Agricultural Trade Needs a Boost

America’s farmers and ranchers are getting hit hard this year with low commodity prices and another record-setting agricultural trade deficit. USDA released its latest trade outlook the last week of August, and, unfortunately, the numbers are going from bad to worse. For the 2024 fiscal year, we can expect a deficit of $30.5 billion—that’s nearly double last year’s record deficit of $17.1 billion. Looking ahead to 2025 doesn’t brighten the outlook either, with an expected deficit of $42.5 billion. There’s no question that agricultural trade needs to be a top priority for the next administration.

While the current agricultural trade deficit is mostly about value not volume, the U.S. can still take action to improve the trade outlook. Low commodity prices are certainly playing a role with this deficit, but U.S. farmers are also getting priced out by competition with countries that have more favorable deals and fewer trade barriers. This agricultural trade deficit should serve as a wake-up call that we are long overdue for new trade deals that expand market access and level the playing field for America’s farmers and ranchers.

Unfortunately, the U.S. has seen few trade deals in the last decade. In the meantime, other countries have moved on to form deals and agreements without us. One example of getting edged out of a promising market is our trade with Vietnam. Before the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), U.S. farmers were enjoying a growing market in Vietnam, with exports increasing about 15% per year. But when we look at that same market today, five years after CPTPP, our ag exports have declined by about 5% per year. U.S. ranchers have lost out on a significant share of the beef market to Australia, New Zealand and Canada—all CPTPP partners with zero tariffs in that market.

We need new trade deals to reduce barriers and open new market opportunities for U.S. farmers and ranchers. Not only that, we also need to do a better job of maintaining our existing markets. First, we must keep holding our trading partners accountable. Farm Bureau supports the administration doing just that with the current GMO corn dispute with Mexico. The unscientific barriers to trade that Mexico has thrown up to block our safe and sustainable products is unacceptable. The hearing on this case was held earlier this summer, and we expect a decision in November.

Of course, trade by its nature goes both ways, and we all enjoy access to products that we do not grow in the U.S., or that may be out of season in the winter months. But in recent years, we’ve seen a rise in fresh produce imports in what we call the “shoulder seasons.” Take blueberries for example. In the last 15 years, the volume of blueberry imports from April to June (the start of the domestic season) has skyrocketed by nearly 3000%. Flooding fresh produce imports in our prime growing season like this unfairly squeezes American farmers out the market. And it’s getting harder for U.S. farmers to compete at home and abroad because of our own barriers to economic sustainability, like labor costs. For fruit and vegetable farmers, labor accounts for roughly 30 to 40% of their costs, so it's no wonder that many produce growers are switching to less labor intense crops or going out of business altogether when you add in the pressures of rising land costs and other challenges. Since 2000, U.S. fruit production is down 10% and vegetable production is down 23%.

Strong agricultural trade is critical to our food security and national security. America’s farmers and ranchers have long relied on strong trade partnerships and export markets to build economically sustainable businesses. We must break down the barriers standing in the way of market access for our farmers and ranchers to reach customers at home and abroad. Let’s bridge the agricultural trade gap and ensure that everyone has access to the best food, fiber and renewable fuel in the world.