How Trump's New Tariffs Will Make Farming (and Food) More Expensive
Trump's first trade war cost farmers $27 billion. Losses this time around could be higher.

Americans love foreign products, but is our indulgence in Canadian whiskey, Mexican avocados, and Brazilian coffee a bad thing? If you ask President Donald Trump, the answer is unequivocally, yes. On Wednesday, the president announced a baseline 10 percent tariff on products from 180 nations, including higher rates for certain countries the president considers bad actors.
These duties will negatively affect the agricultural sector, which relies heavily on trade. Despite exporting over $175 billion worth of agricultural products (the third-highest level on record), imports outpaced exports in 2024.
If history is any indicator, farmers are sure to pay for Trump's trade war. During the first Trump administration, retaliatory tariffs on American goods led to $27 billion in losses to agricultural exports, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, most of which was caused by lost trade with China.
This time around, the damage could be more severe. Wednesday's announcement elevated tariffs on three of America's five largest agricultural trading partners—China (34 percent), the European Union (20 percent), and Japan (24 percent). Mexico and Canada, which are America's two largest trading partners, were exempt from the list but have faced 25 percent duties on certain products since March.
Together, these five markets account for more than 60 percent of American agricultural exports and retaliatory tariffs have already been enacted by some. China has implemented a 10 percent to 15 percent tariff on American soybeans, cotton, pork, and poultry. In March, Canada announced retaliatory tariffs on a number of American goods, including $5.8 billion worth of agricultural products. The European Union, meanwhile, is considering a suite of tariffs that will impact the agricultural sector.
As these tariffs make it harder for American farmers to access foreign markets, thus decreasing revenue, they could also increase production costs and the price of fertilizer, which is one of the largest expenses involved in farming. Imports of the three most commonly used nutrients in fertilizers—potassium (potash), nitrogen, and phosphorus—topped $10 billion in 2023, $5 billion of which came from Canada. Potash, which "is an irreplaceable component of modern agricultural production," according to the Fertilizer Institute, is sourced predominantly from Canada. Nitrogen, meanwhile, is imported mainly from Canada (the country meets 10 percent of American nitrogen needs), Russia, and Trinidad and Tobago (10 percent tariff).
Trump's announcement retains the 10 percent levy on Canadian potash that doesn't comply with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. The president has also tapped emergency powers to increase domestic production of potash, but the move is unlikely to reduce import dependency for the mineral.
With farmers facing higher production costs and imported products being taxed, consumers can expect food prices to rise.
Since the bird flu outbreak, the U.S. has imported eggs from Turkey, which has already shipped 15,000 tons of eggs to America this year. Under the new tariffs, eggs imported from Turkey will face a 10 percent tax. The cost of importing bananas from Guatemala (10 percent tariff), instant coffee from Vietnam (46 percent tariff), vanilla from Madagascar (47 percent tariff), and many other goods will also rise. With grocery stores operating on low profit margins, these costs will inevitably be passed down to American shoppers.
The damage that this policy will cause is not lost on the Trump administration. On Monday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told the Des Moines Register that her agency is ready to make farmers affected by tariffs "whole" through cash assistance programs. Under the first Trump administration, the Agriculture Department also hedged against its poor trade policy by issuing $28 billion in bailouts to farmers.
Monetary compensation may provide farmers a reprieve, but it will be at the expense of taxpayers, who are going to have to pay more for their favorite products because of Trump's trade war.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck Donald Trump!
I’d rather have a brain addled president who can’t remember what day it is and mostly does nothing.
#TeamGridlock
So ... Rump is levying tariffs on penguins, but not Russia ?
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tariffs-australia-liberation-day-2054649
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/02/trump-tariffs-russia-ukraine-ceasefire
We have sanctions on Russia, this has not changed. Tariffs would be less restrictive to nearly pointless, full on embargo would be the next step in more restrictions.
now do what are the farmers going to do when the whole fucking nation is Argentina?
"Trump's first trade war cost farmers $27 billion."
You forgot all the farm subsidies he added back to make up the losses.
Trump was and remains an economic genius.
Usually sarcasm is difficult to detect in posts, but that was so powerful it’ll probably give me a black eye.
The breadth and depth reporting, the sheer volume, of every facet of Trump's Presidency for two months, including the ins and outs of who is and isn't working for DOGE and exactly which pocketbook any given tariff will and will not hit, compared to the radio silence about who was running the Biden Campaign for 2+ years, is becoming deafening.
Your skill wielding the non-sequitur is truly impressive
It's an ad hominem, not a non-sequitur. It's only a non-sequitur if you assume Jeff Luse and whomever is behind him and despite the obvious second, or further, hand assembly of opinions, has a better, but unstated, policy prescription that is clearly distinct from their reluctant and strategic support of the regulations that divested from the fertilizer and energy via regulations that expatriated fertilizer production in the first place.
But, alas, just like Jeff and Reason and Chase Oliver and the LP, you're just yet another bag full of verbal non-sequiturs that claims to be right because you pulled from the select works of Bastiat and Hayek but not Von Mises or Borlaug or Tull.
Quick to "brilliantly" point out that government is frequently solving problems of its own creation while dismissing any discussion of the predicate problems with "whataboutism!" and "non-sequitur!". Bark louder please you worthless, retarded sea lion, I think all the farmers working out in the fields didn't hear you.
They won’t have to work soon. Their products will be priced out of the international market, but they’ll be fine because Trump will cover their losses with cash.
FFS, as indicated below, "is an irreplaceable component of modern agricultural production".
The people who buy potash to put on their fields listen to the price of futures for fun. They sit down and hash out pricing before they buy the potash and go spread it on their fields. If they get some extra time when they're not maintaining the equipment that spreads it, they vote. Of what use is the opinion of people who have to have "potash is an irreplaceable component of modern agricultural production" explained to them? Do we sit down and hash it out for crazy cat ladies next?
Do you think there are a lot of farmers on here waiting for Jeff Luse's opinions on Trump's tariffs? Seems like if there is a non-sequitur, it's the whole article.
Biden ushered in peace and prosperity…but the thought of President Trump humping Melania in the White House is the only thing that makes your dick hard anymore. Pathetic!!
Biden ushered in
peacewar in Ukraine and prosperity for Zelenskyyyyy and his wife and 20,000,000 illegals.Potash, which "is an irreplaceable component of modern agricultural production," according to the Fertilizer Institute
Gell-Mann meets ChatGPT. Jeff, imagine for a moment that I've crushed empty pop cans in pools of anhydrous and tasted the flavor of potash dust in the air. Why would I assume you and your quotation marks around "is an irreplaceable component of modern agricultural production," would know what any of this means any more than ChatGPT could/would or does by guessing the next word in my next sentence?
Even more critically, why would I assume you care more one way or the other? On down the line, why should or would I assume you actually need potash or even food and aren't just an LLM generating the bag of words that gets your name stamped on it? Or a bag of chemicals generating a bag of words that an LLM could do far more efficiently and effectively?
I wonder if the writer of this article has considered the possibility that these new tariffs might change the behavior of the countries that wish to sell into the USA? Is it possible that they might see it as a good idea to reduce their own tariffs to get some relief? If so, will US goods be more attractive to citizens of those countries due to new, lower prices? All you have to do is think more than one step ahead here. Is it possible that won't work? Sure it is. Does that mean we shouldn't try it and find out? Seems reasonable to me. Call it crude, but at least the man is trying to bend the competition in our favor. The president doesn't have a lot of unilaterally deployable tools, so he's chosen to use tariffs, one he can deploy. It's not a scalpel, but it might do the trick.
I wonder if the writer of this comment has considered the possibility that tariffs might change the behavior of the American electorate and undo Trump's 1.5% margin of victory in 2026, flipping the House and Senate, and possibly leading to Trump's third impeachment, much more likely to succeed?
Pundits liked to claim Harris lost because of the economy and inflation. Slap 10% price increases on all imports, give domestic producers the incentive to do the same, and see how the public likes them apples.
I wonder if the writer of this comment has considered the possibility that tariffs might change the behavior of the American electorate and undo Trump's 1.5% margin of victory in 2026, flipping the House and Senate, and possibly leading to Trump's third impeachment, much more likely to succeed?
I wonder if the writer of this comment has considered the possibility that this sentiment makes him seem like every "deplorable", "bitter clinger", "racist Trumpista", "they don't really mean America first, they mean Trump first" leftist who has stumbled through these forums in the last
816 yrs.?Edit: That's a lie. I don't wonder. Or, if I do, it doesn't materially affect the fact pattern.
> I wonder if the writer of this article has considered the possibility that these new tariffs might change the behavior of the countries that wish to sell into the USA?
There is no indication from Trump administration that the tariffs has anything to do with how other nations are behaving with USA. He calls them "reciprocal" because he likes that word but there is nothing "reciprocal" about them.
For example, Israel has removed all tariffs on US imports and yet they are slapped with 30% tariffs.
This is because Trump admin has claimed that tariff rate = |(exports-imports)*0.5/imports| As you see tariffs imposed by the other country does not even factor in that formula.
For nations like Canada which have agreed to all his economic criteria, he has claimed "Fentanyl" as an excuse. So it is a moving goalpost.
For some small nations like say Vietnaam, obviously they can not import much from USA as they are small, but their economy is mostly specialized in few industries which exports a lot to USA. So the trade deficit will never change. (But they hold lot of US dollars which either get invested back or drive US service sector).
Drump's plan appears to be to grow manufacturing and low level manufacturing in USA at the expense of high paying service sector jobs. What you will increasingly see if the tariffs stay is that small towns will get abandoned, less motels, less gas stations all in favor of factories that make T shirts and shoes.
Perhaps there is a national security argument to this that USA might always want to maintain certain manufacturing ability even at the expense of quality of life and prosperity. But I think there are much better ways to achieve this.
The real goal however here is to strengthen the Drump family grip on economy so he can grow in power and hold on GOP.
The real goal however here is to strengthen the Drump family grip on economy so he can grow in power and hold on GOP.
So for the last several terms the cries about The TPD and RCV and multiple parties was just a facade and really there are political dynasties and bureaucratic deep state apparatus at play that retarded foibles like RCV don't even begin to approach?
What's your next big reveal? COVID research was actually funded at least in part by our own government?
Fucking retard.
“ All you have to do is think more than one step ahead here. Is it possible that won't work?”
You first. If tariffs around the world go to zero, how would American manufacturing jobs be protected? That is, according to Trump, one of the reasons to use tariffs. But in a completely free market, jobs will move to cheaper labor markets, likely at a faster rate than before.
So the second step, much like the first, reinforces the argument that tariffs don’t work and only hurt American consumers.
Hold your horses here. Drump loves limelight and media attention.
Firstly, in order to impose tariffs the CBP (Customs and Border P) needs to formally create a regulation. A lot of this has to go through complex reviews and updates. Then the software systems computing these tariffs need to be updated too. Often there will be chaos due to which a lot of the regulations remain in suspended state for a long time.
I will bet that no tariffs of consequence would actually get imposed on anyone.
But this gives a lot of time for companies to hire lobbyists in Washington, build ties with Drump family and curry favors.
The best way smaller nations could wither this storm is by doing nothing. The best way large nations could handle the situations is telling Trump that he will get whatever he wants and he can get his people talk to their people.
4 years will pass by the time there is a deal. Very likely Trump will get what he "really wants" in that time.
More likely, he will tank the 2026 midterms and lose both houses, which, knowing the Democrats, is likely to lead to a third impeachment, which controlling both houses means they could make it stick. Do they really want JD Vance in the White House during his 2028 run? Who knows, Democrats are stupid too.
Or no impeachment, he's still confusing the economy, and JD Vance loses in 2028. Trump only won by 1.5% against Kackling Kamala; if he's not running and the economy's in the tank, that's not going to help JD Vance either.
Or Trump may pull his head out of his ass by the end of the year with some face saving triumphs, barnstorm the country, fuck with interest rates, and actually save the House and Senate in 2026. All sorts of things are possible.
We'll be fine. Go breathe into a paper bag or something. For crying out loud.
Aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!! Oil was expensive for 4 months in 2022!!! Biden is trying to destroy America!! Outrage!!!!!!
Psssss, America is the biggest energy producer by far so high energy prices are actually now good for America. And in fact now frackers are profitable after record bankruptcies in 2020.
Aren't you supposed to be in jail?
Replying to the "breathe in a paper bag..." I think you have the right attitude. Freakout on day one is pretty par for the course, but we're watching a live negotiation happening, and commenting before there are any results, good or bad. I'm pretty sure doing the same thing we've been doing for the last 50 years isn't a working solution, so I'm willing to watch what happens now. Does Trump get thrown to the lions in two years? It seems like he's pretty lion resistant. the Blob will continue to try and drag him down, but so far, the closest they came was with a rifle. I don't know if his "solution" is going to work well, poorly, or not at all, but at least it's not the same old shit, and they are communicating their intent. I think they actually do give a shit, and I'm willing to watch and see, then judge. Those with TDS are not going to be rehabilitated, so I don't really care what they think. Their responses are pretty predictable. Is it libertarian? Nope, not from what I can tell. Does that mean it won't happen? Not from what I can tell. Might as well deal with reality as it is, than as we wish it were. He's still worlds better than the "Kackler", which is an admittedly low bar, but again, reality.
Can anyone here name one business that closed specifically and clearly because of Reagan's tariffs? I can name specific businesses that were saved by TARP. No tariffs involved. I can name businesses saved by TBTF. No tariffs involved. I can name specific businesses and CEOs who've been convicted violating the EPA's clean air act. No tariffs involved. I can name lots and lots of businesses that closed because of trade imbalances or even just quasi-random market forces completely without regard for tariffs.
Hell, any business by any tariff by any President relatively directly. Otherwise, the exclusion of Asian Americans, African Americans, and White Americans (Anglo and Latino) from education programs in favor of lower performing immigrants (and natives) *and* the expansion of the education program *and* the expansion of the H1B Visa program has been a *far* greater black hole/money pit for 'untapped potential' or opportunity cost.
The Javier Milei of El Salvador or Venezuela or Brazil flees to the US and gets a scholarship to get a degree in Pre-Medieval White Colonial Genocide and LatinX Transgender Heritage while a native, black HVAC repairman gets to finance his student loans? Fuck your "MUH DISHWASHUR (that's mandated to use 50% less water) IS $20 CHEAPER!"
The hyperventilating about tariffs is like having multiple forms of cancer, undergoing chemo to partially treat some of them and hyperventilating that the resulting hair loss will make you less attractive to potential mates going forward.
All tariffs - and this applies to every country world-wide - should be reduced to zero for a simple reason: It is our right to engage in peaceful transactions of commerce with whomever we want.
All tariffs - and this applies to every country on earth - should be reduced to zero for one very simple reason: It is our right to engage in peaceful transactions of commerce with whoever we want.