico, as well as to Central America and Colombia,” USMEF reports.

Halstrom says beef exports have been hit harder by barriers in China, where U.S. beef not only faces retaliatory tariffs, but also unwarranted plant delistings and China’s failure to renew registrations for the vast majority of U.S. beef plants and cold storage facilities. Fully reopening the world’s largest beef import market to U.S. beef will require several actions on China’s part, and the lockout could extend into 2026.

“This is obviously a political card that’s being held by the China side,” Halstrom says. “One thing I’m very confident in is that [the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative] is well aware of our position, well aware of what’s involved, and very well-informed. I do think they’ll get it worked out eventually, I just can’t tell you when – no one can.”

Free Trade Agreements are Key
Protecting and defending existing free trade agreements is an urgent priority, Halstrom says. He is optimistic that ongoing negotiations with several trading partners may lead to new opportunities for U.S. red meat, especially in Southeast Asia.

Over the past decade, red meat exports to free trade agreement partner countries have expanded by more than 30%, and exports to these destinations now account for 76% of total shipments, he says.

Invoking the Paul Harvey quote, “In times like these, it helps to recall that there have always been times like these,” Halstrom reminds USMEF members that the industry has endured tremendous trade setbacks in the past, including widespread market closures due to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and plunging consumer confidence and buying power in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.

“Remember that we overcame all those obstacles,” Halstrom says. “I believe that with the knowledge in this room, and with continued cooperation and collaboration, we can overcome anything.”

A Complicated Relationship
Keynote speaker Jan Lambregts, head of RaboResearch Global Economics & Markets, discussed the complexities of the U.S.-China trade relationship.

“I’m not quite sure if you will like this news, but I don’t think there will be a comprehensive deal coming soon between China and the U.S.,” Lambregts shares. “What the U.S. is demanding is access to Chinese markets. What China will never give is access to the Chinese market because that’s not how they’ve been winning in trade during the past 30 to 40 years.”

Both countries are playing for time, he says. China has been cut off from high-end semiconductors and needs time to develop its own semiconductor sector. Similarly, the U.S. needs time to build its rare earths capacity, including development of extraction and processing capabilities.

“In the meantime, the U.S. is basically sending all its allies the same message: What was previously free defense now must be paid for, because we (the U.S.) need to be compensated. And by the way, if you want to trade with China, there are conditions now,” Lambregts says.

Is China a National Security Threat to U.S. Agriculture?

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 14:28:15 GMT

It’s been more than a decade since China made very public, very large investments in its future to feed its own people and gain greater control over international agribusiness.

In 2013, WH Group (then known as Shuanghui International) purchased Smithfield Foods for $4.7 billion, which was a U.S. company with 25 U.S. plants, 460 farms, and contracts with 2,100 producers in 12 states. A year later in back-to-back months, COFCO (China National Cereals, Oils and Foodstuffs Corporation) bought two major agricultural trading companies: Noble Agri and Nidera. Then in 2017, ChemChina acquired Swiss-based Syngenta for $46 billion.

These acquisitions highlight the production and power China has amassed, and it’s being called into question by policy thinktank America First Policy Institute (AFPI).

“We know that many of these state-owned enterprises have an obligation to the CCP, and that is to report in and turn in all of the intellectual property they collect around the world or trade secrets and turn it in the Chinese Communist Party, giving them an edge and their ability to offshore a lot of our production from the United States,” says Ambassador Kip Tom, Indiana farmer and AFPI expert.

In a recent report, AFPI spotlighted the following vulnerabilities for U.S. farmers and consumers:

Smithfield controls 23% of U.S. pork processing
The U.S. market accounts for 23% of The Syngenta Group’s revenues
DJI drones are used by U.S. farmers to collect field data

One policy recommendation from AFPI is for Syngenta and Smithfield Foods to “divest to a domestic company or, at a minimum, a company not principally managed by an adversary of the United States.”

“Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party pose a threat to American farmers and U.S. food security,” says Congressman John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), Chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. “They’re engaged in economic aggression against the United States. We must protect our farms, feed mills, processing plants, and slaughterhouses. The CCP strategy is two-fold, undermine U.S. food security while siege-proofing their own.”

The full report is available here.

Ambassador Tom says in addition to direct or majority ownership by the CCP, global supply chains have evolved over recent decades resulting in U.S. farmers being more susceptible to negative impacts.

“We’re going to need to do everything we can do in our regulatory regime to make sure we can bring back these supply chains,” Tom says. “With the amount of sourcing that we’ve done in chemistries around the world, our fertilizer production, computer chips that run our tractors, everything, we are very vulnerable.”

Another aspect of Chinese ownership that has come into focus is foreign owned land in the U.S. The most recent reports peg a minimum of 35 million acres of farmland (3.4% of all U.S. ag land) is foreign owned, with Chinese companies owning around 350,000 acres. Of that, Brazos Highland owns 102,345 acres, and Smithfield owns 97,975 acres. The topic garnered attention at the state level with more than a handful of states passing legislation limiting foreign farmland ownership.

“Farmland is critical in the United States,” Tom says. “We know that the Fufang Group tried to place a [corn milling] plant up near Grand Forks, North Dakota, near an Air Force base, that was a strategic problem. That same group came to Indiana, and we stood up and said the same thing, ‘no, this shouldn’t be allowed.’ So it comes back to the states to get involved and make sure we put the measures in place to not allow this to happen.”

AFPI applies a skeptical eye on DJI drones, a Chinese company currently the largest manufacturer of drones worldwide.

“I would be very supportive, and I hope many of us farmers would be, to see the DJI drones go away. We should never underestimate the Chinese ability to use any information that they gather from the United States,” Tom says. “But we need to make sure that we shore up the production of drones here in the United States with American parts and information that’s processed here in the United States.”

In addition to their agribusiness investments, China has ramped up its public-funded research . Since 2008, China has outspent the U.S. in comparable public sector spending for agricultural research, and furthermore, since 2019, China has spent twice as much, or double, as the U.S.

“This is all part of the BRICS initiative, Brazil, Russia, India, and China. And we know that actually the Brazil has fast forward their agriculture development in their nation,” Tom says. “We know that now they are leading suppliers and a lot of the commodities that are produced in the world today, whether it’s corn, soybeans, wheat, beef, hogs, and they’re getting into the biofuels. Because of the theft of some of these intellectual property products that we had here in the United States, namely genetics, corn genetics, we know that China in a few years here will probably be self -sufficient on corn.”

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

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 21:13:19 GMT

The Meat Institute is calling on the Trump administration to renew the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) for its benefits to American meat and poultry companies and the entire U.S. animal protein value chain.

“USMCA has been a boon for the American meat, livestock and poultry sector, along with the broader American food and agriculture economy and ancillary industries,” said Julie Anna Potts, The Meat Institute president and CEO, in a news release. “It has provided steady income to American farmers, ranchers, and meat and poultry exporters; it has created jobs for American truck drivers, ports, and transportation companies; it has strengthened American food retail and food service establishments; and it has accomplished all of this through transparent rules that allow American businesses to proactively plan supply chains and develop durable customer relationships.”

USMCA entered into force on July 1, 2020, substituting the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to create more balanced, reciprocal trade supporting high-paying jobs for Americans and grow the North American economy, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) .

“The domestic U.S. meat and poultry industry’s long-term economic viability, though, depends on robust international trade, particularly as domestic per capita consumption of meat and poultry remains stable, and 95% of consumers live outside the U.S,” The Meat Institute wrote in comments submitted to the USTR on Nov. 3. “International trade is, therefore, vital to the long-term strength of the U.S. meat and poultry industry, the American workers it supports, and the rural and farm communities it sustains.”

In 2024, U.S. meat and poultry exports exceeded $24.6 billion. Meat and poultry product exports to Canada and Mexico accounted for $7.5 billion of that total. Annually, approximately 14% of U.S. beef production, 15% of U.S. poultry production and 25% of U.S. pork production are exported, the organization noted. As well, exports add value to every animal produced, and in turn, increase demand for U.S. corn and soybeans.

“The Trump Administration’s America First Trade Policy Agenda has reinvigorated American trade policy and has reasserted American leadership to advance U.S. meat, poultry, food, and agriculture trade in a manner that revitalizes our farm communities and supports broad-based economic growth. President Trump’s negotiation of the USMCA during his first term resulted in the world’s gold-standard trade agreement,” the letter said. “Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, USMCA has bolstered U.S. meat, poultry, and livestock trade, has led to increased market integration in North America, and must be preserved without significant changes that would disrupt the U.S. meat and poultry industry’s substantial access to the Canadian and Mexican markets.”

The Meat Institute says it’s clear USMCA’s access terms – zero tariffs on most meat, poultry and livestock trade – have underpinned American economic and job growth, particularly in rural and farm communities across the U.S.

“No other trade agreement can boast the same success,” Potts said. “President Trump deserves enormous credit for this extraordinary achievement.”

See The Meat Institute’s full comments in response to the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) “Request for Comments on the Operation of the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.”

Pork Industry Encouraged by Preferential Market Access in US-EU Trade Framework

Thu, 21 Aug 2025 18:58:36 GMT

The White House announced a United States-European Union Framework on an Agreement on Reciprocal, Fair, and Balanced Trade on Aug. 21. The Framework Agreement aims to resolve trade imbalances and maximize the U.S. and EU’s combined economic power in an ongoing process to improve market access and increase the U.S./EU trade and investment relationship, according to the Administration.

“America’s pork producers are encouraged by the specific inclusion of pork in the U.S.-EU framework to address tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. We look forward to continued collaboration to address longstanding market access issues,” says National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) president Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio.

U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) president and CEO Dan Halstrom is encouraged to see that the European Union will provide preferential market access for pork and bison meat, has committed to streamlining requirements for U.S. pork sanitary certificates, and intends to address other non-tariff barriers affecting agricultural trade – including its deforestation regulation.

“These changes are long overdue, and USMEF greatly appreciates the Trump administration making agricultural market access a top priority in negotiations with the EU and with other key trading partners,” Halstrom says. “The U.S. has been a net importer of red meat from the EU due to the vast barriers the EU imposes on imports, and addressing the EU’s tariff and non-tariff barriers is absolutely essential for U.S. export growth.”

For decades, pork trade between the U.S. and the EU has been weighted to favor EU interests, NPPC says. In 2024, the U.S. exported $7 million of pork products to the EU while importing over $709 million from the EU. To compare, the U.S. currently exports more pork to Honduras than to the 27 countries total that make up the EU.

Halstrom adds that it’s critical that U.S. beef exports to the EU – which are already heavily restricted – face no further regulatory obstacles related to deforestation. With U.S. agriculture posing negligible risk to global deforestation, USMEF thanks the Trump administration for securing a commitment from the EU to address concerns of U.S. producers and exporters regarding the EU Deforestation Regulation.

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.

North American Pork Producers Reaffirm Commitments to Food Security, Responsible Production

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 17:44:09 GMT

North American pork producer leaders confirmed a common focus on producing nutritious, sustainable and affordable pork at a recent trilateral meeting in Niagara on the Lake, ON.

The meeting brought together officers of the Canadian Pork Council (CPC), the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the Mexican Pork Producer Organization OPORMEX. The meeting, hosted by CPC, addressed issues of critical importance to pork production in North America, discussed animal care and health issues, and producers also reaffirmed their commitment to collaborate on efforts to reduce the risk of animal diseases, such as African swine fever.

“This was an opportunity for pork industry representatives to exchange ideas, discuss mutual challenges and possible solutions, and explore areas of common interest,” CPC chair and meeting host René Roy, said in a release. “This foundation includes the adoption of new approaches and methods demonstrated by sound science to provide the best possible care and handling of our pigs, allow for environmentally sustainable use of our natural resources and achieve favorable results in the quality, safety, affordability and availability of our pork products.”

NPPC President and Ohio pork producer Duane Stateler said the North American pork industries – including both producers and pigs – are strongest when they collaborate, share challenges and solutions, and learn from one another.

“This important trilateral meeting accomplishes just that,” Stateler said in a release. “American pork producers appreciate the opportunity to meet annually with our neighbors to the north and south to find new ways to reaffirm our commitment to producing pork in the best ways possible.”

In their discussions, the leaders recognized that, in addition to production efficiency and environmental sustainability, pork producers share with the rest of society the expectation that pigs are raised in a manner which respects their animal welfare needs as well as society’s concerns that the industry uses antimicrobials prudently, the release said.

“For pork production, North America is more than just a trading bloc responsible for almost 50% of international pork trade. From an animal health perspective, it is a strategic region with great potential to continue supplying global demand,” Heriberto Hernández Cárdenas, president of OPORMEX, said in a release. “The exchange of experiences and analysis of the environment allows us to take coordinated action in each of our countries, with the goal of influencing the creation of conditions that allow us to better address the challenges facing our industries.”

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.

Breaking: Mexican Border Closed Again as New World Screwworm Comes Within 370 Miles of the U.S.

Thu, 10 Jul 2025 02:18:05 GMT

On July 8, Mexico’s National Service of Agro-Alimentary Health, Safety and Quality reported a new case of New World screwworm (NWS) in Ixhuatlan de Madero, Veracruz, Mexico, which is approximately 160 miles northward of the current sterile fly dispersal grid on the eastern side of the country and 370 miles south of the U.S./Mexico border.

This new northward detection comes approximately two months after northern detections were reported in Oaxaca and Veracruz, less than 700 miles away from the U.S. border, which triggered the closure of our ports to Mexican cattle, bison and horses on May 11, 2025 .

While USDA announced a risk-based phased port re-opening strategy for cattle, bison and equine from Mexico beginning as early as July 7, 2025 , this newly reported NWS case raises significant concern about the previously information shared by Mexican officials and severely compromises the outlined port reopening schedule of five ports from July 7 to Sept. 15. Therefore, in order to protect American livestock and the U.S. food supply, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins has ordered the closure of livestock trade through southern ports of entry effective immediately.

“The United States has promised to be vigilant — and after detecting this new NWS case, we are pausing the planned port reopening’s to further quarantine and target this deadly pest in Mexico. We must see additional progress combatting NWS in Veracruz and other nearby Mexican states in order to reopen livestock ports along the Southern border,” Rollins says. “Thanks to the aggressive monitoring by USDA staff in the U.S. and in Mexico, we have been able to take quick and decisive action to respond to the spread of this deadly pest.”

To ensure the protection of U.S. livestock herds, USDA is holding Mexico accountable by ensuring proactive measures are being taken to maintain a NWS free barrier. This is maintained with stringent animal movement controls, surveillance, trapping and following the proven science to push the NWS barrier south in phases as quickly as possible.

In June, Secretary Rollins launched a 5-point plan to combat NWS by protecting our border at all costs, increasing eradication efforts in Mexico, and increasing readiness. USDA also announced the groundbreaking of a sterile fly dispersal facility in South Texas. This facility will provide a critical contingency capability to disperse sterile flies should a NWS detection be made in the Southern U.S.

Simultaneously, USDA is moving forward with the design process to build a domestic sterile fly production facility to ensure it has the resources to push NWS back to the Darien Gap. USDA is working on these efforts in lockstep with border states – Arizona, New Mexico and Texas – as it will take a coordinated approach with federal, state and local partners to keep this pest at bay and out of the U.S.

USDA will continue to have personnel perform site visits throughout Mexico to ensure the Mexican government has adequate protocols and surveillance in place to combat this pest effectively and efficiently.

Click to enlarge.

(USDA)

Your Next Read: Protect Your Livestock: Signs of New World Screwworm

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 .

Boost for U.S. Pork: China Approves More Plants for Exports

Wed, 25 Jun 2025 18:55:00 GMT

U.S. pork will be gaining more access to China again through additional port renewals. This breakthrough was the result of combined efforts of the USDA and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), who have been working with China’s General Administration of Customs to renew the registrations of U.S. meat and poultry plants and facilities that expired earlier this year.

The recent renewals, which also include 83 poultry facilities, apply to product produced after June 11, according to a statement from the National Pork Producers Council.

These latest plant approvals came just a week after the U.S. and China agreed to move forward on the May trade deal they reached in Geneva, Switzerland, NPPC says.

“Export registrations for more than 1,000 U.S. meat plants were granted by China under the 2020 Phase 1 trade deal with the United States, but many expired in February and early March,” says the NPPC statement.

China previously renewed the registrations of 300-plus U.S. pork facilities in mid-March, then suspended renewals during tariff war after that.

“A win for certainty, NPPC has worked diligently with USDA and USTR to gain this very market access for U.S. pork,” the statement says. “Approval of these additional 23 pork processing plants opens further trade opportunities for certain types of U.S. pork products.”

The port renewals matter to U.S. pork producers as China has been an important destination for certain types of U.S. pork products, such as offal, that return more value to U.S. producers than they do in other countries.

More than 475,000 metric tons of U.S. pork valued at more than $1.1 billion was exported to China in 2024, and about 55% of pork variety meat (offal) exports go to China.

Your next read: PRRS and Profitability: The Pork Industry Paradox

Is Food Inflation Heating Up July 4th Grills?

Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:44:51 GMT

Two industry reports are shining a light on the cost of a July 4^th barbecue.

The economists at Wells Fargo calculate an at-home holiday party for 10 will cost $130. The menu includes chicken breasts, beef sliders, hot dogs, fresh fruit, a vegetable platter, potato salad, corn bread, cake, apple pie, ice cream, beer, wine and soda.

Dr. Michael Swanson, chief agricultural economist within Wells Fargo’s Agri-Food Institute, says year-over-year food inflation is 2.2%.

For notable food prices from the July 4^th report, he cites the following:

Ground beef: Up 7.4%
Boneless chicken breasts: Up 1%
Watermelon and strawberries: Down 0.6%
Potatoes: Up 1%
Egg prices: Up 40%
Ice cream (1.5 quart): Up less than 1%

Swanson says beef prices year over year have been running 6% to 8% higher.

“When you talk to somebody who’s a processor or a packer, there’s not a part of the cow that moves independent from the other parts of the cow so it’s all right in that category 6% to 8% on a year over year basis the last couple of months based on CPI,” he says.

He says for cost-savings, chicken offers the greatest opportunities in the protein category.

“When you look at the composite pricing from USDA, it’s right around $2.42 to $2.45 a pound — including everything from wings and breasts,” he says.

As for hot dogs, Swanson says the blend inside the casing will drive the price.

“If you go with the all-beef frankfurters, yes, they’re up substantially. If you look for a sausage or bratwurst that has a blend of pork and beef in it, you’re probably finding a much better bargain. Pork has been pretty flat year over year,” he says.

Swanson says the effects of highly pathogenic avian influenza are still being reflected in higher egg prices for menu items such as deviled eggs and salads.

As for ice cream, Swanson says the increase in cost is being attributed to additional labor expense in production.

“We’re seeing a little bit of inflation in that category, but just very modest. We have a good supply of cream and milk in the country right now. The dairymen are doing wel. So, what that reflects is kind of that cost of transformation,” he says.

Wells Fargo uses NeilsenIQ data for its analysis.

American Farm Bureau Market Basket Survey
Using its annual survey, The American Farm Bureau Federation says this year’s food prices are resulting in the second-highest cost for an at-home July 4^th barbecue since 2013 when the survey began.

“High prices don’t mean more money for farmers, however. Farmers are price takers, not price makers. Their share of the food retail dollar is just 15%. The cost of running their farm is up — from labor and transportation to taxes,” says AFBF associate economist Samantha Ayoub.

Per AFBF, this year’s cost for an Independence Day cookout will cost $70.92 for 10 people. Included in the calculations are cheeseburgers, chicken breasts, pork chops, potato salad, strawberries and ice cream.

Last year was the highest cost found by the survey at $7.39 per person.

Year-over-year retail price increases in 2025 include:

2 lb. of ground beef: Up 4.4% to $13.33
Pork and beans: Up 20¢ to $2.69
Potato salad: Up 6.6% to $3.54

Notable reductions, compared to 2024, in food prices per the survey were:

3 lb. package of pork chops: Down 8.8% to $14.13
Chips: Down 10¢ to $4.80 a bag
Hamburger buns: Down 2.6% to $2.35

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