Trade

Canadian Mushroom Growers to Fight ‘Deeply Flawed’ U.S. Subsidy Ruling

Tue, 19 May 2026 12:25:58 GMT

Late last week, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a preliminary affirmative ruling that Canadian mushroom producers received unfair government subsidies. As part of the ruling, the federal government announced preliminary subsidy rates ranging from 1.62% to 4.97% on fresh mushroom imports from Canada.

U.S. Case for Tariff Enforcement

“This is an important and critical first step through a rigorous investigation the U.S. [Department] of Commerce conducted,” says Mark Currie, CEO of The Giorgi Cos. “Countervailing duty actions involving Canadian industries are relatively uncommon, underscoring the significance and merit of this affirmative determination and the seriousness with which federal investigators viewed the case. And it’s only the first step.”

A separate antidumping ruling is expected later this summer.

Canadian Industry Warns of a ‘Deeply Flawed’ Precedent

However, the Canadian mushroom industry says that the Department of Commerce’s ruling sets a dangerous precedent using a standard tax treatment that both the U.S. and Canadian governments use as the basis of the antidumping claim.

Ryan Koeslag, executive vice president and CEO of Mushrooms Canada, called the preliminary conclusion “deeply flawed” in a news release.

“The overwhelming basis for the preliminary countervailing duty rate appears to be mainstream agricultural tax treatment, including provincial sales tax exemptions available to farmers generally,” Koeslag says in a statement. “Treating broad-based agricultural tax measures as unfair subsidies is contrary to common sense and unfairly penalizes Canadian mushroom growers for participating in programs available across the agricultural sector in any number of countries.”

Lewis Macleod, CEO of South Mill Champs, says the company, which has mushroom farms in both Canada and the U.S., has reached out to other U.S. produce sectors to share the potential implications of this legal precedent on other industries.

“What this ruling essentially says is that if a produce or agricultural grower buys new equipment in the year and gets a sales tax exemption, essentially, they’re opening themselves up to a successful countervailing petition from a U.S. grower,” Macleod says. “And for doing nothing more than receiving the same support which the U.S. producers benefit from.”

Currie says the case is about Canadian growers “selling mushrooms in the U.S. below actual cost of production.”

“The dangerous precedent we should all be concerned about is American farmers being undercut by private equity and unfair business practices that put American mushroom farmers out of business and further shrink a domestic supply,” Currie says.

Beyond Tariffs: The Dispute Over Farm Accounting Practices

Macleod says the Department of Commerce has also opened a new inquiry targeting mushrooms’ cash-basis taxation in Canada, which is another common tax treatment.

“The inquiry flies in the face of the long-held policy positions of U.S. farming interests that do not view cash basis taxation as some form of subsidy, but merely a method of taxation to address conditions unique to farming,” South Mill Champs says in a letter to specialty crop commodity groups. “If farmers are pushed into accrual-based taxation, they could owe taxes on crops or livestock not yet sold, creating serious, potentially existential, liquidity problems.”

Supply Chain Impacts and the Cost of Defense

Koeslag says that the countervailing duties and the pending antidumping duties likely won’t impact Canadian mushroom exports to the U.S. While Canadian growers will likely see these tariffs as frustrating, it’s not enough to disrupt mushroom sales into the U.S.

“We’re still going to see Canadian mushrooms flow south into the United States, not only because of the quality, but I think it will still be price-competitive in comparison to what they have in the states,” he says.

Macleod notes, “At this level of margin, I think the broader issue from our perspective is the frustrations that we’re now being caught in a process that just adds an awful lot of ongoing cost, with zero benefit to product quality, or for the mushroom industry as a whole,” adding, “Regardless, it’s not going to fundamentally change the supply picture as there is a demand for good mushrooms grown in new infrastructure providing better quality to consumers.”

Currie says The Giorgi Cos. has led an industrywide effort to invest dollars into marketing to the next generation of mushroom consumers.

“The future depends in part on a fair playing field in which Canadian producers are not unfairly subsidized or dumping below production costs,” he says.

A common counter-argument from Canadian producers is that this trade dispute isn’t actually about unfair subsidies but rather that the Canadian mushroom industry has aggressively invested in highly automated, modern, climate-controlled facilities, while many domestic U.S. farms have been slow to move away from older, labor-intensive production systems.

“Close if not 100% of the mushrooms exported from Canada are grown on new infrastructure. This compares with approximately only 25% of U.S. mushroom production,” Macleod says. “We have both new and old infrastructure and know firsthand the difference in quality — a difference that U.S. customers also recognize and show through their buying decisions.”

Currie refutes that claim, saying, “The issue isn’t the type of operations. The argument isn’t about infrastructure. The issue is Canada is dumping mushrooms and unfairly disrupting the marketplace.

“The U.S. mushroom industry continues investing in operations, technology, growing practices and people to meet customer demand and strengthen domestic production. Innovation in American mushroom production takes many forms, including advanced infrastructure, operational investment and generations of growing expertise,” Currie continues.

Mushrooms Canada has already invested more than $1 million to defend this suit, and Koeslag says the mandatory respondents in the case will likely pay double or triple that amount to defend the suit; this comes at a time when the industry has already struggled with increasing consumption.

“All of our farmers are having to contribute to that right now,” Koeslag says of the legal fees. “It’s unfortunate. We should be focusing on how to market these healthy mushrooms during an inflationary issue, maybe go back to the blend and extend and other ways to try and make every person’s grocery bill go further.”

Macleod says these countervailing duties will set a harmful precedent, hurt the North American mushroom industry and consumers.

“Our view is that all players in the industry should be coming together to promote the benefits of mushrooms and grow the market, rather than undertaking costly and distracting actions like these, which only serve to add costs and increase prices — neither of which are good for customers,” he says.

Koeslag says the association will continue to fight the claims and can still make arguments about this announced countervailing rate as it applies to agricultural tax exemptions.

Legal Timeline

A preliminary antidumping rate will likely be announced this summer, a timeline that Koeslag says could easily see extensions.

“We’ll still have more arguments,” he says. “There’ll still be more data collected, but it will be preliminarily set as they start collecting the tariffs from the countervail and the antidumping duties likely in August. That’s all in holding until the final determination is made.”

The Department of Commerce officially extended its deadline for the preliminary less-than-fair-value (antidumping) determination to July 13, pushing the broader tariff rollout into late summer.

Then, Koeslag says, following the preliminary rates, there will be additional investigations throughout 2026 by the U.S. International Trade Commission into whether or not Canadian mushroom growers have caused material harm to the U.S. fresh mushroom industry.

“What could happen, like the other tariffs that were placed earlier in 2025, they could be returned after finding all the information that there really has been no material damage caused whatsoever,” he says. “That will be our hope, and that will be what we think that they should find with the data that’s coming out of the mandatory respondents and the general information that we provided. It’s still ongoing, and we’re not going to see the end of this for likely, still some time.”

Macleod agrees, noting, “We know the ITC process needs to play out to where we’re confident that it’ll demonstrate that there’s no harm to the U.S. industry. We’ve done nothing wrong and abide by fair trade practices.”

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.

Fresh Produce Must Avoid Becoming ‘Collateral Damage’ in USMCA Trade Talks, Says CPMA President

Mon, 09 Feb 2026 13:29:30 GMT

BERLIN — While 2025 was a year in produce defined by tariffs , 2026 will likely focus on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), slated for its first six-year joint review on July 1, 2026.

At last week’s Fruit Logistica, The Packer sat down with Canadian Produce Marketing Association President Ron Lemaire, who has repeatedly urged for the full 16-year renewal of USMCA, to discuss the current state of negotiations, reasons for optimism and what the industry needs to do now ahead of July.

“Starting in 2026, I was quite optimistic. We had good consultations on USMCA in the U.S. as well as in Mexico and Canada, and there was a willingness from the produce sector to look at doing no harm to USMCA, but trying to find improvements where necessary,” he says. “I think the primary goal for our sector is, let’s keep the trilateral deal in play.”

One challenge, says Lemaire, is talk of the U.S. government pursuing a bilateral rather than trilateral agreement.

“When meeting with officials with the U.S. government, there has been a lot of discussion on having more bilateral deals than trilateral, and I know for our sector, that would be a challenge relative to the administrative burden — the time and the challenges that we would all face relative to how efficiently we can run our businesses,” he says.

“The trilateral deal works, and I think moving into the review process, everyone has to do their part in messaging that to their governments,” he adds.

In recent meetings of North American leaders, like the 2026 State Agriculture and Rural Leaders (SARL) Legislative Agriculture Chairs Summit, which convened state and provincial legislators from the U.S. and Canada to address agricultural policy, technology and rural community strengthening, Lemaire has seen reasons for optimism.

“We were very happy going to SARL, the State Agricultural Rural Leaders, meeting in New Orleans in early January and hearing from state legislators that they are believers in the trilateral deal and the importance of working collaboratively with stakeholders in Canada, as well as stakeholders in Mexico,” Lemaire says. “So, there’s a lot of moving parts, but I think it’s positive to see the provincial- and state-level collaboration that hopefully will resonate up to the federal level.”

The July 2026 USMCA review is a high-stakes juncture that will determine whether the U.S., Canada and Mexico extend the trade pact to 2036 or initiate its termination. Key stakes include restructuring auto industry rules, addressing energy and agriculture disputes, preventing major disruptions to more than a trillion in annual regional trade and more.

Lemaire cautions the produce industry to ensure it doesn’t get swept into other trade deals on the table in July.

“USMCA is going to be a primary focus [for the produce industry], especially when we lead into June and July,” he says. “I’m part of a group, a coalition of North American trade that not only includes fruit and vegetables but also automotive, steel and aluminum. And I think those are the moving parts we have to be continually watching, because we can control our sector, but it is the demands outside of our sector that are really going to influence what USMCA looks like going forward.”

“So, it’s vital that we start expanding our networks, to start working with those other commercial sectors that are influenced and impacted by USMCA to ensure that we’re not collateral damage and that pushes to change USMCA that may be detrimental to feeding our nations [are not realized],” he continues.

The message the produce industry must push forward, Lemaire says, is how USMCA supports North American consumers’ access to nutritious and affordable food.

“We’re dealing with food inflation. We’re dealing with high costs of inputs. We’re dealing with growers who aren’t able to be profitable,” says Lemaire. “And when you start seeing these changes impacting our food supply, it’s vital that we find the most efficient, cost-effective trading mechanisms so that we don’t add to the burden which we’re already all experiencing, not only in the U.S. but also in Canada and Mexico and around the world.

“It’s a global change happening right now on the cost of food, so the simplest way to deal with it is to find efficiencies,” he says. “And the first efficiency is a free trade deal.”

Your next read: North American Produce Industry Calls for Full Renewal of USMCA

U.S.-Canada Produce Ties Weather Political Storms

Mon, 09 Feb 2026 11:03:51 GMT

Despite a few hiccups regarding tariffs and trade restrictions at the highest levels of government, working relationships among Canadian and U.S. produce businesses seem to be on track.

Angelo Alberga, vice president of sales and general manager for Canadian Fruit & Produce Co. Ltd. on the Ontario Food Terminal in Toronto, says it’s business as usual between his company and its U.S. counterparts.

“Our relationship has not been tarnished by any political movement at all,” he says. “We don’t have a problem with any of our American shippers.”

Tariffs have not significantly disrupted the flow of fresh produce, says Frank Quaranta, manager of operations for Ippolito Produce Ltd. on the market, but they did impact areas such as packaging materials and equipment.

“While there has been increased attention to trade policy, the fundamental working relationships have remained strong,” he says.

“U.S. suppliers are extremely important, particularly during the Canadian off-season,” Quaranta adds. “Cross-border relationships are essential to maintaining year-round supply.”

Hutch Morton, senior vice president at J.E. Russell Produce Ltd. on the market, is hopeful that disruptions can be avoided.

“I would be a happy man if 2026 wasn’t a year we were talking about tariffs and trade disruptions,” he says. “But with the [U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement] up for renewal, there will be some tensions for the produce industry.”

Disruptions because of product flow or tariffs would be “incredibly harmful” for the industry, he adds.

“The three countries that make up our North American trading block are so interconnected in the produce industry that it becomes very difficult very quickly when there are bumps in the road,” he says.

Modern Infrastructure at Heart of North American Mushroom Trade Dispute

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 22:38:02 GMT

In September, several U.S. mushroom growers filed an antidumping and countervailing duty petition with the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission, alleging Canadian producers export mushrooms into the U.S. at prices below fair value.

Since then, the U.S. International Trade Commission has offered a preliminary determination of injury and the U.S. Department of Commerce initiated antidumping and countervailing duties.

A Procedural Step

A spokesperson for South Mill Champs, which is part of the respondents, says this outcome wasn’t entirely unexpected.

“The ITC preliminary ruling is a standard and very typical procedural step in a long process - over the past 15 years and hundreds of cases, there has only been one instance in which the ITC decided to terminate the case at this stage,” the spokesperson says.

The spokesperson added that South Mill Champs views the petition as lacking merit and an attempt by “certain market participants to use administrative measures to thwart healthy competition.”

“South Mill Champs’ success and increasing market share is the result of our investment in modern growing facilities that enable us to deliver the consistency and high quality that customers want,” the spokesperson says. “We are retaining and earning new customers even though our prices are not always the lowest, underscoring our position at the ITC that quality and service are principal drivers of purchasing decisions.”

The company states it remains delighted by customer support and will continue investing in facilities to meet demand.

Navigating the Levy Timeline

Ryan Koeslag, executive vice president of Mushrooms Canada, which represents Canadian growers in this case, says he expects preliminary levies to begin in May or June as the U.S. International Trade Commission and the Department of Commerce will issue preliminary determinations in February.

Koeslag says all levies collected during the investigation period will be held in a trust and returned to the Canadian growers if the Department of Commerce and ITC do not find validity to the antidumping claims.

“We’re waiting to hear,” he says. “I think they’ll use a lot of the preliminary data that’s been collected by the farms from Canada and the locations where they sold into the United States. I think that will kind of play into how they’ll calculate that. We’re hoping that it will be a number that will still allow us to do business into the United States. “

While the growers Mushrooms Canada represents are disappointed that the case moves forward, Koeslag says he feels the team representing the Canadian growers has put forth a strong case with pricing points that reinforced the message that Canadian mushrooms are priced fairly and reflect market realities.

He says, too, ITC’s preliminary findings also indicated further investigation into the difference of newer generation infrastructure of mushrooms, how phorid flies have also impacted production in Pennsylvania and the limited reach for U.S. producers in the West Coast.

Koeslag says Mushrooms Canada argued phorid flies have impacted production in Pennsylvania and end producers sought Canadian imports to offset the reduced production in the U.S., not Canadian producers displacing U.S. growers.

“Part of the argument that our economists identified was that if production had remained consistent with the previous years, there could be an argument there that the Canadian exports to the United States could have either stagnated or declined,” he says. “But because there was a very visible reduction in production during that period of time, as we see as a result of that fly infestation, that impacted some of the purchasing habits and some of the outcome of the last little while too.”

Investing in Shelf Life

Koeslag says Mushrooms Canada and the growers his team represents feel as though the ITC heard the points brought forward during the initial parts of the case.

“It seems as though they heard our message,” he says. “Knowing that the threshold for them to move forward with wanting to have this investigation being very low, we realized that that was going to happen, and so they had enough for that to proceed, but they’ve identified already that there’s some things that they want to investigate with the full-fledged study over the next year, and it is including what we brought forward during our hearing.”

And he says this case is not about how Canadian mushrooms are of a superior quality than U.S.-grown mushrooms, but that the infrastructure of Canadian growers is modern and has allowed for a higher-quality mushroom with better shelf life.

“If you have a higher infrastructure farm in the United States, you would also find those same benefits,” he says. “In Canada, however, we’re looking at nearly 90%, if not higher, of the operations being of new infrastructure. They’ve made those investments, and they have the technology from Holland. That’s been a result of also in having reduced fly infestations.”

Koeslag says these modern growing operations have rooms with proper sealing, use aluminum trays and plastic and modern sanitation techniques. He says older growing systems that use wood have conditions that favor the reproduction of the phorid flies.

“The new infrastructure is reducing the possibility of those flies to reproduce and become a problem,” he says.

Koeslag says it’s been an unusual case as the filing happened before a government shutdown. He says his team used that time to pull together a positive and well-positioned case using data. As for now, he says growers await the initial tariff percentage to come out.

“We’re nervous to see how that comes through,” Koeslag says. “I think we’ve done as much as we possibly could, considering we’ve had some additional time to do this.”

California Lemon Growers Face Uphill Battle as Argentine Imports Saturate Domestic Market

Thu, 15 Jan 2026 22:58:08 GMT

During a December webinar on agricultural labor, Lisa Tate, a fifth-generation citrus and avocado grower in southern California, spoke about the impact of imports on her family’s farm.

“As a lemon grower, we were very profitable for many years, and then all of a sudden, trade policy changed, and we just got an influx of foreign lemons, which killed our domestic crop immediately,” she says in the webinar. “I went from making very good money on our crop to losing 2 cents per lemon over the course of three years without any other changes, just that policy change.”

Casey Creamer, president and CEO of California Citrus Mutual, says Argentinian lemon imports have been problematic for the state’s citrus growers for almost a decade. But its history dates back about 25 years. In 2000, amid pressure from the Argentine government, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service lifted a phytosanitary ban on imports from the country. However, in 2001, U.S. citrus growers filed a lawsuit noting the science used to justify the opening was flawed, and a judge ruled in favor of the U.S. growers.

In December 2016, USDA announced it would lift a ban on lemons from the northwest part of Argentina. Following negotiations, fresh Argentine lemons were allowed in by around 2018. Creamer says the influx of lemons coming from Argentina started off slow, but it’s become a flood.

“It’s been increasing it feels like every year,” Creamer says. “They’re a pretty big player in lemons, and they’ve shifted a whole lot more tonnage from the EU, which is where they traditionally sent it, to the United States.”

Creamer says what’s problematic for Southern California coastal growers is the timing of these imports.

“It’s really the time that they come in, really impacting our Southern California Coastal growers,” he says. “Who have had negative profitability significant for the last few years, and without any sort of improvement in or reduction in the amount of lemons that are being sent from Argentina. We just don’t see many options there for improvement.”

Creamer says California Citrus Mutual has had discussions with members of Congress and with USDA and the Office of the United States Trade Representative to elevate this issue.

“We’re not against fair, reciprocal access, but we should be having American growers first,” he says. “There’s a balance there that we just feel is not balanced at the moment, and so we’re looking for some remedies, whether they be in the current discussions that are happening with Argentina around the reciprocal tariffs, whether they’re in other areas. Our growers are a good portion of the especially lemon growers in Southern California, are experiencing a lot of pain, and we need some help.”

And that balance, Creamer says, is crucial for all global trade. What is imported, what is exported? What other markets is the USTR working to open?

“There’s the trade-offs that always happen, and it’s a tough deal, and I get it, but we’re going to do our job for our growers and advocate for them,” he says.

Tate acknowledges this too in the webinar, where she says decisions and the subsequent consequences can really impact growers.

“Sometimes those policies are helping one commodity, but they end up hurting another,” she says. “I don’t know how you even that playing field, but the more competitive we can be with foreign growers, the better it is for us.”

And Creamer says while he understands growers feeling the brunt of these polices might get frustrated, he wants to assure the growers that organizations such as California Citrus Mutual are vital to create relationships that can help best communicate those concerns.

“This is why you have organizations to be on top of these types of things, to have the relationships and speak with a collective voice to share these concerns,” he says. “Know they have an advocate who’s working on their behalf 24/7, making sure elected officials and agencies understand what’s happening on the ground.”

And he says growers should understand that while the government might move quickly when there’s a crisis, the pace of government isn’t necessarily quick.

“You’ve got to convince the senators, and then you’ve got to get something signed by the president, and there’s an administrative side of things,” he says. “Our system was not built necessarily on speed. These things take a long, consistent, persistent effort. I understand the growers’ frustration, but this is part of how the system of government works.”

Also, he wants growers to know they are at the table and are presenting the data on the issue of imports and other issues concerning California citrus growers.

“All politics is local. It never hurts for people to be involved in local politics,” he says. “Your member of Congress in your area, you need to know who they are. You need to call the office and say hello, make sure they’re aware of the issues that are affecting the district. All that feeds in and is very helpful for the work that we do, because it’s not only a trade association coming and talking to the member in D.C., but they’ve also heard it from their constituents and back in the district.”

He also says growers should understand how helpful it will be to have Sen. Adam Schiff as a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

“It’s great that we have Senator Schiff on the Senate Ag Committee now, which gives us a much stronger voice than what we had before,” he says. “We’re really grateful to have connections like that, and people, like the senator, who want to help.”

Potato Industry Road Map Eyes Billion-Dollar Export Growth

Tue, 13 Jan 2026 02:48:41 GMT

DALLAS — Kam Quarles, CEO of the National Potato Council, kicked off a session at Potato Expo 2026 on international openings for U.S. potatoes, stating that the trade situation in the U.S. is a critical part of the potato industry, though it’s not without its opportunities and challenges.

Quarles says challenges include the impact of tariffs on growers’ fertilizer, pesticide, new or renovated storage facilities, equipment from overseas and more.

“The opportunities would come in being able to decrease some of the friction for our exports, either in processed potatoes, primarily when you’re thinking of tariffs, nontariff barriers into some of our key export markets or possibly gaining new export markets,” he says.

Strategy of Friction and Leverage

Matt Lantz, senior vice president of global access with global trade consulting firm Bryant Christie, joined Quarles. Lantz says he did some quick numbers to calculate the benefits of some of the expanded markets for potatoes. He estimated that with this “back of the envelope” trade runs, U.S. exports of fresh potatoes to Mexico have increased 162% since opening the market, which went from $51 million to $134 million annually.

“We often say any potato outside the market in the U.S. is a good potato,” Lantz says. “So, that’s left the U.S. to another market, and that was hard to achieve over 20 years, and it was a nice conservative partner.”

Fry exports to Mexico, too, have increased by 130% to become a $319 million fry market.

Though isn’t open for fresh potatoes, Japan has been open for chipping potatoes for 20 years. While there’s only two factories in Japan, it’s been a $20 million to $25 million market. Lantz says his estimations show that the market is up 65% through September.

“This is why Japan is such a priority for us; opening the fresh market for Japan could be Mexico revisited, if not more,” he says. “It’s a very high-end market, and we think it’s a new $150 million market for fresh produce, in addition to chip produce.”

U.S. fry exports to Japan hit $422 million last year and are up 37% over six years ago, Lantz says, noting that 2019 figures are a more normal year to set a baseline.

“You would think we’ve maxed out Japan, and in six years we’ve grown it by 37%,” he says. “It’s going to be a half-billion-dollar market in the next couple of years.”

Korea also has been a great opportunity for growers, Lantz says, noting the Korean Free Trade Agreement helped get duties down and now exports are up 16% at $125 million.

Lantz says there’s opportunities for growth, especially in Vietnam, which is now under a 13% tariff, and the Philippines, with a 10% tariff. He estimates the potential for growth is high in the Philippines.

“For a while, we had zero duties in the Philippines, and our exports went from about 30 million to about 60 million,” he says.

Lantz says within the global market, it’s critical the U.S. potato industry continues to monitor the impact of tariffs and trade.

“We have had to work every day to make sure that we are not affected by tariffs we put on another country and [get] a retaliation,” he says.

Defending Market Access

Quarles addressed the benefits of U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement, which is up for review this year.

“Is it perfect? No, but you wouldn’t have the USMCA but for that tariff leverage,” he says.

Lantz says it’s important not only to maintain zero duties on exports to Mexico and Canada but also to use the USMCA reevaluation as an opportunity to improve areas of friction within the agreement.

“I will tell you that the Europeans who are aggressive exporters on the rise have gotten a zero duty in Mexico, and we certainly do not want to see Mexico [add duties to U.S. exports],” he says. “It’s a recipe for Canadian fries to just to go straight from the U.S., through the U.S. and supply Mexico.

Lantz says it took a long time to get the Mexican market open, first having to go to the Mexican Supreme Court. A challenge, though, is the market is under pressure from Mexican growers to close it again. Lantz says a frequent argument is that U.S. growers send too many products with pests down, however, he says it’s been contentious with potato mop-top virus.

“An international panel in 2010 reviewed all possible pests between the United States and Mexico,” Lantz says. “And they concluded that no virus is relevant in exports. The challenge we had in order to open the market: The Mexican government insisted on this virus being put into the agreement. They would not sign the agreement unless this virus was imposed. And we knew if they put it in there, they were going to find it. And we knew it was going to be used to try to limit our exports.”

Lantz says it’s been a lot of work to prove to the Mexican government that U.S. exports to Mexico are clean with science-based evidence. He says Mexican buyers have been pleased with shipments.

One challenge, Lantz says, is that growers export in 20-pound bags, but there is interest in expanding to bulk or larger bags.

“We are pushing very hard for that in these negotiations,” he says. “We’ll probably start with 50-pound bags, because it allows you to continue to trace back. There’s no argument against it, essentially. And then we’ll try to move on to bulk shipping.”

Quarles says the work from state grower associations, as well as Potatoes USA, has been instrumental in opening Mexico.

“Mexico’s incredibly important partner for the United States,” he says. “We want to similarly see that as a strong, durable, reliable market for the U.S. as well as for Mexican consumers. So, getting all of this right is one of our ongoing challenges.”

Lantz says the potential to open the Japan fresh potato market would be huge, noting the U.S. potato industry has been working on a pest risk assessment for more than a decade. Lantz says it has been a political issue and one he hopes will be resolved within a year or two. He adds that he sees this following a similar path to chipping potatoes.

“It’s a political issue, and we just have to find the right key to move the Japanese government to open this market,” Lantz says. “Once they make that decision, we will roll it through the rest of the questions within a year, and we’ll get that market open.

“It was always said to me that rice is so sensitive that you might have a chance at potatoes, but rice is so imperative,” he says. “Guess what? Rice is in. That was in the agreement this summer. The reason rice is in is for food security. And so, they made agreements to allow rice to come in. And so, if they can do what was the third rail of ag exports to Japan, they can make a decision to get potatoes in Japan.”

Emerging Frontiers: From Korea to West Africa

Lantz went through a few other opportunities for U.S. exports. Korea, he says, will likely open for some additional states, which he thinks will come sometime later this year. The market in China is open, he says, but it’s been harder to get the product to a processor.

“We’ve been working on this for about five years,” Lantz says. “The relationship with China is very strained right now. The market is open; we haven’t signed a deal yet. It’s just a matter of finding that [processor].”

Lantz says there has been interest in opening Senegal, Mali and the West African markets for seed potatoes, adding that Potatoes USA has been working to develop those markets.

“So, we’re hoping to develop a new, completely new market for U.S. seed potatoes there,” he says.

USDA Releases Per-Acre Rates for Farmer Bridge Assistance Program

Wed, 31 Dec 2025 21:17:14 GMT

The long-awaited Farmer Bridge Assistance rates are out! Rice and cotton will receive the highest per-acre rates, in keeping with earlier predictions.

On the last day of 2025, USDA announced the Farmer Bridge Assistance program rates for row crop and oil seed farmers hit hard in 2025 by the ongoing trade wars.

“Farmers who qualify for the FBA program can expect payments in their bank accounts by Feb. 28, 2026,” says Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in the announcement.

The following per-acre rates apply:

Corn: $44.36
Soybeans: $30.88
Wheat: $39.35
Cotton: $117.35
Rice: $132.89
Peanuts: $55.65
Sorghum: $48.11
Barley: $20.51
Canola: $23.57
Sunflower: $17.32
Lentils: $23.98
Peas: $19.60
Oats: $81.75
Mustard: $23.21
Safflower: $24.86
Flax: $8.05
Chickpeas: $26.46 (large), $33.36 (small)
Sesame: $13.68

Oil seeds rapeseed and crambe — which were included in the original list of commodities to receive payments according to USDA’s Dec. 8 announcement of the bridge payments — were not included in the Dec. 31 rate list.

The payments, which amount to $11 billion, are intended to bridge the gap between current economic straits of farmers dealing with “unfair market disruptions” and the stepped-up farmer support programs from the previously titled “One Big Beautiful Bill Act ,” which will take effect in October 2026.

In addition to the $11 billion for row crops, $1 billion was set aside for specialty crops and sugar. The Dec. 31 rate announcement, like the Dec. 8 initial announcement of the bridge payments, notes “timelines for payments to producers of these crops are still under development.”

The bridge payments are funded under the Commodity Credit Corporation and will be administered by the Farm Service Agency based on 2025 acreage reports. Payments will be released to eligible producers by Feb. 28 with a limit of $155,000 per entity or individual. Click here to access USDA’s FBA program calculator.

Reaching the Farmer Bridge Assistance Rates

According to USDA, the FBA rates were developed using “a uniform formula to cover a portion of modeled losses during the 2025 crop year.” This loss average was reportedly based on planted acres reported to the Farm Service Agency, cost of production estimates from the Economic Research Service, and yields and prices from the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report.

The announced rates were mostly in keeping with earlier estimates. For example, shortly after the bridge payments were announced Farm CPA Paul Neiffer projected that corn would see rates of $43.52 to $48.35. Later in December, University of Illinois’s farmdoc Daily released its own estimates , which trended a bit higher than Neiffer’s, but they were also in line with the Dec. 31 announcement. For example, farmdoc estimated cotton would see a $115 rate.

Both based their estimates on how USDA did the 2024 Emergency Commodity Assistance Program payments given the similarities between how that is calculated and how USDA described it would calculate the FBA rates to row crop and oil seed growers.

What About the Other Commodities?

Notably absent from the list of crops benefiting from the bridge payments are fruit, vegetables, dairy, meat, and nuts, crops that collectively represent hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy.

According to USDA’s Dec. 8 announcement, “the remaining $1 billion of the $12 billion in bridge payments will be reserved for commodities not covered in the FBA program such as specialty crops and sugar, for example.”

By contrast, the Dec. 31 rate announcement specified that the $1 billion would be just for specialty crops and sugar.

Shortly after the FBA program was announced, the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance expressed disappointment that specialty crop growers were not included directly in the bridge payments. The group noted specialty crops account for more than one-third of all U.S. crop sales. Later, on Dec. 18, the Congressional Specialty Crop Caucus urged congressional agricultural committees to make that $1 billion available to growers immediately .

According to records from USDA’s Economic Research Service, these agricultural commodities not directly named to receive bridge payments saw the following total cash receipts in 2024 :

Cattle and calves; $112.09 billion
Dairy products; $50.73 billion
Fruits and nuts; $31.34 billion
Hogs; $27.31 billion
Vegetables and melons; $25.31 billion
“Other Crops” which include commodities like sugar, mushrooms, flowers, and herbs; $40.58 billion

Speaking specifically about the specialty crop industry, Rebeckah Freeman Adcock, vice president of U.S. government relations for the International Fresh Produce Association, told The Packer that $1 billion is not enough : “Quite frankly, the $12 billion is not enough for agriculture in general, and USDA knows that, it’s just this is what they have.”

Some See Payments as a Bandage on a Bigger Problem

Following the announcement of the planned bridge payments, commodity groups and ag economy experts voiced appreciation for the planned payments, but some also noted the payments would be too little, too late in many cases.

Ed Elfman, senior vice president of agriculture and rural banking policy at the American Bankers Association, told AgWeb that the support will help , but it won’t fix structural issues in the ag economy.

“Any aid will help,” he said. “It’ll help make cash flow work a little better. It’ll make the margins look a little better. Profitability will go up, but at the end of the day, it’s just a Band-Aid. It’s not a long-term solution.”

Jerry Gulke, president of the Gulke Group, had much the same to say, calling the payments “like a bridge to nowhere.” Referring to earlier estimates on the FBA rates for corn, he told AgWeb a $46-per-acre payment is woefully inadequate for him to plant corn next spring and that he may need to shift to soybeans in 2026 where the cost of production is lower.

Luke Lindberg, USDA under secretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs, acknowledged the bridge payments are a short-term solution in a one-on-one interview with AgWeb .

“We don’t want Band-Aid programs. We want fundamental shifts to the farm economy that allow our producers to be profitable for the long run, bring rural prosperity back to rural America,” he said, pointing to USDA’s three-point plan , announced in late September, aimed at bolstering international demand for U.S. ag products.

“Our team certainly plays an important role in generating demand overseas for the products,” he said.

“A lot of those One Big Beautiful Bill provisions, like some of the taxing, tax expenses and things, all start next year,” he added. “We’re bridging the gap from today to what that better future will look like next year.”

Tariffs and Trade Wars in 2025 and Beyond

Mon, 29 Dec 2025 22:25:23 GMT

True to his campaign promises, President Donald Trump began announcing tariffs shortly after taking office on Jan. 20. Since then, announcements of tariffs have been on then off in a matter of hours, creating what has been called a chaotic landscape of trade wars that is unlikely to end any time soon.

Most recently, Trump threatened Mexico with a 5% tariff if they didn’t start paying down their water debt, and it’s possible growers could get refunds for tariff damages in the future. Billions could be in the balance.

After roughly nine months of real and threatened tariffs, early November 2025 saw the first day of oral arguments before the Supreme Court on whether or not the Trump administration had the authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The Packer’s Jennifer Strailey covered what we knew that day. Namely, that the U.S. could owe billions in tariff refunds , including to produce importers.

Getting a refund could be a complicated matter and comes with a ticking clock, however. And, according to Strailey’s sources, the Supreme Court did not give guidance about how specific companies should seek a refund.

The commodities particularly hard hit by tariffs

Produce casualties of the 2025 trade wars could be felt in winter of 2026 because many fruit and vegetable favorites available during winter and early spring depend on imports. These could include exotics such as bananas and mangoes, and seasonal favorites such as berries of all kinds, avocados, broccoli, cucumbers, strawberries, peaches and many more according to reporting by Strailey during the summer.

She talked to Miguel Curiel, the president of Aneberries, Mexico’s National Association of Berry Exporters, during the group’s July trade fair . He said the U.S. consumer currently enjoys berries all year round due, in large part, to trade with Mexico. Tariffs could threaten that, he said, adding that “in the mid to long term, it is the consumer who takes the hit. There’s no doubt about that.”

But it wasn’t just berries at risk. Basically, any fresh produce available en mass in winter would be struck down in the trade war, according to one of Strailey’s reports in August .

“I think there will be a decrease in variety, and I think there will be price increases,” one source said, adding that the Make America Healthy Again movement might help mitigate some of the negative impacts of the trade war on fresh produce and consumers’ pocketbooks.

Things started quickly in 2025 and will continue in 2026

The impact of the tariffs, realized and threatened, was felt in the earliest weeks of 2025.

In the first week of February, Strailey reported from the floor of the Fruit Logistica trade show , having talked to Ron Lemaire, president of the Canadian Produce Marketing Association. He told her Trump’s threatened 25% additional tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada would represent a significant risk to the Canadian produce industry, especially the greenhouse industry.

“Ontario greenhouses ship about 80% to 85% of their product to the U.S., and they’ve integrated their business strategy having Canadian and U.S. operations. Tariff systems in that sector would be dramatically consequential to that industry,” he said.

The message was much the same on the southern border. In late February, Texas produce growers had a front-row seat to the potential impact of Trump’s proposed 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico. The Packer’s Christina Herrick interviewed Texas International Produce Association’s CEO, Dante Galeazzi , on potential impacts to the state and the country overall.

Most immediately, tariffs on Mexican fresh produce imports would “close the valve of the fresh fruits and vegetables arriving in the country,” particularly in the U.S.’s growing off-season. That’s something that “could not come at a worse time” according to Galeazzi.

As the ongoing trade war updates and tariff news breaks, The Packer will be here covering what growers need to know.

Commodity-Specific Trade War Battles to Watch for in 2026

Tue, 23 Dec 2025 20:12:01 GMT

While larger-scale trade battles dominated national headlines, different fresh produce commodities had their own trade fights to pick. The Packer covered these in detail in 2025, and it is almost certain that the ongoing issues will hit headlines in 2026 as well.

For example, The Tomato Suspension Agreement was one of the biggest examples of a commodity-specific trade fight to grace the headlines. In late November, a source told The Packer’s Christina Herrick that U.S. tomato growers might not see the impact of the termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement until the January 2026 crop and beyond into spring.

Coverage of the tumultuous trade fight in 2025 started in summer when Herrick sat down with Robert Guenther , executive vice president for the Florida Tomato Exchange, as the agreement neared the end of its 90-day implementation period.

“For decades, Mexican exporters have dumped tomatoes into the U.S. market below their cost of production, by margins as high as 273%, which are injuring American tomato farmers,” Guenther said.

“The 2019 Suspension Agreement and the previous four suspension agreements were supposed to stop this,” he continued. “Instead, it became a shield for repeated violations. It failed in its basic purposes: to shield U.S. tomato producers from dumped Mexican tomatoes and to ensure fair trade as required by U.S. law.”

Later, in mid-July, when the U.S. Department of Commerce ended the Tomato Suspension Agreement and imposed a 17% tariff on most imports of Mexican tomatoes, the reaction from the fresh produce industry was pronounced and deeply divided. Herrick and The Packer’s Jennifer Strailey covered the controversy’s sides .

On the one hand, Florida claimed victory. The Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association and the Florida Tomato Exchange called the end of the agreement a victory for U.S. tomato growers and a positive movement “toward fairer competition, not only for tomato growers but for all specialty crop producers nationwide.”

On the other hand, the controlled-environment agriculture industry was “deeply disappointed,” by the move.

“Because most high-value greenhouse growers farm in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, the termination of this agreement will cause significant damage to these growers, serving as a financial barrier to new investment in U.S. greenhouses,” the CEA Alliance said.

But the situation with tomato prices, tomato trade, and prices is a nuanced one. Because they are such a staple to U.S. consumers, and supplies are dependent on Mexican-grown tomatoes, the situation begged the question: Are tomatoes poised for an eggs moment?

Other commodities faced trade threats and dumping issues

Tomatoes weren’t the only commodity to see trade war battles in 2025 that will likely continue in 2026.

For example, in mid-September, Herrick covered the growing fight over mushrooms . A group of U.S. mushroom growers accused Canadian growers of dumping mushrooms in the U.S. market below the price of production.

“These practices have resulted in significant negative impacts on U.S. mushroom growers and packers, including lost sales, depressed prices and declining profitability,” they said.

Herrick reported the trade situation between the two countries is more than a symbiotic relationship, however. Canada supplies almost all of the peat moss substrate for U.S. growers, and the U.S. supplies most of Canadian growers’ mushroom spawn, for instance.

According to the U.S. International Trade Commission , the case will extend into 2026 due in part to the government shutdown’s impact on its operation late in the year.

California’s citrus industry also found itself at the center of a pitched trade battle in 2025 as well. As Strailey reported in early October , the Golden State’s citrus growers found themselves pressured by imports exceeding exports, pest and disease threats, and tariff pains from China.

Long a desired destination for California citrus exports, China answered President Donald Trump’s first term tariff threats seriously.

“China took retaliatory measures and increased tariffs substantially,” said California Citrus Quality Council President Jim Cranney. “And since then, we’ve been operating with tariffs that are in a neighborhood of about 46%.”

The tariff fight with China looks like it will be an on-going issue in 2026. As will the question of Argentinian dumping of lemons and limes with the shifts in reciprocal tariffs on the country, among others.

Fresh Produce Focuses on Growth, Health Amid Tariff and Trade Tensions

Tue, 28 Oct 2025 12:27:40 GMT

ANAHEIM, Calif. — While tariffs and trade uncertainty persist, the fresh produce industry remains focused on growth and increasing access to fresh fruits and vegetables. This commitment to “Fight for Fresh” was evident in every aisle of the recent International Fresh Produce Association Global Produce and Floral Show.

The Canadian Produce Marketing Association‘s Shannon Sommerauer and Jeff Hall pose with some uniquely Canadian treats at the IFPA Global Show.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

CPMA Talks Tariffs

At the Canadian Produce Marketing Association booth, Shannon Sommerauer, senior director, government relations, discussed the importance of free trade for fresh fruits and vegetables in North America.

“We’re happy the Canadian government removed most of the retaliatory tariffs,” says Sommerauer, referring to the government’s move on Sept. 1. But she also says it feels a bit like the “calm before the storm.”

“We’re looking to work with the U.S., Mexico and Canada to put the message to all three governments that tariff-free produce is what we need,” she says. “We hope that by putting that collective voice to all three governments, we really mitigate any unintended consequences.”

Sommerauer says the U.S. is a critically important export market for Canada, especially for highly perishable produce.

While potatoes can travel to export markets with relative ease, cucumbers are another story, she says.

“It’s a key reason the U.S. has been such an important market for us,” she says.

“We’re hearing from everyone that they don’t want tariffs,” Sommerauer adds. “They’re no help in making fresh food more accessible.”

The Equifruit team celebrates feeling good about paying banana farmers fairly.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

‘Banana Badasses’ Pose for Wellness

Known for its attention-grabbing marketing and dynamic trade show booth themes — all in the name of fairer wages and better conditions for banana farmers — Equifruit didn’t disappoint at the IFPA Global Show.

The Montreal-based Fairtrade International-certified banana company promoted fair-trade bananas as the ultimate wellness product. It’s simple, says the Equifruit team: “Wellness is all about feeling good. And paying banana farmers fairly makes you feel good.”

In September, Equifruit was named one of Canada’s top growing companies by The Globe and Mail for a fourth consecutive year. Ranked No. 174 with a growth rate of 195%, it marked the company’s highest position on the list yet, up from No. 229 in 2024.

Even with the growth, Equifruit still has work to do in the U.S. market, where it continues to communicate its message that a switch to fair-trade bananas only costs $5 a year, says Jennie Coleman, president and co-owner of Equifruit.

Now tariffs are threatening to disrupt these efforts.

“We finally got to a place where consumers have accepted [a modest price increase on fair-trade bananas] and then tariffs eat all that up on a product that can’t be grown in the U.S.,” Coleman says.

But Coleman is keeping her eye on the prize of better and fairer conditions for banana growers.

“We’re excited and amazed by our brand recognition,” she says. “Tariffs will pass, and our values will remain. And when people are ready, we’ll be there.”

Lipman Family Farms’ Morgan Stuckart discusses the benefits of being a vertically integrated company.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

Lipman Family Farms Focuses on Fresh Cut

Lipman Family Farms, a vertically integrated grower-packer-distributor, grows tomatoes in California, Florida, Canada and Mexico, giving it a unique perspective on both tariffs and the U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement.

“We support the fairest trade and prices for all,” says Lipman Family Farms Marketing and Communications Manager Morgan Stuckart. “It affects everyone.”

Lipman operates greenhouses in both Jalisco, Mexico, and in Canada, enabling year-round supply; while there may be tariff and trade turbulence, the company is focused on what it can control — including expanding the fresh cuts side of its business for both retail and restaurant foodservice.

“Fresh cut has grown exponentially for us in the last 10 years,” Stuckart says. “We’ve grown from three facilities to now eight.”

Stuckart says Lipman’s customers are looking for more convenience, labor-saving solutions and the highest food safety standards, which its custom, fresh cut program provides.

“Labor is always an issue,” she says. “With our products our foodservice customers can make the most of their time in the back of the house. Restaurant staff can go home an hour earlier to their family because they’re not chopping after close.”

Stuckart says this support on labor and consistency of food safety to support growth has been a “big ask” from Lipman’s customers.

And as a vertically integrated company, Lipman has greater control over the entire field to table process.

“Ninety-five percent of the seeds we grow were created in house by our genetic scientists,” says Stuckart, pointing to Lipman’s Crimson Tomatoes that are field-grown from a proprietary seed.

“We’re continuing to improve our tomatoes with better disease resistance and stem strength,” she says. “Crimsons are great for slicing and have a stronger skin. They also have a deep red color, meatier center and great flavor.

“We truly created the Crimson Tomato from the ground up,” she says.

Zespri Marks Record Season

Despite economic headwinds and competition from other fruit categories this summer, Zespri says it fueled double-digit growth with an earlier start to the season, expanded distribution of Zespri green, organic and Zespri RubyRed and continued strong consumer demand for Zespri SunGold kiwifruit. Zespri says these efforts have made kiwifruit the fastest-growing category in the fruit department, according to Circana data.

Canada currently takes 1.5% of total global kiwifruit production, says Zespri CEO Jason Tebrake, who adds the goal is to reach 3% to 4% of global production with Canada in the next four to five years and then “see if it continues to grow from there.”

But the U.S. is a “growth market,” says Tebrake. “This was the biggest season we’ve ever had. We increased volume to the U.S. by 30%.”

The brand says it’s investing in distribution and shopper programs that not only grow Zespri but the entire kiwifruit category.

Tebrake says that “even with tariffs concerns, [Zespri] is taking a long-term strategic” view. “We’re focused on giving the consumer a great experience,” he says.

Your next read: The Heat Is on as Fresh Produce Weathers Tariffs

Tomato Suspension Renegotiation: Where It Stands and What’s Ahead

Wed, 22 Oct 2025 20:00:00 GMT

ANAHEIM, Calif. — In July, the U.S. Department of Commerce terminated the 2019 Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico, and with that termination, the Commerce Department issued an antidumping order that places a 17.09% duty on most imported tomatoes from Mexico.

Dante Galeazzi, president and CEO of the Texas International Produce Association, sat down with The Packer at the International Fresh Produce Association Global Produce and Floral Show to discuss the latest updates on efforts to bring forth a new tomato suspension agreement.

While TIPA and other organizations have been working to bring back some reiteration of the tomato suspension agreement, Galeazzi says theirs is one of many conversations around trade happening in Washington, D.C. Adding to that, the Mexican government has also introduced its own rules for handling tomatoes to prevent a larger antidumping margin.

“So, now you’ve got now you’ve got almost two strategies for tomatoes from two different countries,” he says.

Things are moving fast, Galeazzi says, and TIPA and other organizations still have some questions about prices for certain commodities with these new rules.

“Not only were we paying a 17.09% duty on all of our tomatoes and what does that look like in the bonds in the system, etc. Now we’re also having to adhere to this brand new set of rules out of the Mexican government,” he says. “How do you handle rejections? How do you handle quality concerns?”

Galeazzi says TIPA and other organizations, such as the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas, have been collaborating to identify the best experts to guide importers navigating these new rules.

While tomato prices didn’t rise significantly at the termination, many of the growers were under contract for those tomatoes, Galeazzi says. However, he suspects the fresh produce industry will see more impacts with the January crop.

“The next wave, which is probably going to be the January crop, is going to be the first time you will have Mexico make decisions about their volume as it relates to the influence of things like the duties,” he says. “Coming into 2026, we will feel the impacts of what the tomato suspension agreement has done to the tomato trade in the U.S.”

USMCA Renegotiation

Galeazzi says TIPA is part of a larger group working together on a joint review ahead of the potential renewal of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement in 2026, adding that the organization is uniquely positioned with its position along the border.

“We experience a lot of the impacts of USMCA differently than a lot of the other industries because we’re dealing with the trucks every day crossing back and forth,” he says. “We’re dealing with the lack of harmonization. We are dealing with documents and papers and phytosanitary disputes and all of these other kinds of challenges that continue to come through.”

Galeazzi says while he sees an opportunity to improve the agreement, the renegotiations must be mindful not to cause additional burdens or impacts.

“One of our things has always been ‘do no harm,’” he says. “Because USMCA has done some great things. Now we do obviously want to change some things that can improve the trade relationships for both our importers and our domestic folks, but ‘do no harm’ should be the mantra for these renegotiations.”

The Heat Is on as Fresh Produce Weathers Tariffs

Tue, 21 Oct 2025 12:19:20 GMT

ANAHEIM, Calif. — Tariffs’ impact on the fresh produce supply chain was a key topic at last week’s International Fresh Produce Association’s Global Produce and Floral Show.

How’s the industry weathering the storm? To find out, The Packer spoke with IFPA Vice President of U.S. Government Relations Rebeckah Freeman Adcock on Oct. 16.

“We’re still really mostly in a place of uncertainty. There’s been a lot of adjustments that have been made — country by country,” she said. “We certainly still have a baseline tariff, but that is under court review. So, although the tariffs are being collected, it’s unclear whether they will stay in place and what would have to happen if the court decided those tariffs wouldn’t stay in place.”

While Adcock says the industry is weathering tariffs and the uncertainty they have caused “pretty well,” she also says more changes are coming as the seasons change.

“It will be interesting to see how things move when we see changes in seasonal movement of produce — when we see the domestic supplies that we normally see in the summer shift with what comes in and out of the country, and how that affects prices and people and the movement and logistics,” she says.

IFPA members have told the association that advocacy is of utmost importance, and the organization says it continues to urge the government to support policies that increase Americans’ access to fresh produce and create an environment in which business can flourish.

“We’re very, very focused on trying to make sure that folks don’t walk away from produce should it become more expensive because of tariffs or because of things in the dynamics and the uncertainty in the industry that tend to drive costs up,” Adcock says.

Adcock says USDA data predicts that, despite tariffs, imports will continue to rise in the U.S.

“This is tough for the United States, and it’s about a lot more than trade and tariffs,” she says. “It’s about labor. It’s about inflationary costs. It’s about many other things. Tariffs aren’t necessarily kind of a symptom of the problem rather than the underlying problem. So, we have that conversation with the administration to help them understand the dynamics of what it takes to feed people.”

IFPA is hopeful that the fresh produce industry will play a crucial role in the Make America Healthy Again movement.

“We know what a critical part our industry can play in that, and we want to do that in a way that empowers U.S. producers, which is something that the Trump administration is interested in,” she says. “We’re going to have to stay focused on making it a good place to do business in the U.S. and certainly in North America.”

In her State of the Industry address, Oct. 16, IFPA CEO Cathy Burns said the uncertainty surrounding tariffs has been particularly hard on suppliers. Adcock agrees.

“In some ways, suppliers are truly caught in the middle. We know that it’s a very difficult time to be a grower in the U.S.,” she says. “Suppliers are trying to navigate those pressures that the growers are feeling all the way up to retailer and the consumer and trying to find a way to compensate and make up for those prices and see how much they can actually absorb into the system, where we’re seeing price increases — where things are costing more to do business. Suppliers are definitely feeling the heat as well.”

The International Fresh Produce Association’s Global Produce and Floral Show featured a session titled, “Leadership Through Turbulence.”

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

Tariffs and Turbulence

Tariffs also took center stage during an Oct. 16 IFPA Global Show panel discussion, “Leading Through Turbulence,” featuring John Anderson, chair, CEO and managing partner for The Oppenheimer Group (Oppy); Adriëlle Dankier, CEO of Nature’s Pride; John Simko, president and CEO of the Sunshine Bouquet Co.; and moderator Alexis Taylor, IFPA’s chief global policy officer.

For Oppy, which operates in 30 different countries, navigating tariffs requires quick action, Anderson says.

“We … figure out how [to] quickly make sure that we’re giving the right price to the customer, and we’re making sure that the grower is not paying any more duty than is required,” he said. “And now you have an option to go back later on, and if you’ve made a mistake, to get your money back, if it’s overpaid or underpaid, but it takes time to do that.

“The other thing that I noticed being a global company — and we have lots of resources — is that not everything needs to be done in house,” he continued.

As a member of the IFPA board of directors, Anderson joined the board at the White House, where they met with President Donald Trump’s advisers.

“We had a discussion about tariffs,” he said. “It was actually quite a good discussion — an open discussion.”

Anderson says the discussion included talk of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which calls for zero tariffs on produce in all three countries, though the Trump administration had said it would get rid of that.

“We said to him, ‘well, you want America to be healthy, don’t you? Yeah, he did. He would like grocery store prices not to rise. We would like that [too],” he said.

The IFPA contingent to the White House urged the government to keep USMCA in place until it’s time to renegotiate in July 2026.

“To make a long story short, that recommendation was made, and the president accepted, so that was a really big win for the entire industry,” he said.

Mark Your Calendars: Nov. 5

Simko says since the “Liberation Day” roll out of tariffs, “it’s been constant turmoil” for anybody dealing with imported products. “Every day has been a new challenge,” he said.

The Supreme Court will hear the case on tariffs that apply to the fresh produce and floral industries on Nov. 5, Simko said.

It’s important to understand that Congress gave the office of the president the power to impose tariffs related to national security — tariffs on steel and aluminum, he said.

Trump is using the International Economic Emergency Powers Act to apply the other tariffs, actions which have been taken to court.

“It’s been ruled unlawful — twice ruled unlawful. It was appealed again, and Trump lost,” he said. “The Supreme Court is going to rule on this Nov. 5., so that is a key date to watch.”

Your next read: The ‘Fight for Fresh’ Continues, Says IFPA CEO Cathy Burns

How Global and Domestic Economics Will Shape Fresh Produce

Tue, 21 Oct 2025 12:24:45 GMT

ANAHEIM, Calif. — Arjun Chakravarti, managing partner of a Chicago-based consultancy Cogknition Analytics, offered a look at the current economic climate globally and in the U.S. to kick off his session at the International Fresh Produce Association’s 2025 Global Produce and Floral Show.

In the first quarter of the year, Chakravarti says businesses pulled back due to the uncertainty of trade policies, but by the second and third quarters, businesses began to adapt. He says what’s happening is almost a tale of three economies in the U.S. as the economies of Southern states in the U.S. are growing much more rapidly than the rest of the U.S. States, such as Pennsylvania, Indiana and Wisconsin, are also growing as well, but states such as California and New York are on the edge and could tip into a down cycle.

“We’re really seeing that the economy is muddling along at 1.5%,” he says. “We had kind of a collapse at the beginning of the year, but we got some pull of growth back in the middle of the summer and people have started to get more clarity.”

But, with the 1.5% economic growth rate, it’s also important to consider inflation’s impact on the economy. While inflation sits at about 2.9% percent, the economy shows signs of slowing, Chakravarti says. He points out, however, that inflation doesn’t feel as high as it did in 2022 when the inflation rate peaked at 10%.

“It’s quite high, given the lack of growth that we have right now,” he says. “You have to think of what or how much inflation we are getting, given the amount of growth that we have.”

Chakravarti says that while imports face inflation rates twice as high as domestic goods, consumer spending continues to show growth — but not all consumers are fueling that growth.

“We’ve started to see, particularly since COVID, this compression towards who is spending,” he says. “The top 10% of spenders in the U.S. account for 50% of total spend. So, that’s why you’re seeing high spending still driving the economy, but it’s being driven by a narrower and narrower group of people.”

Chakravarti says this type of distribution hasn’t happened in the U.S. in around 100 years. These compressed spending habits and slowing wage growth in lower-income households have impacted the economic outlook for spending.

“Ninety percent of households report changing grocery and restaurant behavior in response to inflation,” he says. “Ninety percent are deal-prone right now; 60% are saying they’re eating out less; 40% are switching to private label; 38% are making checklists to make sure that they’re really being mindful about what they spend at the store; and then waste mindfulness is even accounting for about 25% of behaviors as well.”

Chakravarti says produce industry businesses need to ensure that marketing efforts align with these shifting shopping habits.

“You’ve got to really track where the inflation is going,” he says. “So, if you’re finding that these folks are going to be fairly constrained in their spending and they tend to spend the dollars that they have once they get them in the pocket, that’s where you would see inflation, but those folks are going to be fairly depressed in spending.”

Global Perspective

In terms of the global economy, Spain is the most well-positioned in the aggregate with higher tourism, lower gas costs and higher consumer confidence, Chakravarti says, adding that this is a good opportunity for the country.

Germany, as an export-based economy, now competes with China rather than selling directly to the country, he says. Germany keeps its debts low, but if it decides to invest in infrastructure, it could boost the economy. The country has also faced some gas price increases due to the war between Russia and Ukraine.

France and Italy face high debt and low investment. Italy also faces a rapidly aging population and higher oil and gas risks. The Netherlands, too, faces gas availability challenges and issues with competing with China instead of selling to China.

“When you net all of that out, I’d say Spain is the best sort of opportunity inside of the EU right now in terms of consumers’ ability to spend and people actually having money in their pocket, not being as worried about other expenses like gas,” Chakravarti says.

Canada’s economy fares better than expected due to the majority of its trade being exempt under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, he says.

“And that has helped not only in terms of mitigating some of the losses that were expected from the United States but also in allowing them to be more competitive in selling abroad as well,” he says.

But Chakravarti says Canada still faces some structural issues that need to be worked out; it’s important to see if there are structural reforms that help consumers become less controlled by high housing prices.

“They need to improve their economies by actually trading between their provinces a bit better,” he says. “And they also need to make sure that people are putting their money into something other than real estate right now in Canada.”

Pulling It Together

Factoring in the current economic picture, Chakravarti says he sees a lot of opportunity for the produce industry for those who understand the needs of category managers.

“A lot of produce really, really works in terms of marketing in the mid funnel, your ability to … move the needle in the middle of the funnel with great innovation is really offsetting a lot of these tariff effects,” he says.

Chakravarti says there are opportunities on the demand side that, when married with the opportunities on the supply side, could be seen in tax benefits for investing in new technology. He says the 20% pass-through deduction for LLCs and S Corps, the increase in SALT (State and Local Tax) Cap can all help produce industry businesses through changes in demand, especially when a produce business focuses on promotions.

“There’s a lot of ability for you to be seen as major players in those systems to offset some of the demand costs,” he says.

Chakravarti says he sees fertilizer and anything coming from China as a risk for inflated costs. He says import fees on produce such as bananas, grapes and tomatoes are also a challenge.

“I’m talking to a lot of importers who are telling me, ‘We have to make entry exit decisions right now from certain markets to manage cash flow,’” he says. “Where there’s opportunity for investment, maybe from a tax basis, is on the cold chain side because you’re seeing increases in compressor refrigeration replacement costs, holding costs are getting higher and spoilage costs are going up as well.”

Chakravarti says retailers have the most power in the market due to the high pass-through rate to consumers.

“Produce is historically moderately price sensitive and income level is really the bigger determinant here,” he says. “When you start to take all of this together and you start to think, what are the costs really going to be? We’re looking at an anticipated pass-through of about 6 cents to 8 cents per dollar.”

Chakravarti points to a Harvard study that tracks price changes. With a commodity such as avocados, which is embedded with high-income consumers, he says that the tariff pass-through goes directly to the consumer, who is willing to pay for the product.

“If you’re dealing with other parts of the produce chain, you’re seeing maybe about as low as 50% is actually hitting the consumer in terms of who ends up paying the incremental dollar for every tariff that we pay,” he says. “What we’re seeing is that retailers are able to pass through in the long run, the most both downstream and upstream to consumers.”

Importers with weaker foreign currencies may pay a lot more of the trade impacts, Chakravarti says.

Another thing to look at, he says, is that there will be a slowing of population growth, which will directly impact demand and supply in the future.

“We actually expect that if this is going to be the trend moving forward, that we’ll get a population decline in the next 10 years,” he says. “So, this is something we really need to start tracking over the long run.”

Chakravarti says that produce industry businesses need to balance consumer pressures with business upsides.

“That starts with an understanding of this wonderful product that you have, that’s an amazing complementary good inside of these retail media networks,” he says. “There’s major opportunities for figuring out how to partner with your category managers and retail to really move the needle there and help them be great and be great partners to them. We think that there’s major returns there that can help offset some of the tariff effects.”

Understanding retail loyalty programs, Chakravarti says, can help produce industry businesses.

“Truly understanding sort of how to become next level in customer acquisition and retail partnering is going to be critically important moving forward,” he says.

Texas Leaders Urge Rio Grande Valley Residents to Act on Water

Fri, 10 Oct 2025 19:26:12 GMT

There are 14 days left in the current five-year water cycle between the U.S. and Mexico. According to the 1944 water treaty, Mexico must deliver 1.75 million acre-feet of water from the Rio Grande River to Texas.

It almost certainly won’t make the total. As of Oct. 4 (most recent complete data), Mexico has only delivered 811,348 acre-feet.

“Currently, under the 1944 water treaty, there are no consequences to the Mexican government if they fail to deliver the water to us,” U.S. Rep. Monica De La Cruz (TX-15) said Oct. 10 at a press event hosted by Texas International Produce Association.

De La Cruz and the event’s other speakers stressed the need to give the 1944 treaty teeth by including water delivery enforcement mechanisms into the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement , which is up for renegotiation next year. To this end, all the speakers called for action.

“We need the public to step in and make comments on the U.S. Trade Representative’s website to urge them to put [the 1944 water treaty] into the USMCA agreement,” De La Cruz said.

Anyone interested can submit via the USTR’s comment portal , docket No. USTR-2025-0004. More detail below on specifics.

Comments can be submitted no later than Oct. 30, 2025.

The impact of late and lacking water deliveries

All speakers stressed the negative impacts of the late, lacking and sometimes non-existent deliveries of water from Mexico on Texas.

“Who suffers?” De La Cruz asked. “Not the Mexican farmers. Our farmers. Our fellow community members right here in the Rio Grande Valley.”

She referenced the loss of Texas’ sugar mill as an example of that suffering and cited negative impacts on Texas ranchers and row crop farmers. Dante Galeazzi, president and CEO of TIPA, quantified the impact for produce.

“This last year, our farmers put 30% less fruit and vegetables into the ground, not because they wanted to but because they were forced to,” he said.

This reduction, he said, was the result of tough decisions in the face of years of unpredictable, insufficient water deliveries. He added that Rio Grande-area growers are no longer able to grow water-intensive crops or crops that need specific watering intervals like broccoli or cauliflower or celery now due to the water situation with Mexico.

“Our farmers are not able to do the diverse mix that they usually can,” he said. “That creates all kinds of problems. The biggest problem is, when you have all these farmers planting the same two or three crops and that market goes down, the entire region goes down too.”

But it isn’t ag alone who suffers, according to Daniel Rivera, executive director of the Elsa Economic Development Corporation. Speaking from his experience in the ranching-heavy rural Hidalgo County town of Elsa, he said the impact of the lack of Mexico’s water deliveries ripples out into his community and beyond into Texas’ economy.

“Water drives production, labor and infrastructure; the very sectors that USMCA was designed to strengthen,” he said. “If we tie the 1944 water treaty to the USMCA, we create a system that assures predictability and accountability because, without reliable water, our region’s economic engine fails.”

Submitting USMCA Comments

Though De La Cruz said she didn’t know what water delivery enforcement mechanisms might look like if included in USMCA, she stressed the importance of making such mechanisms available.

“Please, submit your comments asking for the 1944 water treaty to be included into the USMCA agreement,” she said. “This is the time when the Rio Grande Valley can step up into the national light and really highlight the need for this treaty to be in the USMCA agreement.”

TIPA made some logistical recommendations for those in Texas agriculture who decide to submit comments, including:

In the “Chapters” prompt, select any that apply to your situation, but also or at least select 2, 3, 10, 24, and 31
If you are directly involved in Texas agriculture, include details such as number of acres, what you grow or raise on your operation, years in operation and number of employees you hire in your comments

Galeazzi described submitting comments as being a small time investment that could have big, beneficial impacts for the Rio Grande Valley.

“It will take 5 minutes out of your day, but if all 1.5 million citizens of the Rio Grande Valley were to take those 5 minutes, it would send a clear message to all three countries just how important this is, just how much we depend on the Rio Grande River,” he said.

“Please — citizens of the Rio Grande Valley and further afield — take the time,” he said. “Make the comments. Help save our region, save our way of life, and save our path forward.”

Your next reads:

California Citrus Industry Faces Significant Trade Challenges

Thu, 09 Oct 2025 11:53:44 GMT

California’s citrus industry is facing unprecedented challenges, including strong headwinds on both the import and export side of the trade equation, where imports now exceed exports. Adding to these difficulties, are the rising cost of production, labor challenges and the threat of pests like huanglongbing (HLB) and the Asian citrus psyllid .

California Citrus Quality Council President Jim Cranney says the organization is focused on facilitating changes that will help move the industry forward and weather some of these challenges.

CCQC’s mission is to represent the California citrus industry in response to issues at the state, national and international levels, which means everything from quarantine matters to technical assistance to international compliance to understanding regulations with trading partners and assisting with reducing barriers to market access.

But recently, Cranney says the CCQC has been doing a lot of work, providing input and comments to the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, focused on the trade front.

“I came to California in 2008 as the new president at CCQC, and at that time it was all about exports. The industry was very outward looking,” Cranney says.

Much has changed in the 17 years since he took the helm at CCQC, including both increased competition on the domestic citrus market and, in some cases, crippling tariffs on the export side.

CCQC President Jim Cranney says, recently, the council has been doing a lot of work focused on the trade front.

(Photo courtesy of CCQC)

“Recently, we’ve seen more difficulties on the export side and a lot of imports coming into the U.S., so much so that, regrettably, I would say when we look at trade policy, we’re paying a lot of attention on the import side,” he says.

Family Farms Under Pressure

California lemon growers are increasingly facing competition from lower-priced imports to the U.S.

“Lemons from Argentina have been a big problem,” Cranney says. “APHIS granted market access to lemons coming in from Argentina, I think it was around 2016 or 2017, and from 2018 until this past year, we’ve seen an increase from approximately 8,000 metric tons to 93,000 metric tons in that short period of time. That’s been an enormous increase in supply, and quite honestly, there’s a big differential in our cost of production as compared to Argentina.”

“It’s very difficult for our industry to meet the kind of prices that are coming in from Argentina,” he adds.

In addition to higher labor costs compared to Argentina, California also has more stringent regulatory requirements, Cranney says.

“The Environmental Protection Agency’s Endangered Species Act? You can multiply that by 10 with requirements that are necessary in the state of California,” he says. “The regulatory costs for producers here are tremendous, so we feel the playing field is unfair for California citrus producers.”

While the CCQC continues to advocate for the industry, Cranney says it can only do the best it can to meet lower prices in the marketplace.

“Returns back to growers have been lower, and it’s been a very difficult situation for lemon growers,” he says.

For some California citrus growers, the situation is reaching a tipping point.

“Farms are under pressure,” he says. “Some of these are family farms that have been in the family for generations, and you can imagine it’s not an easy decision for these farming operations to just say, ‘We’re going to give up now.’ A lot of this is happening in places in California, where development is a real possibility and there’s potential in the next two to three years, if this continues, we’ll start to see farms coming out of production and just going into shopping malls.”

Cranney says CCQC has been bringing its message of an unlevel playing field to the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.

“We have been saying that we’re not so much upset that Argentina has access to the U.S. market, but we expect them to operate in a more responsible way in terms of marketing their fruit in the U.S.,” he says. “We haven’t gone to the level of documenting dumping on their part, but if you look at market conditions, it’s also very difficult for them to be selling at cost of production.

“We have questions about how rational it is for producers in Argentina to be dumping product into the U.S. market, when they’re not making money either,” he adds. “Our industry’s opinion is that the U.S. government should put a limit on the amount [of lemons] coming in from Argentina to protect the industry from predatory behavior on the part of Argentine interest, and we’ve been advocating for the industry along those lines with USTR.”

A lot of this is happening in places in California, where development is a real possibility and there’s potential in the next two to three years, if this continues, we’ll start to see farms coming out of production and just going into shopping malls.

Jim Cranney, president of California Citrus Quality Council

While the U.S. government has imposed 10% tariffs on products from Argentina imported into the U.S., Cranney says it’s not likely to have measurable impact.

“Ten percent isn’t likely to make a huge difference,” he says. “It will deter and restrict some imports coming in, we’ll have to wait and see by how much, but probably we need a tariff quite a bit higher than 10% to really get to the level where there’s not real disruption in the marketplace.”

Opportunities and Challenges in China

When it comes to exports, California citrus has long eyed China as a market with tremendous potential for growth.

“If you look at what has happened in China over the last 10 to 15 years, they’ve had one of the largest migrations of people in rural areas to cities in human history,” Cranney says.

China’s urban population in 2024 was approximately 943.5 million, according to Statista. To put that in perspective, the population of New York City was 8.5 million in 2025.

“When you look at it in those terms, and you’re a produce supplier or food producer, you don’t have to think too long and hard to know that demand is going to increase substantially when you have people coming out of rural areas and into a city where they can’t produce their own food,” he says. “Because of that, China has always been viewed by the industry as a really interesting top growth market.”

While the California citrus industry had been exporting to China, Cranney says that with the trade disruptions from about 2018 to around 2020, California citrus saw its exports decrease to the country by 28% to 30%.

“China took retaliatory measures and increased tariffs substantially,” he says. “And since then, we’ve been operating with tariffs that are in a neighborhood of about 46%.”

Steep tariffs have made California far less competitive in China’s citrus market, where suppliers from other countries have a large advantage as far as price.

“That has been an ongoing problem because China hasn’t really reduced those retaliatory tariffs,” says Cranney, who adds that COVID-19 further exacerbated the situation with supply chain disruptions and shipping delays that are less than ideal with a perishable product.

“It’s been a challenge for the industry to overcome those difficulties, and there’s still a lot of residual problems from COVID in the supply chain that have not been completely resolved,” he says. “We’re still faced with delays that make it difficult to make customers happy halfway around the world.”

If China would lower tariffs, giving California citrus growers greater access, Cranney says, “it is a very promising market.”

“But if we can’t, then we feel like we’re stuck in the same boat as many other types of producers going into China,” he says. “We hear a lot about soybeans, for instance. China has always been a very big market for soybean producers, and we also hear about different government programs or bailouts, if you will, that will compensate those growers for loss of market and financial difficulties.

“We would just expect that California citrus growers also would be included in any type of market assistance programs along those lines, including purchases that the government may make for [federally funded] food programs or other types of government programs that can utilize citrus from California.”

Cranney says that as CCQC and the citrus industry continue to navigate these difficulties, there is some good news on the horizon.

“It looks like we have a good crop coming up this year, with probably a little bit larger size fruit,” he says. “Some markets like larger fruit, and that is a bright spot for the industry.”

South Africa OKs Imports of U.S. Fresh Blueberries

Thu, 28 Aug 2025 16:25:51 GMT

The North American Highbush Blueberry Council says South Africa has officially approved market access for fresh blueberries from all U.S. states.

“After years of stalled progress, we thank the Trump administration for prioritizing this request and finally getting the South African market open for U.S. fresh blueberries,” says Kasey Cronquist, NABC president, in a news release. “We’re grateful to the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) for its collaboration and for securing a science-based and practical work plan for blueberry growers and packers.”

Cronquist says NABC is optimistic about the future of U.S. blueberry exports, while noting NABC first requested access to South Africa trade about a decade ago, when U.S. blueberries would have held a dominant position in the South African market.

“We believe strongly in the importance of open, science-based trade and will continue working to expand and strengthen global market access for U.S. blueberry growers,” he says.

Now, exports from Morrocco, Zimbabwe and other African nations has surged.

“This is a clear example of the risks when market access is delayed,” Cronquist says. “Competitors fill the gap, capture market share and limit opportunities for U.S. growers.”

NABC says the organization is also working to secure expanded access to South Korea and new access to Australia and New Zealand.

“We appreciate the ongoing efforts of USDA and the United States Trade Representative (USTR) on these priorities, and we’re hopeful that, under the Trump administration, we can open these new markets and create profitable opportunities for U.S. blueberry growers,” Cronquist says.

Ron Lemaire Talks Canada's Unique Role in Sustainability, Global Trade

Fri, 22 Aug 2025 21:15:20 GMT

Editor’s note: This interview with Ron Lemaire was recorded before Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s announcement to remove all of Canada’s tariffs on U.S. goods specifically covered under USMCA.

When asked about the biggest drivers of change in the fresh produce industry for Canada and globally, Canadian Produce Marketing Association President Ron Lemaire says there are a few forces at play; on this episode of “The Packer Podcast,” Lemaire lists wildfires, heat waves, logistics, geopolitical issues and more.

“It’s not one thing that’s really driving challenges for everyone within our supply chain,” he says. “It’s the compounding of challenges that we’re living with. And you know what the amazing thing is? The industry is so resilient. We still pivot. We still adjust, and that’s something that I think we can be proud of.”

Lemaire says tariffs are another big force in the global fresh produce trade. While most fresh produce falls under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), some imports such as beans, citrus, melons and more face 25% retaliatory tariffs. U.S. and Canadian officials have been engaged in conversations on the potential to remove those tariffs and also build better trading relationships, says Lemaire, adding that the Canadian government has taken a strong stance on those 25% tariffs remaining in place in response to the U.S. government’s initial fentanyl tariffs.

Lemaire says there are opportunities for a remission of duty for products not found anywhere else.

“Lemons are having a real hard time globally,” he says. “The U.S. is one of our primary sources, and it’s a market that we need, so importers could apply for a remission of duty to hopefully get that 25% back to leave some of the stress within the system.”

Lemaire says there have been discussions on the Canadian side of trade about the minimum tariff the country’s importers could live with.

“For me it is zero,” he says. “The fact that we’re talking about minimizing tariff frameworks and saying, ‘Maybe 10% is okay.’” The approach I want to win for us moving forward is getting back to a USMCA framework, removal of the tariffs for fresh produce, and then go and look at if there is a tariff regime in play.”

Lemaire says he and fellow association colleagues see any tariff on fresh produce as being a challenge for the industry.

“When you start looking at the production challenges, the tight margins that we all function within, even a 10% base tariff or even a 5% tariff is detrimental to how we conduct business,” he says. “A big part of that is part of my biggest concern today is that the U.S. administration has set the context for a baseline tariff discussion.”

Lemaire says that as the U.S. put the original fentanyl tariffs in place, Canadian shoppers developed anti-American goods sentiments. While those beliefs still remain, he says he’s seen a softening.

“When we look at the fresh fruit and vegetable sector in Canada, $4 to $5 spent on fresh produce at retail is spent on imported product, and a majority of that comes out of the U.S.,” he says.

Lemaire says Mexico is also a major fresh produce trading partner, so the future of the North American fresh produce industry depends on a good business strategy that works for the entire fresh produce industry.

“We’re seeing consumption fairly static in Canada,” he says. “We’re seeing price still a driver. We’re seeing consumers still shopping at discount and mass merchants and really feeling the impact; where banners are still thriving, and you’re looking at club stores also doing well relative to value proposition.”

And Lemaire says that Canada has begun to engage with other geographic zones as a response to these increased tariffs on certain fresh produce goods.

“If you grow a product and you only have a window where North America is your market because of perishability, we need to make sure we get rid of the tariff framework,” he says. “We need to make sure we have open flow of trade across borders. … When we sit down and look at it, the consumer at the end holds the power. If they’re buying and they are increasing consumption, we all win.”

Regaining Canadian consumer confidence in U.S. goods is an important next step in the future of North American trade, Lemaire says.

“We’ve encouraged and had discussions with the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, saying how do we rebuild and begin starting to look at a buy U.S. or some type of strategy that gets Canadians back on track relative to not only enjoying Canadian product and the products that they may not have access to through domestic production, but let’s look at the strategy that brings North America back together,” he says.

Export Markets Show Potential for U.S. Apples

Tue, 19 Aug 2025 12:32:24 GMT

CHICAGO — “It’s a pretty dynamic time in the industry right now,” says Chris Gerlach, vice president of insights and analytics, before the start of his industry outlook and global crop report during the U.S. Apple Outlook conference.

While Gerlach gave attendees a preview of the USDA’s domestic crop forecast, he also provided a snapshot of the current export market, which he says shows some true opportunities for growers.

Mexico is the U.S.’s top export market for apples, worth about $400 million a year; Canada is second at $150 million a year, followed by Taiwan ($94 million), Vietnam ($74 million) and India ($40 million). The U.S. also sends apples to about 59 other countries, worth about $320 million.

Gerlach points out that India’s presence on the list is a bright spot.

“We’re trying to win back that market share, “he says. “It’s an important market for us.”

Gerlach also says apples avoided being part of a potential retaliatory tariff that Canada proposed in February.

“The tariff foreign policy levers are being used much more widely than just unfair trade practices,” he says. “It’s being used in all manner of things, so anything can kick off a trade war anywhere at any time.”

Many countries that import U.S. apples have expressed a willingness to work with the administration on trade deals, Gerlach says. These include Taiwan, Vietnam, India, Thailand, Israel and Indonesia.

“I think there’s a real opportunity to expand into or expand what we are sending them,” he says.

Other countries that the U.S. does not currently export to such as Japan, South Korea, Australia and the United Kingdom, could be additional sources of apple exports.

“There have been announcements of deals with Japan, South Korea, U.K. Those details are vague, but I think still opportunities that we could get some of those nontariff trade barriers removed and increase our exports to those countries,” he says.

Global Apple Production

China, which grows about 2 billion bushels — or about 10 times U.S. production — looks to be down about 5% this year, Gerlach says. China exports apples to Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand. With China being down, he says there could be an opportunity for the U.S. to make some inroads in those countries.

“Those are all countries that have come to the negotiating table, and they’re all in our top five export markets, or at least Thailand is top 10,” Gerlach says. “Being down 5% to some of their some of their export markets that we also trade with might be some opportunity there.”

Turkey, which produces about 142 million bushels, looks to be down by 38% this year. While Turkey exports apples to Iraq, Russia, Libya and Syria, the country also exports apples to India, which could be a great opportunity for the U.S. to make more gains.

“If Turkey normally produces the same amount of apples as the U.S. and is down close to 40%, there might be some real opportunities to scale up exports and take back some of that market that we lost when we got outpriced of that market for about a five-year time period,” he says.

In Europe, Gerlach says overall production looks to be flat. Poland looks to be up 3%, Italy down about 3%, France up 4%, Germany up 15% and Spain down about 8%.

In South America, Chile expects to be up about 1%, Argentina up 6%, Brazil up 15%, and in North America, Canada looks to be up about 3% and Mexico is projected to remain flat.

“Uncertainty around tariffs will continue to be a challenge,” Gerlach says. “Expanding existing markets and opening new markets may provide significant opportunities.”

Trump Gives Mexico 90-day Tariff Reprieve as Deadline for Higher Duties Looms

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:39:13 GMT

U.S. President Donald Trump gave Mexico a 90-day reprieve from higher tariffs to negotiate a broader trade deal but was expected to issue higher final duty rates for most other countries as the clock wound down on his Friday deal deadline.

The extension, which avoids a 30% tariff on most Mexican non-automotive and non-metal goods compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, came after a Thursday morning call between Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

“We avoided the tariff increase announced for tomorrow,” Sheinbaum wrote in an X social media post, adding that the call with Trump was “very good.”

Approximately 85% of Mexican exports comply with the rules of origin outlined in the USMCA, shielding them from 25% tariffs related to fentanyl, according to Mexico’s economy ministry.

Trump said the U.S. would continue to levy a 50% tariff on Mexican steel, aluminum and copper and a 25% tariff on Mexican autos and on non-USMCA-compliant goods subject to tariffs related to the U.S. fentanyl crisis.

“Additionally, Mexico has agreed to immediately terminate its non-tariff trade barriers, of which there were many,” Trump said in a Truth Social post without providing details.

Trump is expected to issue tariff rate proclamations later on Thursday for countries that have not struck trade deals by a 12:01 a.m. EDT (04:01 GMT) deadline.

South Korea agreed on Wednesday to accept a 15% tariff on its exports to the U.S., including autos, down from a threatened 25%, as part of a deal that includes a pledge to invest $350 billion in U.S. projects to be chosen by Trump.

But goods from India appeared to be headed for a 25% tariff after talks bogged down over access to India’s agriculture sector, drawing a higher-rate threat from Trump that also included an unspecified penalty for India’s purchases of Russian oil.

Although negotiations with India were continuing, New Delhi vowed to protect the country’s labor-intensive farm sector, triggering outrage from the opposition party and a slump in the rupee.

Tough Questions From Judges

Trump hit Brazil on Wednesday with a steep 50% tariff as he escalated his fight with Latin America’s largest economy over its prosecution of his friend and former President Jair Bolsonaro, but softened the blow by excluding sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice from heavier levies.

The run-up to Trump’s tariff deadline was unfolding as federal appeals court judges sharply questioned Trump’s use of a sweeping emergency powers law to justify his sweeping tariffs of up to 50% on nearly all trading partners. Trump invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare an emergency over the growing U.S. trade deficit and impose his reciprocal tariffs and a separate fentanyl emergency.

The Court of International Trade ruled in May that the actions exceeded his executive authority, and questions from judges during oral arguments before the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit in Washington indicated further skepticism.

“IEEPA doesn’t even say tariffs, doesn’t even mention them,” Judge Jimmie Reyna said at one point during the hearing.

China Deal Not Done

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the U.S. believes it has the makings of a trade deal with China, but it is “not 100% done,” and still needs Trump’s approval.

U.S. negotiators “pushed back quite a bit” over two days of trade talks with the Chinese in Stockholm this week, Bessent said in an interview with CNBC.

China is facing an Aug. 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with Trump’s administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals.

(Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu and Susan Heavey in Washington and Aftab Ahmed in New Delhi; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

Leaders of North American Produce Industry Urge Swift End to Tariff Dispute

Fri, 25 Jul 2025 18:16:19 GMT

More than a dozen representatives of the fresh fruit and vegetable sector in North America sent a letter addressed to U.S. President Donald Trump, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to push for a swift end to ongoing tariff disputes, citing severe consequences to growers, exporters, retailers and consumers.

The Canadian Produce Marketing Association (CPMA), the International Fresh Produce Association (IFPA) and the other co-signers say these tariffs threaten the aﬀordability, accessibility and stability of fresh produce supplies across the continent.

“The fresh produce supply chain is one of the most deeply integrated in the world, with cross-border trade between our nations ensuring year-round access to healthy fruits and vegetables,” says Cathy Burns, IFPA CEO. “Consistent access to safe, nutritious produce is essential to addressing chronic health challenges. Tariﬀs on these vital goods disrupt that balance — driving up grocery costs, reducing availability and placing significant strain on the businesses that grow, ship, and deliver our food.”

In 2024, Canada imported nearly $5.5 billion in fresh produce from the U.S. and $3 billion from Mexico. The U.S. imported over 24 billion pounds of fresh produce from Mexico — valued at $19.6 billion — and exported more than $1.7 billion into Mexico. The organizations say these figures illustrate the tight-knit and mutually beneficial trade relationships that have long supported regional food security and public health.

“The stability of the North American fresh produce market is paramount. Canada’s industry is inextricably linked with our trading partners; any disruption directly impacts our growers, supply chains, and ultimately, consumer access and affordability,” says Ron Lemaire, CPMA president. “We stand with our domestic and global colleagues in demanding that leaders prioritize swift and collaborative resolution to safeguard the continental supply of fresh produce.”

The associations say in the letter that each country has a right to address unfair trade practices, but the associations caution that tariﬀs on perishable goods cause immediate and disproportionate harm to the supply chain. The organizations urge leaders to pursue a collaborative, long-term trade agreement that brings stability and predictability to the marketplace.

“Our organizations remain committed to supporting fair and open trade,” Burns and Lemaire said jointly in a news release. “We stand ready to work with all three governments to reach a solution that protects consumers, ensures food security, and strengthens the agricultural economies of North America.”

Will Termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement Lead to an 'Eggs Moment' for Tomatoes?

Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:19:27 GMT

On July 14, when the U.S. Department of Commerce terminated the 2019 Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico and imposed a 17% tariff on most imports of tomatoes from Mexico, reaction from the fresh produce industry was pronounced and deeply divided.

“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,” says Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, in a news release. “This rule change is in line with President Trump’s trade policies and approach with Mexico.”

But ag economists and industry researchers say the end of the agreement and tariff hike will put billions in economic activity at risk and threaten tens of thousands of jobs. And they say American consumers are likely to feel the impact in higher tomato prices at retail, with some ag economists anticipating the price of not only Mexican tomatoes to increase by about 8.5%, but also prices on all tomatoes sold in the U.S.

Whether to extend the 90-day review period or terminate the agreement has been fiercely debated in the fresh produce industry, with those calling for its termination saying it failed to prevent Mexican exporters from dumping below-production-cost tomatoes into the U.S. market, and proponents of the agreement’s extension saying the past five Tomato Suspension Agreements did not fail, but rather benefited American consumers.

Robert Guenther, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, calls the decision to end the U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement a bold and crucial action. “This decision will protect hardworking American tomato growers from unfair Mexican trading practices and send a strong signal that the Trump administration is committed to ensuring fair markets for American agriculture,” he says.

(Photo: STOCKSTUDIO, Adobe Stock)

Florida Claims Victory

Both the Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association and the Florida Tomato Exchange call the end of the agreement a victory for U.S. tomato growers.

FFVA says this is a positive movement “toward fairer competition, not only for tomato growers but for all specialty crop producers nationwide,” stating Mexico dumped imports into the market for too long, injuring the U.S. tomato industry.

“This action demonstrates that U.S. trade laws can protect American farmers and ensure that U.S. consumers have access to locally grown fruits and vegetables,” the association says. “We are grateful to Commerce Secretary Lutnick and President Trump for listening to growers and leveling the playing field. And for the relentless advocacy of the Florida Congressional Delegation. The future of the industry is stronger without the undue pressures of unfair foreign trade.”

Robert Guenther, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, calls it a bold and crucial action.

“This decision will protect hardworking American tomato growers from unfair Mexican trading practices and send a strong signal that the Trump Administration is committed to ensuring fair markets for American agriculture,” Guenther says. “Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick recognized that five previous agreements with Mexico had failed, and that strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws is needed to protect the stability of our food supply chain.”

Guenther adds the ending of the agreement will ensure that “American consumers will have more choices and higher-quality products, while strengthening America’s food system against future disruptions.”

Bob Spencer, owner of West Coast Tomato in Palmetto, Fla., said in an op-ed sent to The Packer that he’s seen a rapid change in the American tomato market, where at one point he says American tomatoes supplied about 80% of the U.S. market but are now down to about 30%.

“When the first agreement went into effect, we saw the impact almost immediately. Prices dropped. U.S. growers started losing contracts. Family farms began shutting down,” he says. “Many hardworking growers have thrown in the towel because they couldn’t compete due to these trade practices. Just this season, we have seen one Florida tomato farm sell off prime tomato acreage for development while another just announced they are going out of business and are in the process of selling off their equipment. That’s the human cost of failed trade policy.”

Spencer says U.S. growers can’t survive in a system that “rewards dumping and turns a blind eye to enforcement,” noting that ending the Tomato Suspension Agreement helps protect American growers and U.S. food production.

Greenhouse Tomato Growers ‘Deeply Disappointed’

The CEA Alliance is deeply disappointed 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, Stenzel says.

“Unfortunately, the Department [of Commerce] failed to take into account the voice of our members in the U.S. greenhouse tomato industry, which now grows more than one-third of all U.S. fresh tomatoes,” he says. “When the original dumping order was issued in 1996, the greenhouse sector was just beginning to grow, offering consumers better-tasting, vine-ripe tomatoes compared with field tomatoes that are picked green.”

Today, greenhouse tomatoes represent the growth in the category, says Stenzel, pointing to the USDA, which reports production of U.S.-grown greenhouse tomatoes increased 69% from 2010 to 2023, compared to a 49% decline in field-grown tomatoes.

“Because most high-value greenhouse growers farm in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, the termination of this agreement will cause significant damage to these growers, serving as a financial barrier to new investment in U.S. greenhouses,” he says. “Unfortunately, this became a political issue that was not resolved on the facts of what would be best for American businesses and consumers.”

Stenzel says the CEA Alliance will continue to stress the “critical importance” of the U.S. greenhouse tomato industry moving forward.

“We remain hopeful that open-field growers will reengage in discussions that could serve all parties much more effectively than this order,” he says.

The Economics of Ending Agreement

Luis Ribera, director of the Center for North American Studies at Texas A&M University, rebuts the claim that Mexican imports cause lower tomato prices. He co-authored a study with Andrew Muhammad, professor of agriculture and resource economics at the University of Tennessee, which examined the economic impact of fresh tomato imports on fresh tomato prices.

Ribera says U.S. importers of Mexican tomatoes paid 31 cents per pound in 1995, and they paid around 74 cents per pound in 2024.

“The claim that tomato prices are low because of Mexican imports — the data doesn’t show that,” he says.

In fact, Ribera says price increases align with general food inflation.

“They have often exceeded prices paid to American farmers and kept pace with the overall rise in food prices the past three decades,” Ribera and Muhammad wrote in the study.

Ribera says retailers and consumers should expect more volatility in the market, as the Tomato Suspension Agreement took some of the risk in the market.

“There is a lot of uncertainty,” he says. “When you have uncertainty, you’re going to have volatility. It’s going to hurt the U.S. economy, even though it’s imported products.”

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs cited the Texas A&M study in a press release on her website that said the decision to terminate the Tomato Suspension Agreement will put $8.33 billion in economic activity at risk and threaten over 50,000 agribusiness jobs in Arizona and Texas. She was joined by affected business leaders and elected officials in denouncing the decision to terminate the agreement.

Lance Jungmeyer, president of the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas, also sees the end of the Tomato Suspension Agreement as detrimental to the U.S. economy and consumer.

“Food inflation is real,” he says. “When prices go up for one item, especially an essential like tomatoes, consumers will spend less on other items. As shoppers spend less on other items, other industry sectors will see reduced volumes, which will contribute to a cycle of layoffs and failures in the food business.

“Also, the cash flow crunch, and the long-term uncertainty existing under antidumping duties means in two years, commerce could retroactively increase the margin, and companies would have to find a way to retroactively pay the difference on all the tomatoes that they shipped during that prior time frame,” he continues. “It is an expense that is impossible to predict or even to plan for. We could see a huge negative impact in two years that causes many companies to go out of business or face significant financial impacts.”

Lance Jungmeyer, president of the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas, sees the end of the U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement as detrimental to the U.S. economy and consumer. “Food inflation is real,” he says. “When prices go up for one item, especially an essential like tomatoes, consumers will spend less on other items.”

(Photo: Ivanb, Adobe Stock)

Are Tomatoes Poised for an ‘Eggs Moment’?

David Magaña, senior analyst with RaboResearch Food and Agribusiness, says the termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement will cause prices in the U.S. to rise. This is due to a number of factors, he says, including that about 70% of the fresh tomatoes consumed in the U.S. are imported and about 90% of U.S. fresh tomato imports are from Mexico.

“The U.S. heavily relies on Mexican tomatoes, especially for specialty varieties like vine-ripened, roma, grape and cocktail tomatoes,” Magaña says. “With the tariff in place, importers must either absorb the cost (unlikely for most), or pass it on to retailers, who then pass it on to consumers.”

What’s more, U.S. growers, including those in Florida and California, can’t immediately scale up production to replace Mexican supply, creating a supply gap that will also drive prices higher, Magaña says.

American consumers also now expect year-round and robust tomato supplies, helping to make U.S. fresh tomato demand more inelastic in recent decades.

“Per basic economic theory, the more inelastic the demand is, the higher proportion of the duty will be absorbed by consumers versus exporters,” he says.

In 2023, Timothy Richards, professor and chair of the Morrison School of Agribusiness at Arizona State University, and a team of researchers released a study on the direct impact of the end of the Tomato Suspension Agreement. He says a crucial finding in that study is what he calls the “pass-through rate,” or the percentage of the duty that the American consumer will absorb.

“We found that the pass-through rate is going to be about 50%, so my fearless forecast, as all economists like to make, is roughly half of that tariff will be reflected in consumer prices,” he says. “Given that we found out that it’s going to be 17%, my prediction is that on average, we expect tomatoes to go up by 8.5%.”

Richards cautions that this 8.5% increase in tomato prices will likely not only affect imports but will also impact every tomato sold in the U.S.

“Because if Mexican tomatoes go up in price, then obviously American prices are going to go up to match that,” he says. “All tomatoes are going to be that much more expensive in the store.”

Ribera says he doesn’t think this price increase will stop Americans from buying tomatoes, but it will likely impact shopping habits.

“They might change the kind of tomatoes that they buy,” he says. “Instead of the heirlooms that are a little more expensive, they might go to roma tomatoes. Consumers who like to consume organic tomatoes from Mexico, for example, might switch to conventional because of the price hike.”

While Jungmeyer says consumers might not see an immediate price hike at the supermarket, as it’s summer when production from Mexico is not as high as U.S. production, spikes are on the horizon.

“Later in the fall and winter is when we would see the impacts begin on pricing,” he says. “Importers will need to pass along the increased duty amounts to buyers and ultimately consumers. Also, because of the intensive cash flow of duties, the required customs bonding and other expenses associated, it is going to drive a lot of companies to either greatly reduce their plantings or even get out of the tomato business. This supply shortage will lead to an ‘eggs moment,’ where fob prices could rise uncontrollably, with supermarket prices to follow. Higher fobs, combined with the duty, will make next year’s tomatoes even more expensive.”

“Seventy percent of the fresh tomatoes Americans eat are from Mexico, which means this withdrawal will result in higher prices for American families,” agrees Dante Galeazzi, president and CEO of the Texas International Produce Association. He adds that termination of the agreement “introduces uncertainty and disruption into a binational supply chain that supports tens of thousands of jobs, especially in the Texas border region where we cross 2 billion pounds of tomatoes.”

Rather than scrap the agreement, Galeazzi says all parties would have been better served by modernizing and improving the agreement.

“We urge the administration to reengage in negotiations and prioritize a solution that supports fair trade, economic stability and a healthy supply chain for one of the most widely consumed fresh produce items in the country,” he adds.

Richards says, unfortunately, the big loser in the end of this Tomato Suspension Agreement is the American consumer as tomato prices increase. And he says reducing consumption or access to fresh fruits and vegetables does not square well with healthy eating and nutritional goals.

“There’s an adage in economics that you either import the people or you import the products when there’s labor cost differences
between two countries,” he says. “The decision was that we don’t want to import the products. And all the news from the weekend is that we don’t want to import the people either. So, there’s a train wreck happening here that you can see coming down the road. There will be labor cost differences between Mexico and the U.S. We either need the people or we need the product. We need to decide, as a society, which one we’re going to do.”

President Trump Threatens New Round of Tariffs Over the Weekend: Here’s the Latest

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 13:39:36 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.

What Trade Means for the Future of California Walnuts

Tue, 08 Jul 2025 12:43:33 GMT

Robert Verloop, executive director and CEO of the California Walnut Board (CWB) and the California Walnut Commission (CWC), says things are looking up for walnut growers in the state.

“When I first walked in, people talked about the fact that there were a lot of trees planted in 2016 and 2015 when prices were good,” he says. “There was a promise of an open market to China, which shut down shortly thereafter when they started overproducing their own walnuts. And then there was also the promise of India, and with the change in the government there at that time and putting these tariffs in place, our growers got caught with having too many acres in the ground and the markets not being fully developed.”

Growers currently face a 100% tariff on imports to India, which Verloop hopes will change very soon. The industry has been in a catch-up mode since 2015 and 2016 to expand market access in other countries, he says, adding that the state’s growers export about 65% of its crop, with leading markets in Germany and Turkey.

“We’ll have probably close to 20 markets where we have active programs,” Verloop says. “California walnut handlers and exporters ship to over 50 countries around the world. We have a broad base that we work with, but we’re very interested in some of these key markets — EU (European Union), India and Turkey — that can be the real drivers and foundation builders for our program.”

India is still a relatively small market, Verloop says, but the CWC sees strong potential in the country, which has placed tariffs on U.S. imports since the late 2010s to protect walnut production in Kashmir and then retaliatory tariffs. The U.S. and Chile are the main exporters to India.

Verloop says the economy in India has experienced a major shift. There’s around 350 million to 400 million people in the middle class with more disposable income and changing shopping patterns.

“We see tremendous opportunities there,” he says. “Let’s say this year we’ll ship 15,000 tons. Its potential is up to 120,000 tons. The importers, distributors, they’re all looking forward to the change as well, because they know what it means in consumption. They know what it means in improving health.”

He says while negotiations continue, the CWC is optimistic for some good news soon.

Thanks to the USDA’s Market Access Program, California walnuts have expanded programs into the United Kingdom, Germany, Holland, Spain, Turkey, India, Japan, Korea, Canada and the Middle East, Verloop says. The CWC has also utilized $14 million in the last two years as part of the Regional Agricultural Promotion Program, started by then-Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

Verloop says the CWC plans trade and consumer programs in these markets; for some, it will be both trade and consumer programs, and in other countries, it will just be to expand trade access.

“We’re looking at markets such as Morocco, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and then potentially some additional investments in India and the EU as well,” he says. “It’s possible that we may also look at Algeria and Egypt in the future.”

He says the CWC matches the Regional Agricultural Promotion Program funds, which helps boost the overall reach of the initiatives.

And aside from global markets, Verloop says increasing demand in the U.S. is also another key priority, which includes engaging with the next generations of walnut consumers. This includes working with distributors to ensure proper handling and marketing, he says.

“We feel that there’s still a tremendous amount of opportunity for growth in consumption in the United States, and so we’re trying to take the walnut out of the baking aisle and make it more relevant to today’s consumers,” he says.

Trade Dominance or Trade Domino? Trump Announces Trade Deal with Vietnam

Wed, 02 Jul 2025 19:10:44 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 .

Tomato Suspension Agreement is an ‘Economic Engine,’ says FPAA President Lance Jungmeyer

Fri, 27 Jun 2025 20:45:59 GMT

Industry opinions differ on the best path forward for the Tomato Suspension Agreement, with the Florida Tomato Exchange, Texas tomato growers, greenhouse growers and industry organizations all weighing in as the agreement nears the end of its 90-day implementation period.

Lance Jungmeyer, president of the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas, recently shared his take on the Tomato Suspension Agreement with The Packer via email.

Tomato Suspension Agreement is an “economic engine,” says FPAA President Lance Jungmeyer.

(Photo courtesy of Lance Jungmeyer)

You’ve said the Tomato Suspension Agreement is an economic engine that contributes more than $8 billion annually to the U.S. economy and supports nearly 50,000 jobs across multiple industries. What do you say to those who argue the Department of Commerce has found Mexican exporters have dumped tomatoes into the U.S. market below their cost of production and by margins as high as 273%?

Jungmeyer: Since the 2019 agreement took effect, the Department of Commerce has not found a single violation of that agreement, including the requirement to eliminate dumping. The 273% margin refers to data from 1995. Obviously, the market has changed considerably over the past 30 years.

Do you see this as a Florida tomato grower versus Mexico tomato grower issue?

This is not a Florida versus Mexico issue. Rather, it reflects a deeper divide between Florida and states like Texas and Arizona. It’s also a debate between traditional open-field cultivation of mature green tomatoes and the innovative greenhouse production of vine-ripe tomatoes.

Over 30 members of Congress from both parties and both chambers and from several states have urged the Department of Commerce to maintain the agreement. Nearly 500 U.S. industry associations and companies have likewise asked the Department of Commerce to maintain the agreement.

In the fall of 2023, the Arizona Legislature passed a resolution in support of the 2019 Tomato Suspension Agreement, and just last week, Governor Abbott of Texas signed a resolution into law in the state that underscores the importance of the agreement to the economy of Texas. The truth is that U.S. businesses and U.S. consumers will be the losers if the agreement is terminated and not renegotiated and modernized.

What is your response to Florida tomato growers who say Mexican tomato imports have used unfair trade practices to increase volume to over 70% of the U.S. market?

The 2019 agreement and its predecessor never guaranteed anyone a specific share of the market. Instead, it leveled the playing field through higher prices.

Tomato imports from Mexico are not the cause of the loss in market share by Florida tomato growers. Adverse weather events, labor shortages, soil salinity and urbanization in Florida have all caused a loss of market share. In recent years, Florida growers have invested tens of millions of dollars in tomato growing operations in Mexico, which have contributed to the shifts in market share and increase in imports.

Are you confident the U.S. can enforce fair trade laws for tomatoes imported from Mexico?

Again, the Department of Commerce has not found a single violation of the 2019 agreement after conducting numerous and rigorous monitoring and enforcement actions since the agreement took effect. Growers in Mexico and their U.S. selling agents have answered over 300 questionnaires since 2019, submitted over 5,000 quarterly certifications, and participated in five intensive annual reviews. In fact, the 2019 agreement has more enforcement and monitoring mechanisms than any other suspension agreement that the Department of Commerce administers, including an agreement covering uranium imports from Russia.

How would the termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement impact Mexico-U.S. tomato trade?

A cash deposit of 17% will apply to most tomato imports from Mexico if the Department of Commerce terminates the agreement, and some form of a deposit would be in effect for at least two and a half years. While the Department of Commerce might ultimately refund some of those deposits, imports would still need to have the capital to pay those deposits for two and a half years. The truth is that most growers and importers in this industry do not have those financial resources at their disposal.

Moreover, the deposit rate could increase after two and a half years, requiring all importers to then also pay the difference for the two-and-a-half-year look back period, putting further financial strain on importers. This makes the surety requirement far more risky, costly and burdensome. In view of these costs, and the uncertainty regarding total duties owed, many growers will simply get out of the business of growing tomatoes, causing a dramatic decline in the supply of tomatoes from Mexico.

Having imports from Mexico is a good thing, particularly because Florida is prone to adverse weather events, soil issues, labor shortages and rapid urbanization.

And in a market that increasingly prefers vine-ripened and specialty tomatoes, termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement, which is anticipated to reduce the supply of such tomatoes, would send prices skyrocketing as demand remains constant or increases. Tens of thousands of jobs could be lost in the U.S., and over $8 billion in economic activity for the U.S. economy could be lost.

Job losses in Mexico stemming from the termination of the agreement could also be detrimental to the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The government of Mexico has already raised the possibility of retaliatory measures on U.S. pork and poultry exports to Mexico if the Department of Commerce terminates the agreement. Moreover, growers in Mexico employ hundreds of thousands of migrant workers on their farms and provide them with housing, health care, child care and schooling for their children, along with fair wages and other benefits. If growers in Mexico are forced to cut jobs for those workers due to the termination of the agreement, those workers could look for employment in the U.S., which has the potential to undermine the border security gains obtained by the administration since January 2025.

The bottom line is that the 2019 agreement provides certainty for the market, which would disappear if the agreement goes away. In 2019 there was only a preliminary determination, and the agreement was actively being renegotiated. Moreover, deposits were imposed in 2019 during the summer, when the volume of tomato imports from Mexico are historically low. The circumstances were temporary and much different.

In a recent interview with The Packer, Robert Guenther, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, said “the evidence of dumping and injury is overwhelming.” What do you say to that?

The Department of Commerce’s valid dumping findings are based on 30-year-old data. The truth is that the department has found zero violations, and the anti-dumping duties are based on an investigation performed on a few companies — most of which no longer exist — back in 1995, when less than 10% of the U.S. population had email.

The 2019 Tomato Suspension Agreement and its predecessors have leveled the playing field. In response to that level playing field, the Mexican industry invested in itself, building state-of-the-art growing and packing facilities and developing supply chains that met changing consumer preferences in the U.S. for specialty and vine-ripened tomatoes. U.S. importers working with Mexican growers have simply outcompeted Florida. Florida does not have a price problem; they have a failure to innovate problem.

Your next read:

Greenhouse Growers Call for Modernization of Tomato Suspension Agreement, Not Termination

Stenzel: 5 Past Tomato Suspension Agreements Did Not Fail

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

Trade

Canadian Mushroom Growers to Fight ‘Deeply Flawed’ U.S. Subsidy Ruling

U.S. Case for Tariff Enforcement

Canadian Industry Warns of a ‘Deeply Flawed’ Precedent

Beyond Tariffs: The Dispute Over Farm Accounting Practices

Supply Chain Impacts and the Cost of Defense

Legal Timeline

Read more on this case:

Supreme Court Strikes Down Use of Emergency Powers for Trump's Tariffs

What This Means for Trump’s Tariffs

What This Means for Farmers, Agriculture and the Future of Trade

President Trump Reacts By Announcing New Tariffs

Reaction to Supreme Court Ruling on Tariffs

What Now? Exploring Alternatives to IEEPA Tariffs

Fresh Produce Must Avoid Becoming ‘Collateral Damage’ in USMCA Trade Talks, Says CPMA President

U.S.-Canada Produce Ties Weather Political Storms

Modern Infrastructure at Heart of North American Mushroom Trade Dispute

A Procedural Step

Navigating the Levy Timeline

Investing in Shelf Life

California Lemon Growers Face Uphill Battle as Argentine Imports Saturate Domestic Market

Potato Industry Road Map Eyes Billion-Dollar Export Growth

Strategy of Friction and Leverage

Defending Market Access

Emerging Frontiers: From Korea to West Africa

USDA Releases Per-Acre Rates for Farmer Bridge Assistance Program

Reaching the Farmer Bridge Assistance Rates

What About the Other Commodities?

Some See Payments as a Bandage on a Bigger Problem

Tariffs and Trade Wars in 2025 and Beyond

The commodities particularly hard hit by tariffs

Things started quickly in 2025 and will continue in 2026

Commodity-Specific Trade War Battles to Watch for in 2026

Other commodities faced trade threats and dumping issues

Fresh Produce Focuses on Growth, Health Amid Tariff and Trade Tensions

CPMA Talks Tariffs

‘Banana Badasses’ Pose for Wellness

Lipman Family Farms Focuses on Fresh Cut

Zespri Marks Record Season

Tomato Suspension Renegotiation: Where It Stands and What’s Ahead

USMCA Renegotiation

The Heat Is on as Fresh Produce Weathers Tariffs

Tariffs and Turbulence

Mark Your Calendars: Nov. 5

How Global and Domestic Economics Will Shape Fresh Produce

Global Perspective

Pulling It Together

Texas Leaders Urge Rio Grande Valley Residents to Act on Water

The impact of late and lacking water deliveries

Submitting USMCA Comments

California Citrus Industry Faces Significant Trade Challenges

Family Farms Under Pressure

Opportunities and Challenges in China

South Africa OKs Imports of U.S. Fresh Blueberries

Ron Lemaire Talks Canada's Unique Role in Sustainability, Global Trade

Export Markets Show Potential for U.S. Apples

Global Apple Production

Trump Gives Mexico 90-day Tariff Reprieve as Deadline for Higher Duties Looms

Tough Questions From Judges

China Deal Not Done

Leaders of North American Produce Industry Urge Swift End to Tariff Dispute

Will Termination of the Tomato Suspension Agreement Lead to an 'Eggs Moment' for Tomatoes?

Florida Claims Victory

Greenhouse Tomato Growers ‘Deeply Disappointed’

The Economics of Ending Agreement

Are Tomatoes Poised for an ‘Eggs Moment’?

President Trump Threatens New Round of Tariffs Over the Weekend: Here’s the Latest

What Trade Means for the Future of California Walnuts

Trade Dominance or Trade Domino? Trump Announces Trade Deal with Vietnam

Tomato Suspension Agreement is an ‘Economic Engine,’ says FPAA President Lance Jungmeyer

Is Food Inflation Heating Up July 4th Grills?