The Florida Tomato Exchange is lauding a Department of Commerce decision to terminate the 2019 U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement, calling it a move that is long overdue to restore fair competition in the domestic tomato market.
The suspension agreement, which has been renegotiated multiple times since it was established in 1996, aims to prevent the U.S. from imposing antidumping duties on fresh tomatoes imported from Mexico — under the condition that exporters adhere to certain pricing and trade rules. The agreement will end on July 14, 2025, following a 90-day implementation period, Commerce Department said in an April 14 announcement.
“This is a major victory for American agriculture,” Robert Guenther, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, said in a news release. “For decades, American tomato farmers have suffered from unfair trade practices by Mexican tomato exporters. Terminating this agreement and enforcing U.S. trade laws is the only way to finally give domestic growers the relief they’ve long deserved. We thank the Administration for standing strong in support of American farmers and the rule of law against unfair foreign trade practices.”
The release said the Commerce Department’s decision comes in response to a 2023 petition from the U.S. tomato industry, which was backed by more than 60 bipartisan members of Congress from 11 states; the American Farm Bureau Federation and state farm bureaus from all nine major tomato-producing states; and 15 fruit and vegetable trade associations throughout the country.
The Florida Tomato Exchange said that, despite five suspension agreements since 1996, Mexican tomato companies have continued to dump product into the U.S. market, undercutting U.S. growers and circumventing enforcement mechanisms. Since the first agreement, Mexican tomato imports have surged nearly 400%, capturing over 70% of the U.S. market, the group said, adding that during the same period, the U.S. industry’s market share has dropped from 80% to 30%.
The Florida Tomato Exchange said the Commerce Department found in 2019 that Mexican tomatoes were being dumped in the U.S. at high margins and the U.S. International Trade Commission unanimously confirmed the material injurious effect of that action on the domestic tomato industry. The decision to terminate the tomato suspension agreement enforces those findings and moves to restore fair competition in the marketplace, the group added.
“The tomato suspension agreement failed American farmers,” Guenther said in the release. “It has been impossible to enforce and easy to evade. Today’s action finally ends the cycle of harm that has decimated the American tomato industry over nearly three decades.”
Guenther said the Florida Tomato Exchange and other industry members have long argued that the agreement was not enforceable and allowed for widespread evasion.
“Once it gets across the border, the market after that is where we’re having the impact,” Guenther told The Packer. “We believe that’s where a lot of the underpricing and circumvention has been happening.”
Still, despite the policy change, Guenther doesn’t anticipate immediate changes for growers.
“There’s a 90-day period before duties go into effect, and we don’t expect any disruption in supply,” he said. “After that, it becomes a free market. The reference price goes away, and the U.S. will apply tariffs on Mexican tomatoes in line with antidumping rules.”
Guenther added that claims of higher consumer prices resulting from the termination are “a false narrative.”
“When this agreement was previously terminated, we didn’t see any influx of price increases,” he said. “Retailers are already telling suppliers that they’re not going to absorb the cost of duties; they’ll be pushing that back on the supply side. Consumers shouldn’t see much change.”
Guenther emphasized that situation isn’t about speculation anymore.
“The Department of Commerce and the International Trade Commission have both ruled that the Mexican industry has been dumping tomatoes in the U.S. at significantly lower prices, and that this has harmed the U.S. industry,” he said. “That’s exactly the situation where U.S. trade law requires antidumping duties.”
Your next read:
