Category: Trade

Over the past decade, China has gone from a minor player to the world’s largest beef importer, with purchases rising from around a $100 million in 2010 to nearly $18 billion in 2022, which is a staggering increase of over 17,000%. This surge isn’t just about spending more. The actual volume of beef purchased has grown by more than 8,000%, driven by rising incomes, urban lifestyles, and shifting diets that favor beef over traditional staples like pork. The outbreak of African Swine Fever in 2018, which devastated China’s pig population, further accelerated the shift, while government dietary guidelines have promoted beef as a healthier option. Due to rising demand and imports, coupled with lifting the import restriction on U.S. beef in 2017, China is now the third largest foreign market for U.S. beef—around $1.5 billion in 2024. This rise has been highlighted in previous Southern Ag Today articles (For example, see: https://southernagtoday.org/2025/04/17/high-tariffs-could-halt-u-s-beef-exports-to-china/).

Rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China, which started earlier this year, raised concerns for U.S. beef exporters. Chinese tariffs on American beef soared as high as 145%, making it far more expensive than beef from countries like Brazil and Australia. Although those tariffs were later lowered to around 33%, the decline had already begun. On top of that, China let export approvals expire for nearly 400 U.S. beef processing plants in March, about 60% of all facilities allowed to ship beef to China, effectively blocking a large portion of U.S. supply (Marianetti, 2025). This move, seen as a non-tariff barrier, has created uncertainty, shaking confidence in the reliability of U.S. beef exports.

In 2025, rising trade tensions quickly took a toll on American beef in China (see Figure 1). From January to September, U.S. beef exports fell sharply—from $814 million in 2024 to $442 million in 2025—a 46% drop driven mostly by lower volumes. The decline was even steeper in the second and third quarters, after China let key export approvals expire, with U.S. beef falling nearly 70%. This happened even as China’s overall beef imports grew in value. Meanwhile, Australia and Brazil gained ground: Australia’s exports to China rose 42%, and Brazil’s increased nearly 25%. In 2024, the U.S. held about 9% of China’s beef import market, compared to Brazil’s 48% and Australia’s 9%. By the third quarter of 2025, the U.S. share had dropped to less than 1%, while Brazil and Australia accounted for 59% and 13%, respectively. It’s a clear sign that when trade tensions rise, other suppliers are quick to take the lead.

References

Marianetti, J. (2025). USA Dairy Pork and Poultry Registrations Renewed while Beef Remains Overdue (GAIN Report No. CH2025- 0056). Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, D.C.

Trade Data Monitor. (2025). https://tradedatamonitor.com/

---

Muhammad, Andrew. “Recent Trade Tensions Cause U.S. Beef to Lose Ground in China, Spurs Gains for Australia and Brazil.” Southern Ag Today 5(44.4). October 30, 2025. Permalink

As U.S. trade policy under this administration continues to dominate the news, there seems to be a marked shift from multilateral to bilateral trade negotiations. The current administration’s strategy to use tariffs and the size of the U.S. economy as leverage to change trade relationships bilaterally seems to be the norm lately. There are 166 countries that are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO). How realistic would it be for the U.S. to negotiate bilateral trade agreements with each of them? And a follow up question, does the United States need to have a bilateral trade agreement with each country?

The answer to the first question is probably “no” as the average duration of U.S. trade negotiations from launch date of signing is 18 months and from launch to date of implementation is 45 months (Figure 1.). Therefore, it will take too much time and resources to negotiate or re-negotiate trade agreements with all WTO members. However, to the second question, the answer is probably “no” as well; the top 10 export destinations accounts for 76 percent of all U.S. products exported (Figure 2.). The European Union (EU) is the largest market for U.S. products accounting for 17.51 percent followed by Canada, Mexico and China with 17.07, 14.51 and 8 percent, respectively. The United States has already or is currently negotiating trade agreements with all top 10 countries.

When the top 10 destination for all U.S. products are ranked by share of agricultural exports, the order of countries changes. China is the largest destination for all U.S. ag products accounting for 17.25 percent. In addition, agricultural products account for 23.98 percent of all U.S. products that China imports from the United States. The second largest destination is Canada where 15.38 percent of all U.S. agricultural products end up, and those agricultural products account for 10.01 percent of all U.S. products exported to Canada. To finish the top three, Mexico accounts for 14.99 percent of all U.S. agricultural products exported while agricultural products account for 11.49 percent of all products the U.S. exported to Mexico. These top 10 countries account for 71 percent of all U.S. agricultural exports.  Due to the latest trade tensions, China is no longer the top destination for U.S. ag exports but is now third behind Mexico and Canada.

References

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). Global Agricultural Trade System (GATS). Online database. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/gats/default.aspx. Online public database accessed October 2025. 

Freund, Caroline & Christine McDaniel. “How Long Does It Take to Conclude a Trade Agreement With the US?” Peterson Institute for International Economics. July 21, 2016.

---

Ribera, Luis A., Landyn Young. “Can the U.S. Move from Multilateral to Bilateral Trade Agreements?” Southern Ag Today 5(42.4). October 16, 2025. Permalink

The decline in U.S. agricultural exports to China has made headlines, most notably due to China’s decision not to purchase U.S. soybeans this season. Soybeans are the largest agricultural export for the United States, and China has traditionally been the top foreign buyer of U.S. soybeans, making this shift particularly significant for American producers. While stories have been mostly about declines in U.S. exports to China, it is important to note that China’s agricultural imports—including related products like forestry, biodiesel, and seafood—are down overall in 2025 compared to 2024, reflecting a broader contraction in trade. 

Figure 1 shows China’s total agricultural imports from global sources, including the United States and Brazil. Overall, total imports declined in 2025 compared to 2024, with the most significant drop occurring during the first half of the year. For example, imports in January 2025 fell to approximately $18 billion, down from $22 billion in January 2024. A year-to-date comparison (January–August) shows total imports decreased from $157 billion in 2024 to $145 billion in 2025, a reduction of $12.1 billion, or 7.5%. In terms of quantity or volume, the decline was even steeper—nearly 12% (Trade Data Monitor®, 2025), suggesting that lower import values were not solely driven by price changes but also by reduced quantities.

Although China’s agricultural imports declined overall, imports from the United States experienced a sharper and more sustained drop, beginning later in the year. In January 2025, imports from the U.S. were down by only $220 million compared to the previous year, and in February, they were up by nearly $600 million. However, starting in March, imports consistently fell below 2024 levels. By August, year-to-date China’s imports of U.S. agriculture and related products had dropped from $20 billion in 2024 to $14 billion in 2025, a decline of more than $5 billion, or 27.5%.

Brazil also experienced a decrease in agricultural export sales to China in 2025, though the decline was less severe than that of the United States. As of August 2025, imports from Brazil fell from $36.7 billion in 2024 to $31.2 billion, representing a 15.0% decrease. Month-to-month comparisons show sharper early-year declines: imports were down 51% in January, 43% in February, and 53% in March compared to the same months in 2024. However, beginning in May 2025, import levels from Brazil became more comparable to the previous year and even exceeded 2024 figures in some months. This mid-year rebound suggests that Brazil is benefiting from seasonal demand as well as favorable trade conditions.

Figure 1. China’s total agricultural imports from the World, United States, and Brazil: January 2024 – August 2025  

Reference

Trade Data Monitor®. (2025). Retrieved from https://www.tradedatamonitor.com

---

Muhammad, Andrew. “China’s Agricultural Imports from U.S. and Brazil Decline in 2025 – But the U.S. Faces Sharper Losses.” Southern Ag Today 5(40.4). October 2, 2025. Permalink

The U.S. fruit and vegetable (F&V) industry is a cornerstone of American agriculture, but it faces continuing challenges from imports and rising production costs. According to USDA, 2025 cash receipts for all crops are projected at $236.6 billion, a 2.5 percent decline from 2024. While fruit and nut cash receipts are expected to rise slightly, those of vegetables are set to fall. Despite strong consumer demand for fresh produce, its perishable nature and exposure to international competition leave U.S. growers in a vulnerable position. Two pressures dominate: a widening trade deficit fueled by imports, and rising input costs, especially labor.

For decades, U.S. agriculture ran a trade surplus. That changed in 2019, when imports began outpacing exports (figure 1). By 2021, the overall agricultural trade balance turned negative and has stayed there since. Fruits and vegetables lie at the heart of this shift. In 2024, horticultural imports (excluding nuts, alcoholic beverages, cut flowers, and essential oils) totaled $49.8 billion—about one-quarter of all agricultural imports. Increasingly, these imports arrive during U.S. harvest windows, driving down domestic prices at critical times. Exports, by contrast, were only $15.9 billion. Mexico dominates U.S. fresh produce imports, particularly vegetables, while Canada, Peru, and Chile are major fruit suppliers. Canada, Peru, and Guatemala also stand out in vegetables. These countries benefit from lower labor costs, government subsidies, favorable climates, and large seasonal labor pools. The result is a structural disadvantage for U.S. growers, who face high costs while competing against cheaper imports.

Even as imports increase, U.S. growers must contend with rising production costs. Specialty crops like fruits and vegetables are among the most labor-intensive in agriculture. Unlike corn or soybeans, they cannot be fully mechanized and require hand-harvesting, pruning, and close crop management. According to USDA, production expenses across the farm sector are projected to reach $467 billion in 2025, up 2.6 percent from 2024 and more than 36 percent higher than in 2018. Labor is the single largest cost driver for F&V producers. Since most workers are hired through the H-2A guest worker program, rising wage rates – mandated through the Adverse Effect Wage Rate – have significantly increased costs. Growers also face higher fees, stricter compliance rules, and added administrative burdens tied to H-2A. Surveys confirm these challenges: in 2024, 44 percent of growers cited H-2A labor costs as their top concern, while 54 percent reported labor shortages—up sharply from 41 percent in 2019.

The U.S. F&V industry is squeezed between cheaper imports and rising domestic costs. Labor shortages and wage pressures magnify these risks, leaving growers uncertain about future profitability. Given the importance of specialty crops to the agricultural economy, strategies to strengthen resilience are urgent. These may include risk management tools, expanded research into labor-saving technologies, and policies that level the competitive playing field. Without such measures, U.S. growers will remain caught between global market forces and domestic labor constraints.

Figure 1. Trade Balance for U.S Agriculture and the F&V Industry

---

Munisamy, Gopinath, and Dixit Poduel. “Rising Imports and Soaring Costs: Dual Pressures Squeeze U.S. Fresh Produce Growers.” Southern Ag Today 5(38.4). September 18, 2025. Permalink

The August 2025 Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade provides a snapshot of the current challenges and opportunities in global markets (USDA, 2025a). The quarterly report has long been a valuable tool for understanding how international trends affect the U.S. farm economy. In the past, it included both data and written commentary to explain possible causes behind trade shifts. However, the May 2025 report sparked controversy when its release was delayed. The issue centered on explanatory text that linked rising agricultural trade deficits to tariffs (Ingwersen & Douglas, 2025). As a result, the USDA removed the commentary and now publishes only data tables. This change has raised concerns about transparency and the loss of expert interpretation that helped make sense of complex trade dynamics.

The August report shows that the U.S. will continue to import more agricultural goods than it exports. However, the projected trade deficit for fiscal year (FY) 2025—running from October to September—was revised downward from $49.5 billion in the May report to $47.0 billion. This adjustment was driven by an upward revision in forecasted exports, while the import forecast remained unchanged from May at $220 billion. For FY2025, exports are now expected to reach $173 billion, with imports holding at $220 billion.

These revisions raise important questions. Are they justified based on the available data? Most notably, is there clear evidence of increased export activity to support the upward revision? And given current trends, should the import forecast have been adjusted as well—either upward or downward? A closer look at recent trade is needed to assess whether these changes reflect actual market conditions or optimism. 

Year-to-date (October to June) export values are reported in Table 1. The data suggest that the value of agricultural exports will remain relatively flat. During the first three quarters of the fiscal year, export values increased slightly from $135.0 billion in 2024 to $135.7 billion in 2025, which is a modest 0.6% rise. However, the volume of exports grew significantly, increasing from 162.4 million metric tons (MMT) to 175.9 MMT, an 8.3% increase. This growth in quantity was offset by a 7.2% decline in average prices (unit value), which fell from $831/MT to $772/MT, suggesting lower prices per unit across many commodities. Depending on prices, the upward revision in the export forecast could be justified despite current trade tensions (USDA, 2025b). 

Assuming fourth-quarter imports in FY2025 will follow patterns seen in recent years, available data suggest that total imports could reach $223 billion. This supports the decision to hold the official import forecast steady at $220 billion given the small $3 billion difference (USDA, 2025b). If ongoing trade tensions continue, it would not be surprising if actual imports were lower than $220 billion. 

Figure 1. U.S. Agricultural Imports: FY2021-FY2025

Table 1. U.S. Agricultural Exports: FY2024 and FY2025 (year-to-date: October – June)

Exports	Oct. – June 2024	Oct. – June 2025	% Change
Value ($ billion)	$135.0	$135.7	0.6%
Quantity (MMT)	162.4	175.9	8.3%
Unit Value ($/MT)	$831.1	$771.5	-7.2%

Reference

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2025a. Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade: August 2025. https://www.fas.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2025-08/AES-133.pdf

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2025b. Global Agricultural Trade System (GATS). Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, D.C. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/GATS/default.aspx

Ingwersen, Julie and Leah Douglas. 2025. “USDA redaction of trade analysis causes concern about report integrity” Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/usda-redaction-trade-analysis-causes-concern-about-report-integrity-2025-06-06/

---

Muhammad, Andrew. “Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade in 2025: Exploring the Recent August Forecasts.” Southern Ag Today 5(36.4). September 4, 2025. Permalink