U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement

Canadian Retailers Lean Into Domestic Produce Amid Lingering Trade Tensions

Sun, 03 May 2026 23:18:34 GMT

TORONTO — As part of the 2026 Canadian Produce Marketing Association Conference and Trade Show, attendees had the opportunity to tour some of Ontario’s leading grocery retailers April 28, where anti-American sentiment continues to linger across the produce aisle and store.

Spurred by the Trump administration’s 2025 implementation of sweeping tariffs and ongoing threats of making Canada the 51^st state, many Canadians have pivoted toward a “buy domestic” movement, replacing American goods with Canadian alternatives as both a personal form of economic retaliation and a statement of national sovereignty.

The CPMA city retail tour first took attendees to a Longo’s grocery store at the Leaside Village shopping complex. Formerly a locomotive maintenance shop for Toronto’s railway system, the site is now a stunning grocery store with soaring ceilings, some of the highest sales among the company’s network of 43 stores and a destination produce department that sells 6,000 to 7,000 fresh-squeezed orange juices from the produce department each week alone.

A Longo’s store in Toronto sells 6,000 to 7,000 fresh-squeezed orange juices from the produce department each week alone.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

“I like to think we’re the best produce department in Toronto,” says Edward Vandergriend, assistant department manager.

On the day of the CPMA tour, Longo’s featured a prominent Foodland Ontario’s “Good Things Grow in Ontario” display of greenhouse-grown produce. The campaign, launched in 1977, is a long-standing initiative by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture to promote local food consumption. Retail stores with the best display of local goods can win a prize.

Vandergriend says while shopper sentiment has softened slightly on U.S.-grown produce, his customers’ first choice is Canadian-grown.

“We have a big push on greenhouse-grown produce and a huge push on Canadian-grown and local produce,” says Vandergriend.

But the realities are that Longo’s also needs to supplement its shelves with U.S.-grown produce that’s more competitively priced than domestically grown.

“My motivation is to sell more product,” says Vandergriend. “The customer shift to ‘Do you have anything other than American’ is ongoing, and we still have customers asking for Canadian product, but we want to offer savings as well. The U.S. is a huge producer. We want to offer good pricing to our customers, and sometimes that means American partnerships.”

The U.S. also grows certain produce items, like citrus, that don’t grow in Canada.

“We need to balance local product with savings and supply that come from U.S. produce,” explains Vandergriend, who says he’s hearing about some U.S. businesses — not just in produce, but across food and beverage — now struggling because they no longer sell to Canada.

Vandergriend breaks down how this plays out in the salad category, for example. He says Longo’s Leaside Village location used to sell Canada’s GoodLeaf Farms vertically grown lettuce in a 4-foot space. As demand has intensified for Canadian-grown greens, the retailer has bumped up the display to 8 feet. However, price and availability can be compelling selling points, and Longo’s store brand of lettuce is a U.S.-grown product.

During the CPMA retail tour, the Longo’s greens were on sale, which “still moves the product,” says Vandergriend.

“Arugula from the U.S. is selling well because there’s only an American option,” he adds. “Shoppers will buy American if there’s no other choice.”

It’s a similar story at Loblaws’ Maple Leaf Gardens 85,000-square-foot flagship store, which uses Canadian maple leaves on store signage to draw attention to domestic produce.

As Loblaws’ shoppers are keen to buy Canadian produce, the retailer uses the maple leaf symbol on signage to indicate domestically grown products.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

“Our shoppers still don’t like to see American products, and while price point and affordability come into play, our customers are not shy about telling us what they want and what they don’t,” says Deneth Kahadawala, store manager. “The anti-American sentiment is still going strong.”

And at Sobeys’ Queensway Flagship store, Dionne McCready, manager of retail operations for Ontario, says there’s a big focus on local.

“In Ontario, and the GTA [Greater Toronto area] especially, shoppers are very vocal about wanting local with the things going on in the world,” she says.

As a result, Sobeys emphasizes locally grown and Ontario greenhouse-grown in POS throughout the produce aisle.

The theme continued on the show floor, where a Produce Trends business session April 29 featured intelligence from Francis Parisien, senior vice president for NielsenIQ Canada, who says 54% of Canadians report trying to eat more domestic products and visit local businesses. Additionally, NIQ finds that 42% of Canadians, while aiming to avoid U.S. products, will buy American-grown if there’s no Canadian alternative.

Can a USMCA Renewal Repair North American Produce Trade, Consumer Sentiment?

Another education session at the 2026 CPMA show explored the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), or United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), as it approaches its high-stakes, six-year review on July 1.

The panel, moderated by Jim DiMenna of Red Sun Farms, presented compelling perspectives on the subject. Featured speakers included Richard Lee of Ontario Greenhouse Vegetable Growers; Dave Puglia of Western Growers Association; Richard Schouten of The Netherlands’ Fresh Produce Centre; and Fernando Cruz of Grupo Comercial Terroir del Valle.

During the discussion, Puglia, WGA president and CEO and a co-chair of the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, said Canadian consumer backlash on U.S. produce items has impacted U.S. specialty crop growers’ bottom line.

In a follow-up interview with The Packer after the session, Puglia said the extent to which U.S. produce companies are impacted by anti-American sentiment in Canada depends on which commodities you grow.

From left, Jim DiMenna of Red Sun Farms; Dave Puglia of Western Growers Association; Richard Schouten of The Netherlands’ Fresh Produce Centre; Richard Lee of Ontario Greenhouse Vegetable Growers; and Fernando Cruz of Grupo Comercial Terroir del Valle discuss USMCA at the CPMA Show.

(Photo: Jennifer Strailey)

“Canada has well-developed production of certain things that are also produced in California. For Canadian retailers with consumer sentiment running in the direction it is, there is at least an opening to buy more Canadian produce over California-grown produce,” says Puglia. “If it’s the same item and the quality is roughly the same, but there may be a price premium, because California operates at a high level of efficiency. It all depends on which category we’re talking about.”

But Puglia is also quick to point out that a number of fruits, vegetables and tree nuts are not produced commercially at scale in Canada as they are in California and Arizona.

“As Canadian retailers look to source and feel the pressure from their customers to not have American produce on the shelves, it still might be hard to find alternatives — just given the sheer volume that comes out of the Western U.S. at a very high level of consistency and quality.”

Puglia says growers in the West are feeling the pushback on American products.

“I think it’s dangerous to paint with too broad a brush, but certainly we’ve heard the [anti-American] sentiment reflected back to our members from Canadian retailers,” he says. “So, it’s there. I haven’t any doubt about that.

“The commercial tethers between the two countries, all depending on what crop we’re talking about, are stronger in some cases, and in other cases, not as strong. And maybe there are tethers that can be created somewhere else,” he continues. “Some of the OVGA members have an opportunity to jump into an opening. But as Richard [Lee] said, they also export a very large amount [85%] of what they grow in Ontario to the U.S. So, this is really complicated stuff.”

Puglia says USMCA has created commercial networks that have evolved over decades “for all the right reasons.”

“We have a situation that is uncomfortable and unfortunate and unwanted in terms of tone and rhetoric, but that alone doesn’t dismantle a decadeslong constructed commercial network,” he says. “It can break some of the linkages, but they may be re-linked in a different way. I think the salve to this wound is perpetuation of USMCA as it relates to the fresh produce industry, and again, possibly with some changes.”

Puglia advocates for the continuation of the USMCA as the primary framework for the produce industry, though he suggests specific enhancements to strengthen the agreement. His primary concern lies in the disparity between food safety inspection rates for domestic products versus Mexican imports. To protect the industry from categorywide market collapses following illness outbreaks, he proposes that the USMCA mandate greater diligence from the FDA and stricter adherence to the Foreign Supplier Verification Program.

In addition to safety standards, Puglia calls for “more cement” around labor provisions, specifically demanding that Mexico improve its diligence in enforcing agreed-upon labor standards. By tightening these rules, WGA aims to ensure a more level playing field for American growers who operate under different regulatory costs.

Finally, Puglia distinguishes his position from more protectionist groups, such as the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association, which has called for tariff-rate quotas. While acknowledging the Trump administration’s protectionist leanings, he remains optimistic that the core merits of the USMCA’s produce provisions are strong enough to stand on their own without resorting to extreme trade barriers.

“I don’t know where all of this is going to land, but I do think at the end of the day — and this could be silly optimism — but I really do think at the end of the day, the success of the fresh produce aspects of USMCA stand on their own,” says Puglia. “I think that is an entirely defensible construct that will be renewed — possibly with some changes — but a tariff-free movement of fresh produce between the three countries fundamentally renewed.”

How Del Fresco Pure is Futureproofing Ontario Greenhouse Growing

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 10:02:32 GMT

Consistency has been the bedrock of Ontario-based greenhouse grower Del Fresco Pure for over 70 years. But the company’s real secret to growth in 2026? Agility. From navigating the upcoming USMCA review to integrating AI into the greenhouse, Ray Mastronardi, vice president of sales, explains why high-tech controlled environments are the ultimate defense against an unpredictable global economy.

The following has been edited for length and clarity.

With over 85% of Ontario’s greenhouse produce heading to the U.S., how are your futureproofing your operation against potential trade barriers or shifts in cross-border policy?

Mastronardi: At Del Fresco Pure, we’ve built our business over seven decades on consistency, trust and long-standing relationships across North America. While cross-border trade is essential, our approach to futureproofing is grounded in operational excellence within our greenhouses — investing in controlled environments, advancing efficiencies and ensuring we can adapt quickly. That foundation allows us to remain resilient, regardless of how the external landscape evolves.

The USMCA agreement is up for its first six-year review on July 1. How are you feeling about the immediate and long-term future of North American produce trade?

There’s a long history of collaboration in North American agriculture, and greenhouse growers play a key role in delivering year-round supply. From our perspective at Del Fresco Pure, that shared reliance creates stability. While reviews naturally bring discussion, we believe the long-term outlook remains strong because the system works — for growers, retailers and consumers alike.

Del Fresco Pure’s Ray Mastronardi shares how the greenhouse grower remains resilient regardless of trade shifts or market volatility.

(Photo courtesy of Del Fresco Pure)

Rising input costs continue to make headlines. How do input costs for greenhouse growers compare to those for field growers and how are you navigating these waters?

Greenhouse growing is inherently more controlled and comes with a different cost structure, particularly around energy, infrastructure and technology. At Del Fresco Pure, we’ve always approached this with a long-term mindset. Continuous investment in efficiency, innovation and scale helps us manage those pressures while maintaining the consistency and quality we’re known for.

2025 was marked by economic uncertainty for many. What was the hardest lesson your operation learned last year? How has it changed your operations?

If anything, last year reinforced that even in a controlled environment, agility matters. Our strength has always been consistency, but 2025 emphasized the importance of being able to pivot just as effectively. At Del Fresco Pure, it pushed us to sharpen our planning, strengthen communication across teams and ensure we’re positioned to respond quickly while continuing to deliver at a high level.

What role, if any, does AI play in your farming operations? If it does play a role, what have been the key benefits of implementation and where do you see taking this technology next?

With greenhouse growing, we’re constantly working with data — climate, irrigation and crop performance. At Del Fresco Pure, we see AI as an extension of that, helping us refine decision-making and enhance precision. It’s not about replacing expertise, but supporting it — giving our growers better insights so they can continue producing at the highest level.

Labor remains a challenge for the produce industry. What are the keys to attracting and retaining greenhouse talent?

Our business has always been built on people. Many of our team members have been with us for years, which speaks to the culture we’ve worked to create. At Del Fresco Pure, attracting talent comes down to offering a modern, technology-driven agricultural environment, while retention comes from investing in our people and giving them a sense of ownership in what we’re building.

Innovation has long played a critical role in your operations. What does greenhouse innovation look like for your brand in the next three to five years? What does it take to continue to succeed in this highly competitive marketplace?

Innovation for us isn’t one moment — it’s a mindset that’s been part of our business for generations. Looking ahead, it’s about continuing to evolve our controlled-environment agriculture, improving efficiency and reducing our footprint while maintaining premium quality. That includes introducing thoughtful innovations like our King Pack cucumber and our more sustainable top seal packaging — solutions designed to meet consumer needs while minimizing environmental impact.

At the same time, we’re committed to strengthening our connection with consumers through our digital media platforms, using engaging storytelling to bring our products and greenhouse story to life. Partnering with content creators like Logan Moffitt allows us to reach new audiences in authentic ways and inspire fresh, creative uses for our produce.

We also work closely with our retail partners to develop tailored programs that support their specific locations, customer bases and merchandising needs, ensuring mutual success at store level.

At Del Fresco Pure, success comes from staying disciplined, listening to the market and consistently delivering the quality and reliability our customers expect. We invite those interested in learning more to visit booth No. 1631 at the Canadian Produce Marketing Association Convention and Trade Show, April 28-30.

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.

Water Fight With Mexico Leaves South Texas Farmer Unable to Plant Half His Acres

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 19:27:57 GMT

For South Texas farmers, the ongoing water dispute between the United States and Mexico isn’t an abstract policy issue. It’s a crisis that has reshaped planting decisions, reduced production and injected deep uncertainty into every growing season along the Rio Grande.

Brian Jones, a South Texas farmer, says years of shorted water deliveries under the 1944 Water Treaty have forced him and many of his neighbors to dramatically scale back their operations. What once was a fully irrigated farming system has turned into a constant struggle to stretch limited water supplies across fewer acres.

“I believe it really starts to reach a crescendo in the 2023 crop year,” Jones says. “For 2024 and 2025, basically I’m only able to plant half of my farm because we don’t have enough water.”

Jones says the water shortages are not the result of drought alone, but of Mexico failing to live up to its treaty obligations. Under the 1944 agreement, Mexico is required to deliver water to the United States through the Rio Grande basin. However, U.S. officials and South Texas producers argue those deliveries have fallen well short in recent years.

“That’s exactly right,” Jones says, confirming that he has been unable to plant roughly half of his acres. “Going from fully irrigated to basically only being able to plant half the farm — and not even having full irrigation for that half — has been quite a struggle over the last couple of years.”

The reduced water supply has forced farmers to make hard decisions, prioritizing which crops and fields can survive with limited irrigation. Jones says even the acres that do get planted are often under-irrigated, increasing risk and lowering yield potential.

“Mexico has willfully held back water that they had,” Jones says. “That puts us in a huge shortfall.”

Hope on the Horizon?

Earlier this month, USDA announced it had reached an understanding with Mexico to release 202,000 acre-feet of water to the U.S., following heightened pressure from the Trump administration — including threats of tariffs if Mexico failed to comply. The announcement marked the most significant movement on the issue in years. But for growers on the ground, the news has been met with cautious optimism.

“I would say I’m both hopeful and skeptical,” Jones says. “I’m hopeful because President Trump and his administration really take the bull by the horns on this and bring the fight to Mexico.”

Jones says farmers in South Texas have long felt ignored as water shortages worsened, and he credits the current administration for taking a more aggressive stance.

“Under the previous administration, it’s like talking to a brick wall,” he says. “Under this administration, President Trump and Secretary Rollins really pick up the club and use it to bring Mexico to the table.”

Despite the agreement, Jones says trust remains an issue. Years of unmet commitments have made farmers wary of celebrating until water is actually flowing into the Rio Grande and irrigation systems.

“On the other hand, I’m still skeptical because Mexico has willfully withheld the water for a number of years,” Jones says. “Until it really starts flowing and they meet that full agreement of the 202,000 acre-feet, we’re still skeptical.”

Water Releases Reported to Start Immediately

According to Jones, Mexico indicates water releases should begin immediately, though geography and infrastructure mean the impact is not instantaneous for South Texas farmers.

“It should start this week,” he says. “It takes about three to four days for the water, once they release it in the lower parts of Mexico, to reach the Rio Grande. Hopefully by now, we start seeing that flow.”

Beyond the immediate relief, Jones says the water dispute highlights deeper concerns about fairness and competition. He believes the issue should be addressed in broader trade discussions, particularly as the U.S. reviews the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

“We actually hope it is a point of contention,” Jones says. “Not only is Mexico withholding water, they’re using that water to grow products we normally grow here in South Texas and compete directly in our marketing window. That creates a trade imbalance.”

Water Issue Could Be at the Center of USCMA Review

Jones says Texas lawmakers and agricultural groups are pushing to bring the issue into USMCA negotiations, arguing water compliance should carry real consequences.

“We’re hoping to use USMCA as a tool to put some punitive measures and some teeth into the water-sharing agreement,” he says.

Planting Decisions Uncertain

As planting season approaches, uncertainty remains front and center. Jones says decisions for the 2025 crop year will hinge almost entirely on whether Mexico follows through on its promises — and how quickly water arrives.

“We’re about 45 days from corn planting here in South Texas,” he says. “I’ll definitely get all my corn in, then switch over to milo. Cotton is the big question mark.”

Cotton planting typically begins in mid-March, leaving little margin for error if water deliveries fall behind schedule.

“All the details are supposed to be out by January 31, and they’re guaranteeing all that water by the end of March,” Jones says. “By early- to mid-March, we should know where they stand on deliveries, and that will shape how I plant this upcoming year.”

For now, Jones and other South Texas farmers are watching river levels, weather forecasts and diplomatic negotiations with equal intensity — hoping that this time, the water fight turns into real relief on the ground.

North American Produce Industry Calls for Full Renewal of USMCA

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 22:43:33 GMT

Last week the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) held a three-day public hearing, Dec. 3-5, on the operation of the United-States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in preparation for the first Six-Year Joint Review of the USMCA on July 1, 2026.

Earlier this week, Canadian Produce Marketing Association President Ron Lemaire shared, on LinkedIn, the Dec. 8 letter he penned to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and other Canadian government officials urging for the full 16-year renewal of USMCA.

“On behalf of leaders in Canada’s agriculture and agri-food sector, we write to echo the recent correspondence from our U.S. counterparts and express our strong support for the full 16-year renewal of the Canada-United-States-Mexico Agreement,” the letter says. “Our organizations represent a broad spectrum of agriculture and agri-food industries — including farmers, ranchers, processors and agribusinesses, to name a few. These stakeholders have greatly benefited from the seamless economic integration across North America made possible by the provisions of the CUSMA agreement.”

In the letter, Lemaire goes on to say that the North American free trade agreement is “instrumental in fostering a stable, integrated North American agricultural market.”

“The agreement’s provisions — particularly those related to sanitary and phytosanitary measures, biotechnology, technical barriers to trade and dispute settlement — have provided the predictability and stability, regulatory clarity as well as science-based frameworks necessary for innovation investment and growth,” the letter continues.

At last week’s New York Produce Show in New York City, The Packer spoke with Lemaire on USMCA, Canadian sentiment toward U.S. products and more.

“Our work’s cut out for us, but it’s important that we drive forward together to try and find solutions, because without an integrated North American market, the only losers are the consumer,” Lemaire told The Packer.

How is Canada feeling as we look ahead to the July 2026 six-year review of USMCA?

“If we see a real turbulent negotiation that Canadians feel their backs are being placed against the wall, it’s not going to help the entire perspective on purchasing U.S. products,” says Lemaire, adding that about 69% of Canadians are still eschewing U.S. products, down from well over 70% in February.

“But right now, especially around food, we’re seeing alignment between philosophies, especially within the U.S. state officials and also the Mexican government,” he continues. “And we’re very hopeful that as we move forward, we’re going to see a strategy and clarity around the trade discussion within USMCA and hopefully build on that so that Canadians will be buying strawberries and citrus out of the U.S. and happily consuming them.”

Your next read: Produce Gets Political: NYPS Panel Discussion Examines the State of Trade

FFVA President Calls for USMCA Reforms

Thu, 04 Dec 2025 19:46:17 GMT

As part of a public hearing on Dec. 3, Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association President Mike Joyner expressed concerns about the impact of produce imports from Mexico under the current U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). During the hearing, he reported significant losses in sales, market share and jobs within Florida’s produce industry due to unfairly priced imports from Mexico.

Joyner’s testimony was part of a hearing with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative as the six-year joint review of USMCA approaches on July 1, 2026.

Joyner’s statement follows previously submitted formal comments advocating for measures to ensure fair competition for Southeastern produce growers. In the hearing, Joyner noted the current terms of USMCA lack the necessary trade remedies for these growers.

“When USMCA was enacted by our country in 2020, it promised to improve trade fairness and economic prosperity for American interests,” Joyner says. “Its impact on our industry has been just the opposite.”

Joyner referenced data from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to highlight market shifts over the past 10 to 20 years. Since 2014, Joyner says Mexican blueberries have increased their U.S. market share by nearly fourfold, while Florida’s share has been reduced by half. The market share for Mexican bell peppers has doubled since 2004, Joyner says, while Florida’s has declined by 73%. Similar trends are evident across tomatoes, cucumbers, squash and additional crops, he notes.

“Since 2020, the Mexican industry has seized substantial additional market share and further depressed prices during Florida’s marketing season, causing that much more devastation to our grower community,” he says.

In Joyner’s remarks, he shared the role of government-subsidized development within Mexico, noting the growth of an export-oriented protected agriculture sector, predominantly supplying the U.S. market during Florida’s peak production periods.

His statements urged the administration to implement product-specific seasonal import limits, or tariff rate quotas, during the USMCA joint review.

“Without these measures, American consumers may soon be forced to rely entirely on foreign-sourced fresh produce during several months of the year,” Joyner says. “Compromising our country’s core nutritional needs in this manner jeopardizes America’s food security and, by extension, our national security.”

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.”

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:

USMCA Could Give U.S.-Mexico Water Treaty Teeth

Thu, 28 Aug 2025 19:36:32 GMT

There is less than two months left for Mexico to deliver roughly a million acre-feet of water to Texas, as required by a 1944 treaty with the U.S. Since it looks like Mexico won’t deliver on that obligation — as it has struggled or failed to do increasingly in recent decades — attentions now turn to how to prevent this pattern from repeating yet again.

“The problem is that the 1944 treaty has no teeth — there’s no enforcement mechanism,” explains Sonny Hinojosa, current water advocate and former general manager at the Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 2.

“We need something that will put pressure on Mexico,” he adds, “because we cannot force Mexico to release water.”

That “something” could be the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement, which is due for renewal and possible renegotiation next year.

The USMCA took effect in July 2020, replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement, which had governed trade between the U.S., Mexico and Canada since 1994. According to the agreement, it must be reviewed by all three countries every six years.

The first review period is set to begin in July of 2026. However, the review could begin as early as September following long-running tariff disputes between the U.S. and its closest trade partners .

Tying water treaties to trade agreements

Mexico’s lack of full or regular water deliveries to Texas have already had damaging impacts on Texas agriculture. The state’s disappearing sugar industry , and produce growers who have had to cut acreage and sell off equipment are key examples of the impact of Mexico’s water deliveries being short or irregularly timed.

“The treaty specifically states it’s got to be an annual delivery of 350,000 acre feet,” explains Hinojosa.

The treaty does include flexibility on deliveries in the case of extraordinary drought, in which case, Mexico must deliver 1.75 million acre feet of water within a five-year cycle. Hinojosa stressed that this doesn’t mean Mexico can go four years of no or minimal deliveries, waiting on a big storm in the fifth year to make deliveries.

“It doesn’t work that way, so we need that mindset to change,” he says.

Part of that mindset change could be working enforcement of the 1944 treaty into USMCA during its upcoming review.

Hinojosa points to the signing of NAFTA as when Mexico’s water delivery problems got started. The improved trade environment, coupled with the country’s ability to store water along the Rio Grande’s six major tributaries, gave Mexican growers the ability and incentive to keep water that should have been delivered to the U.S. to grow produce for trade, he explains.

“They have over a million acre-feet in those six tributaries,” he says. “If they’re not going to give us our water, then implement something, some kind of penalty through the USMCA,” he continues. “If you’re not going to give us our water, we’ll then cut back the trade. Or we impose tariffs, embargoes, whatever it takes, but we need some leverage.”

Dante Galeazzi, president and CEO of the Texas International Produce Association, believes getting leverage to enforce the 1944 treaty “has to happen alongside the USMCA renegotiations” because the water issue between the U.S. and Mexico impacts all three countries.

“The lack of water impacts both U.S. and Mexico, so it only makes sense to tie the treaty to USMCA because the water that comes from the treaty is going to impact the economics of the international trade between us, Mexico and, yes, Canada,” he says. “What we are growing in both U.S. and Mexico is feeding Canadians and goes to Canada, so it’s part of the economics up there as well.”

Your next reads:

Mexico Probably Won’t Deliver All the Water it Owes

Mon, 25 Aug 2025 14:34:58 GMT

Mexico has two months left to deliver almost 1 million acre-feet of water to the U.S., but all that water probably won’t be coming, according to U.S. experts.

“Barring some kind of tropical system, that’s not going to happen,” says Sonny Hinojosa, current water advocate and former general manager at the Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 2 in San Juan, Texas.

According to the 1944 treaty that governs water sharing between the U.S. and Mexico , Mexico must deliver 1.75 million acre-feet of water from the Rio Grande into Texas every five years. The current cycle ends October 25. As of Aug. 25, it only delivered 747,982 acre-feet , 43% of the total.

“The only thing that can bail Mexico out is a tropical system,” Hinojosa says. “Now, this is a monsoon season in northwest Mexico and west Texas, so we’re still hopeful to get some precipitation, but that still may or may not be enough to get us 100% of the water that we need.”

The deliveries of water from Mexico the the U.S. on the Rio Grande as of Aug. 25, 2025, from the International Boundary and Water Commission.

(Chart from International Boundary and Water Commission)

Hoping for a hurricane

Ideally, Mexico should deliver 350,000 acre-feet of water to the Rio Grande for Texas annually to reach the five-year total of 1.75 million acre-feet. But the 1944 treaty allows deliveries to run on the five-year cycle in the case of extraordinary drought. Mexico has been citing this provision and delivering water later and later in the cycle , often getting into “water debt” by not delivering enough on time.

In the past few cycles, late-cycle hurricanes bumped up deliveries. In the last cycle, which ended on Oct. 24, 2020, Mexico made the total 1.75 million acre-feet in the last days due to a heavy weather event.

The last time Mexico delivered roughly a million-acre feet of water in a couple months — what’s needed now — was at the end of 2010 as a result of Hurricane Alex that hit Mexico in late June.

“That’s the last time our reservoirs were full,” Hinojosa says.

The recent history of water delivery cycles from Mexico to the U.S. on the Rio Grande as recorded by the International Boundary and Water Commission. The mostly-vertical lime green line on the far left of the chart is shows the impact of Hurricane Alex in 2010.

(Chart from the International Boundary and Water Commission)

Alex was a just-in-time hurricane for Texas as well. Hinojosa explains those full reservoirs in late 2010 protected the state’s agriculture while it was deep in drought in 2011 and 2012. But by 2013, the water had again run out.

“It’s horrible to hope for a hurricane, but sometimes it seems to be what we need to get us caught up,” says Troy Allen, general manager of the Delta Lake Irrigation District in Edcouch, Texas.

“We don’t want the devastating ones that kill people,” he adds. “But if we do not get a hurricane this year in the watershed area, it’s going to be very rough come next year.”

Lucas Gregory, associate director and chief science officer of the Texas Water Resources Institute, says the best-case scenario “would be for a system to move pretty far inland and rain up in the mountains, in Chihuahua and the Rio Conchos watershed. That’s upstream of Amistad [International Reservoir], and that’s where the best storage capacity is.”

It’s not just a drought problem

However, there’s far more than drought going on in the situation between Mexico and Texas.

Gregory highlights issues such as growing metro populations on both sides of the Rio Grande and the impacts of climate change as contributing factors.

“But the ability of Mexico to store water in country is improved,” he adds. “They’ve built a lot more reservoirs in more recent history than the U.S. has, so now they can actually hold that water there and use it for themselves.”

Hinojosa says Mexico has built eight reservoirs since the 1944 treaty. Most were built along the Rio Conchos, a major tributary that delivers a lot of water to the Rio Grande — or used to, he says.

“Now they’re capturing it and using all the water for their expanded irrigation,” Gregory adds. “They’re basically irrigating desert with our water.”

Every source The Packer talked to pointed to the expansion of Mexico’s agriculture as a reason the U.S. is not getting the water it’s owed. This is particularly the case in the dry state of Chihuahua, and especially problematic with permanent, water-hungry crops like pecans.

Hinojosa points to the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement as when the problems started.

“It opened the doors for Mexico, mainly Chihuahua, to expand their irrigated agriculture into the desert using water that used to flow into the Rio Grande,” he explains.

“They’re using our water, and I say ‘our water’ because it’s rightfully ours,” he continues. “They’re capturing that water, storing it, using it to grow crops and then bringing them to the U.S. for us. And they’re killing our farmers. They’re killing our market.”

The impact on Texas growers

Since Mexico has only delivered roughly two years’ worth of water over the course of five years, Texas farmers and growers have been in a tough place for a while. Allen explains that his growers have been “on allocation” since April of 2023, while others in neighboring irrigation districts have enforced it since 2022.

“Meaning that they’ve told their farmers they are only going to get X number of irrigations,” he says. He calls the situation unprecedented in his 22 years at the district.

“It’s been very difficult for my farmers,” he adds, saying it is especially “looking pretty scary for the citrus farmers.”

Dante Galeazzi, president and CEO of the Texas International Produce Association, says Texas produce growers in particular are going to have to make some tough decisions.

“What it means this coming season is our growers are going to continue to veer away from water-intensive crops,” he says. “They’re not going to put in broccoli. They’re not going to put in celery. They’re probably not going to take a lot of chances on new commodities. They’re going to double down on what they know works.”

Those produce standbys will likely be crops like cabbage, onions, carrots and established citrus like oranges and grapefruit, he says. But the potential loss of produce diversity comes with its own problems.

“The diversity, the variety, the trying new things — that’s what has always helped South Texas be a region that provides commercial volumes of fresh fruits and vegetables,” Galeazzi stresses. But, without assurances about water availability, growers will likely stay in the safe lane, he adds.

“The safe lane is great, but the safe lane isn’t always profitable, and that’s challenging because now you’re coming off of two years where profits have been cut into if there’s even profits. And now, you’re about to go into year three of pretty similar conditions. It’s gut wrenching.”

What’s likely to happen in the next two months

Though Texas probably won’t get the full volume of water owed by Mexico, it will likely get some additional water this cycle. It might even amount to more than the usual annual delivery.

In an agreement signed between the U.S. State Department and Mexico in late April , Mexico pledged to deliver 324,000 to 420,000 acre-feet between the signing and October. That’s roughly a year’s worth of water delivered in five months. These deliveries are on top of the 110,000 acre-feet Mexico had delivered since the start of the current water year that started Oct. 25, 2024 and late April 2025.

If realized, the April agreement will bring the total deliveries for the current water year to 434,000 to 530,000 acre-feet, and the total five-year cycle deliveries between 854,000 and 950,000 acre-feet.

“Mexico has delivered 60.8% of the minimum that they said they would, so they’re on target to deliver this minimum of 324,000 acre feet,” Hinojosa says. “By the time this current cycle ends, it still leaves them with a deficit, but nonetheless, it has brought us some water in in recent history.”

Hinojosa praises the current administration for putting pressure on Mexico to achieve the April agreement that actually seems to be happening.

“I’ve been in this business for 38 years, and I’ve never known Mexico to do anything voluntarily before a cycle ends,” he says. “There’s a lot of pressure being put on Mexico, and that’s why they made these targets of delivering water to the U.S. before this current cycle ends.”

Needs for the future

More pressure is going to be needed to prevent this situation from repeating in the future, sources say.

“[Our administration is] going to have to implement something that puts pressure on Mexico that’s not tied to water,” Allen opines. That might mean tariffs or inclusion into the USMCA renegotiation, but whatever it is, it needs to spur Mexico to make good on their delivery requirements.

“Mexico could have fulfilled and caught up to what they owed us in 2022 because their reservoirs were full. They had a little over 3 million acre-feet in storage, and they still were over a year behind at that point in time,” Allen says. “But they didn’t deliver any of that water to the U.S.”

Hinojosa says a mindset change is needed in Mexico.

“We need Mexico to treat us, the United States, as we treat them on the Colorado River,” he says. The same 1944 treaty that dictate’s Mexico’s water deliveries to the U.S. on the Rio Grande also dictates the U.S.’s deliveries of water to Mexico on the Colorado River.

He says the U.S. takes Mexico’s allocation “off the top” of the available water in the Colorado River, then divides the rest among the seven U.S. states that rely on it. But Mexico does not return the favor, he adds.

“That has to change,” Hinojosa says. “Mexico needs to recognize that the treaty calls for a minimum delivery to United States of 350,000 acre-feet per year — that’s a minimum delivery — and they need to set that water aside and deliver that water to United States.”

Galeazzi also advocates for a mindset change here in the U.S. around not only Texas’ water issues with Mexico, but all of the country’s water issues. He describes the U.S. as having put water infrastructure on the back burner, adding that the country has “hamstrung ourselves” with excessive and burdensome regulations.

“We absolutely need to pressure Mexico,” he says. “But, if we want to prevent this from happening, the other thing we have to do is we — as a region, a state and a country — need to get serious and make some very big investments in the infrastructure of water.”

Your next reads:

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.

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.”

Recent Water Delivery Win is Not Enough

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 21:41:00 GMT

On April 30, Rep. Monica De La Cruz, R-Texas, announced the Mexican government had “agreed to deliver up to 420,000 acre-feet of water” through to October when the current five-year delivery cycle ends. In a June 9 letter to the editor , TJ Flowers, vice president of Lone Star Citrus Growers, thanked De La Cruz and the Trump administration for securing that additional water. And later that week, representatives of Texas agriculture and crops impacted by Mexican water withholdings met with the U.S. Department of State and others in Washington, D.C., to stress that far more needs to be done.

“Part of what we told them is, first and foremost, we are incredibly grateful for this water, and it’s going to be well used,” says Dante Galeazzi, president of the Texas International Produce Association.

It’s a great start, he says, but it is not enough and certainly not at the right time. Growers in Texas and beyond need a more comprehensive solution they can depend on.

“We need to create a system that ensures there is enforcement and that these deliveries occur beyond October. This is a great short-term victory,” he continues. “We need to capture this opportunity, but we also need to expand it.”

Water stats along the Rio Grande

According to the 1944 treaty between the U.S. and Mexico , Mexico must deliver 1.75-million-acre feet of water from the Rio Grande to the U.S. every five-year cycle. This means an average of 350,000 acre feet of water delivered per year. These cycles begin and end in late October, with the current cycle ending on Oct. 24.

According to the International Boundary and Water Commission — the U.S./Mexican international body responsible for applying the boundary and water treaties between the two countries — Mexico has delivered a total 618,799-acre feet through June 7. This level represents roughly a million-acre feet less than what Mexico should have delivered by this time in the cycle.

Even if Mexico delivers all of the 420,000-acre feet of water De La Cruz mentioned as being possible, that will bring Mexico’s total deliveries for this five-year cycle to just over a million-acre feet, slightly more than half of what Mexico is required to deliver. According to records available from the IBWC , recent cycles have seen declining volumes of water deliveries from Mexico.

Water uncertainty means lost U.S. ag

Assuming all of the additional 420,000-acre feet of water is delivered by October, it will not only not be enough, the timing will also be all wrong, according to Galeazzi.

“The problem is, our farming season runs well beyond October,” he says, explaining that growers in Texas, especially south Texas, plan their crops in late summer, plant in fall, and harvest through the beginning of the following summer.

“How are farmers in the U.S. going to make a plan and buy seed and borrow money and everything else if they don’t know if they’re going to have the water?” asks Greg Yielding, executive vice president of the National Onion Association, summarizing the issue.

He outlines the result of not having predictable water, pointing to the closure of Texas’ only sugar mill in 2024 as an example. Galeazzi too offeres an example of a watermelon grower who had to make the hard decision to cut acreage and ultimately sell a recently acquired packing facility due to water issues. Both men say these outcomes are going to get more likely.

“[Growers are] not going to be able to grow crops and, ultimately, more and more of these guys are going to sell off equipment or sell off land,” Galeazzi says. “Or, God forbid, they’re going to have to make the hardest decision: ‘Do I keep doing this another year or do I close up shop?’”

Mexican state of Chihuahua not cooperating

Both Galeazzi and Yielding identify the Mexican state of Chihuahua as a major problem underlaying a lot of the water delivery issues from Mexico.

“What has happened over the last 20 years is Chihuahua has significantly grown its agricultural production,” Galeazzi says.

He explains that since the early 2000s, Chihuahua has more than tripled its acreage of pecans. Yielding similarly notes that the acreage of citrus, onions and other long-term and/or water-hungry crops have expanded greatly in Chihuahua in recent years.

All of this is happening in a state that is roughly half desert. Galeazzi compares it to trying to grow produce in Las Vegas.

“Chihuahua and their agriculture is the same thing — they are growing in an area that should not be growing fresh produce,” he says. “That’s why you see these cycles go down year after year and these deliveries not happening. It’s not because they don’t have the water. Let’s be clear: Chihuahua has the water. They’re just using the water instead of delivering it like they said they would in the treaty.”

Yielding also says Chihuahua has been planting produce crops that directly compete with U.S. producers, pointing to onions as an example.

“They greatly increased their onion acres in the last 10 years, and they are only able to do that because they don’t release the water from the impoundments,” he says, stressing that such efforts impact all of U.S. agriculture, not just onion growers in Texas.

“What [Chihuahuan growers] do affects prices — and I specifically talk about onions — all the way up to Washington and Oregon and Idaho and New York and everywhere,” Yielding says. “It’s affecting everything, all onions, not just the Texas growers.”

Enforcement is key to 1944 treaty issues

Solving the ongoing issue of growing demand on the finite resource of shared water is a difficult one. Galeazzi points to other sources of water Mexico could tap to fulfill their treaty obligations such as the Rio San Juan. But ultimately, he says the situation in Chihuahua needs to change.

“Chihuahua is going to have to make some very difficult decisions about what stays and what goes, but ultimately, that’s where a bulk of that water can come from.” Galeazzi says. “Chihuahua is obligated to participate in a treaty that the country of Mexico signed with the country of the U.S., and it is not OK for a state in Mexico to not comply because they simply don’t want to or don’t think it’s fair.”

Enforcement is the key, however. Yielding says this is something for the current administration to take care of, praising recent past efforts of the Trump administration refusal to deliver water to Tijuana from the Colorado River .

“That’s the level it’s got to be at to get anything done.” he says. “We figured that out a while back. Everything was being done in terms of trying to negotiate with the Mexican government, and it hasn’t worked.”

Galeazzi also stresses the importance of enforcement. Though he says he doesn’t know what it might look like, he points to the upcoming renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement as a potential tool.

“That would be fantastic in my opinion, if the renegotiation occurred with a compliance mechanism for the water treaty.” Galeazzi says. “That has really been our ask of the government agencies as we move forward — we need compliance mechanisms created so that way Mexico sees that there is value in honoring that signature on the treaty.”

Yielding says he and the others who talked to the administration recently want them to know efforts can’t stop with these potential water deliveries.

“We don’t want people in the administration or the general ag community to think, ‘There’s going to be some water release, so everything must be OK,’” he says. “That’s not the case. This is not over.”

Your Next Read:

What Carney’s win could mean for U.S.-Canada fresh produce trade

Fri, 02 May 2025 19:48:38 GMT

With billions of fruit and vegetable dollars at stake on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border, industry leaders are urging for the resumption and protection of free produce trade.

In a congratulatory letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on April 29, Canadian Produce Marketing Association President Ron Lemaire put the U.S. and Canada’s mutually dependent produce industry trade into perspective.

“In 2024 alone, Canada imported close to $5.5 billion in fresh produce from the U.S., representing a little less than half of all fresh produce imports,” he said in the letter. “Just as important, Canadian companies exported just over $4.5 billion in fresh produce to the U.S., comprising more than 97% of [Canada’s] fresh produce exports.”

To get CPMA’s take on the recent elections and the path forward for produce relations, The Packer spoke with Lemaire following Carney’s victory.

“We’re pleased. We were ready to work with either the conservatives or liberals, and we knew it was going to be a two-party race,” Lemaire said. “The positive thing is that we have a strong relationship with the leadership within the Carney campaign.

“We’re also hopeful that Kody Blois will return as the minister of agriculture. He has a very strong understanding of our sector, coming from an apple region,” he continued. “But on top of that, he joined me in Washington to meet with Chairman [Glenn] Thompson of the ag committee group and other congressmen and senators a year ago to talk about Canada-U.S. agritrade and how we work together, so he understands the Canada-U.S. trade framework and the importance of how we work to find solutions.”

But U.S.-Canada relations have been strained in the Trump administration’s first 100 days, with a Feb. 1 imposition of 25% tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from Canada and Mexico — which was later amended — as well as President Donald Trump’s comments that Canada “should be the 51st state.”

Carney addressed this new phase of Canadian-American relations in his victory speech on April 29.

“Who’s ready to stand up for Canada with me?” he asked the audience. “As I’ve been warning for months, America wants our land, our resources, our water, our country — never. But these are not idle threats. President Trump is trying to break us so that America can own us. That will never — that will never, ever happen.

“We are once again in one of those hinge moments of history. Our old relationship with the United States — a relationship based on steadily increasing integration — is over,” Carney continued. “The system of open global trade anchored by the United States, a system that Canada has relied on since the Second World War, a system that will not be perfect [but] has helped deliver prosperity for our country for decades, is over. These are tragedies, but it’s also our new reality.”

The Packer asked Lemaire if Carney’s remarks signal irreparable damage to U.S.-Canada relations.

“Carney’s speech was rallying, and you have to recognize [that] in his role, he now has the power to do what’s best for the population in Canada,” Lemaire said. “But time, as they say, heals all wounds. What the timetable will be to sort of mend the fence, that’s the bigger question.

“I think the steps that we have to take as industry is to continue to work together,” he added. “Where we need to go next is making sure we hold the [Canadian] government accountable to the list of priorities we shared in our letter to the prime minister.”

In its April 29 letter to Carney, which referenced “growing political uncertainty with our largest trading partner” as well as port disruptions, escalating severe weather events and “continuing consumer concerns about the cost of food” as significant challenges for the Canadian fresh produce sector, CPMA also urged the Canadian government to exclude fresh fruits and vegetables from retaliatory tariffs against the U.S.

On March 4, in response to the Trump administration’s initial tariff implementation, the Canadian government announced retaliatory tariffs of 25% on products imported from the U.S., and while they are largely automotive-focused, they do include tariffs on a handful of U.S. produce items such as cherry tomatoes, citrus, stone fruit, nuts and snap beans.

“In the interest of supporting a healthy population, a resilient food system, and a competitive domestic industry, so long as Canadian fresh produce is granted tariff-free entry into the United States, we request that fresh fruits and vegetables should be excluded from any retaliatory trade measures against the United States, and that steps should be taken to remove the existing tariffs on U.S. produce items to protect Canadian produce exporters from potential retaliation that would have devastating impacts on domestic fruit and vegetable growers, particularly in the greenhouse sector,” Lemaire wrote in CPMA’s letter to the prime minister.

“Caretaker mode is finished with bureaucrats, so we can begin more thoroughly engaging the bureaucratic level through finance,” Lemaire told The Packer. “The challenge of finance and the responses we’ve been getting is they’re still concerned with the so-called ‘fentanyl-based tariffs’ that the U.S. has in place on items like steel and aluminum and some other key Canadian items. And their comment to me in a discussion with other allied associations was, ‘We need to see some movement on the U.S. fentanyl tariffs that are at play.’

“At the same time, we reiterated that fruit and vegetables are under [the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement], and this is a challenge for our industry when we are dealing with food and food security and the cost of food, especially in a continuous, turbulent time of supply chain inefficiencies,” Lemaire continued. “So, we’re urging the government to look at food separately and to do the right thing and remove the tariffs so that we can move forward and make sure Canadians and Americans can enjoy fruits and vegetables in both countries.”

Greenhouse-grown in the balance

With some 80% of Canadian greenhouse-grown produce exported to the U.S., the possibility of indoor ag being caught in the crosshairs of a trade war is a chief concern for the CPMA.

“We’ve already clearly articulated in the letter to our prime minister our concerns on retaliatory efforts,” Lemaire told The Packer. “If retaliation is taken on our greenhouse industry — tomato industry — it’s catastrophic relative to the high volume of product going to the U.S.

“Nobody wins in this situation,” he continued. “This has been the same from the very beginning of tariffs. All this does is drive costs into the system. It causes consumers to have either less availability of product and/or higher cost of product. We need to rectify it, and we’ll continue to push the Canadian government with our allied partners. We need to work between associations and within our jurisdictions to effectively push the governments to make the right decision.”

Navigating a minority government

Lemaire said the key for CPMA in bringing its fresh produce message to the Canadian government is that, with a minority government, there’s a need to also rely on the opposition.

“Interestingly, the leader of the conservative party did not win his seat. So, they’re now in a process of how to navigate that system, whether or not they pick a new leader, or if he is moved into a seat that was already won and someone allows him to sit in his seat — that could happen,” he said. “We’re waiting to hear how the conservatives will react to that. And the New Democratic Party also lost their leader, so we anticipate them to look for a new leader.”

Lemaire says that with the liberals having a minority, they will need to work with the Bloc Quebecois, the conservatives and a small group of NDP to keep their agenda moving forward.

“And this is what’s very important,” he said. “We need to ensure we’re working with all parties now in a minority, where before it was opposition control, [which] really keeps the government accountable.

“So, it’s interesting times in Canada,” Lemaire added. “But we’re confident that with the relationships we have with the conservatives, with the Bloc Quebecois as well, and those leftover New Democrats, we will be able to work with the opposition to help maneuver our agenda, in addition to working with the government itself.”

Your next read: CPMA’s Ron Lemaire talks trade wars ahead of Montreal show

IFPA VP of U.S. government relations talks tariffs

Mon, 07 Apr 2025 18:58:35 GMT

Rebeckah Adcock, vice president of U.S. government relations with the International Fresh Produce Association, recently spoke to The Packer about the latest effects of the Trump administration’s tariffs and the potential impact of higher rates for 57 countries.

A large amount of fresh produce moves across North America due to changes in growing seasons and other produce, such as tropicals, may not grow well in the U.S. or in large enough quantities to meet consumer demands, said Adcock, who added that the International Fresh Produce Association has been in contact and working with the administration on the topic of tariffs.

“We have, first of all, listened to what their aims and listed goals and intentions are in talking about tariffs,” she said. “[We’re] trying to figure out a way of helping the administration understand what we expect to happen for U.S. producers, for the U.S. flow and supply chain of fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as globally [and] what we think could happen for the export, the import.”

IFPA has raised concerns about the impact of tariffs on pricing and the subsequent reduction in consumer spending on fresh produce, Adcock said.

“We think that [tariffs] will certainly have some cost and pain for the supply chain, but we also believe, first and foremost, it could have an impact and will have an impact on prices,” she said. “Produce departments are the thing that people love to see when they walk in, and it’s how they judge grocery stores, but it is also one of the first things that people tend to want to cut back on when they see price spikes.”

Especially in a time when healthy eating is at a focus, Adcock said the industry doesn’t want to see anything that could discourage people from eating more fresh produce.

“We definitely don’t want to see anything out there that would discourage people or create some sort of disincentive for people to eat what we know are the healthiest products out there,” she said. “[We’re] having conversations about linking all these consequences together and showing that when you turn the dial in one place it can have some maybe unintended consequences.”

Adcock said an IFPA member that grows 30 to 40 different types of fruits and vegetables in South Texas has shared with the administration that U.S. growers need support to increase production in the U.S., such relieving the regulatory burden and sorting out a stable, legal and reliable labor supply, as well as alleviating water shortages.

“For his purpose, in Texas, there are so many things [in which] the federal government has a substantial role, if not primary jurisdiction, in dealing with that need and has for decades,” she said. “And there are things that can be done. We believe this administration has an interest in those things, but we think if those things were focused on first, that would unleash the prosperity and the competitiveness for domestic production, and that is where you would see the ability to grow and compete on the global market most, most significantly and probably most quickly.

“The situation we’re currently in is that you have a significant amount of U.S. growers who are producing as much as they are able to, given their limiting factors, labor regulations and water, depending on where they are and for what they can’t grow, because they do have a demand,” she continued.

Adcock said that grower in South Texas pulls 20% of produce from Mexico because of the greater demand than what’s grown in the U.S. This grower also sells about 30% of his produce grown to Canada.

“He is truly an American grower that is concerned about being outcompeted overseas,” she said. “But he knows it’s not because he can’t compete with them; it’s because he has a lot of things pushing against him for doing business here in the U.S., and so that is why he feels that inability to extend further.

“That’s a story we’ve made very clear that the administration hopefully understands and sort of gets the picture of what’s at stake — that it’s not just about taxing what comes in and the consequence and maybe helping him build up his production. He’s still not going to be able to build up production,” she continued. “Even if there is more domestic demand — a perceived opportunity to sell more — he’s still possibly likely to lose his clients in Canada, and he still doesn’t have the labor and still has all the other restrictions.”

Adcock said some products, such as mangoes and avocados, have maxed out production in the U.S. and imports are a necessary function of meeting a higher demand.

“Some things have really seen an uptick in popularity, which is wonderful for people’s health outcomes and for the industry,” she said. “But we’re pushing up against the outer edge of the places where those things are viable to be grown. We think with better negotiations — maybe on existing trade agreements there, as well as regulatory reform and a stable label labor market — we think that economically, the U.S. production of fresh fruits and vegetables and floral will expand to the extent that it can.”

Adcock said the U.S. has lost production, and some of that has been the result of the next generation not wanting to continue the family business or a grower facing labor struggles.

“We still have a robust production in this country, and we think that if the conditions are right — and again, we don’t think that necessarily tariffs are the condition — but if other conditions are right, where they can grow and do and expand, they’ll do so,” she said. “The question is whether or not that would truly, on a seasonal and regional basis, be able to meet what we hope is a growing U.S. demand as people continue to eat more fruits and vegetables.”

Adcock said trade deficit numbers are trending in a bad way, but she said the U.S. has strong and aggressive export capacity in durable produce such as orchard fruits and potatoes.

“That really has been a function of — are we able to stay competitive here because of all the winds that are moving against us?” she said. “And like all the rest of agriculture, are people coming back to the farm? Do the people want to go through the trouble of fighting for the workforce, fighting through the regulations, working through all those things? And so that has absolutely led to part of the reason for the growing trade deficit.”

Adcock said some non-produce items — such as alcohols — are also factored into and may somewhat inflate ag trade deficit figures. But she said she’s optimistic that new trade agreements will be on the horizon and will create a more equitable trade for U.S. producers.

As for those who say the U.S. is too reliant on exports, Adcock said that’s not the case for fresh produce.

“It’s hard to say it’s a bad thing to sell into another market when the sale of those products into the other market is not depriving the U.S. market of any of the products,” she said. “Generally, when you have more supply, and you have enough [domestic] supply, you can export. That typically means lower prices where there is also immediate availability.”

Adcock said many produce growers have chosen to grow varieties that have more of a demand in the export market, which is also a good thing.

“There are certain varieties of apples, certain varieties of things that other cultures have a taste for,” she said. “Americans prefer other things, and so that is allowed for some growth. In general, if you’re able to grow more, sell more, be more prosperous across the board, it’s kind of hard to argue that that’s a negative thing for those individuals in those businesses. The export market is not depriving the U.S. market and U.S. consumers of any of the needs that they have.”

Adcock said for those in the fresh produce industry concerned about the impact of tariffs, she encourages them to contact their representatives in Congress.

“You should absolutely ask them to communicate to the administration and share your story where the tariffs are causing pain and consternation and difficulty for your business, and certainly when it’s changing your clients and your customers and having those sorts of impacts,” she said. “That’s very powerful information. IFPA is collecting it unapologetically and sharing it with the administration. They’ve indicated they want to know. They want to track what the consequences are.”

Adcock said she doesn’t think that despite the administration saying the tariffs would be an adjustment period that it has lost sight of possible impacts.

“We have definitely been supportive of the administration working with these individual countries to try to find a path forward, to get their tariffs down,” she said.

Adcock said there is potential for adjustments whenthe U.S.-Mexico-Canada-Agreement comes up for renewal next year.

“There’s a lot of opportunity, I think, to actually create a more equitable playing field for other countries and the U.S., and we’re very much hoping that we can provide the information and the good data and the good reasons for why specialty crops are part of that conversation — and to get things flowing in a better manner again,” she said.

TIPA CEO shares strategies for navigating tariff turbulence

Thu, 03 Apr 2025 18:53:44 GMT

President Donald Trump recently announced a 10% tariff on goods coming from more than 50 countries , adding that the U.S. will impose higher reciprocal tariffs for countries that have a larger trade deficit.

While this will affect the fresh produce industry, imported produce that falls under the U.S.-Canada-Mexico Agreement would continue tariff-free, including fresh fruits and vegetables. Texas International Produce Association President and CEO Dante Galeazzi says as long as the fresh produce is grown in Mexico or Canada, it will not be subject to these tariffs.

“The important thing to know, and this is what I was trying to clarify to my members, is that the executive order for the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 against fentanyl migration is still in place,” he says. “So at any point this 0% could change, but as of right now, it doesn’t look like it. It looks like we’re going to go down this path of the 0%.”

For the rest of the world, there is a bigger impact on imported fruits and vegetables to the U.S., Galeazzi says.

“What we saw for the rest of the countries ... essentially, we saw a baseline of 10% tariff fee introduced on all countries with about a dozen or so other countries, which are going to have a higher tariff rate than that 10%,” he says.

Galeazzi says while there’s a fair amount of uncertainty surrounding the future of tariffs, he encourages fresh produce businesses to monitor how the U.S. speaks about its partnerships with Mexico and Canada, as that’s an indicator of what’s down the road and the USMCA renegotiations that will start late this summer.

“We need to be, as an industry, part of those conversations, because those conversations are going to dictate the terms of business between our three countries,” he says. “We don’t want to be left trying to make changes after those ideas have already been signed into law. We need to be part of those conversations to make sure that we are working with all the countries, all the entities and all the authorities who are going to govern fresh produce movement across North America.”

Though produce businesses in Canada and Mexico might have a tariff reprieve, that could change at any moment, and the produce industry should be prepared, Galeazzi says.

“Take the time to write the [standard operating procedure] for how you would do valuations, how you intended to handle tariffs. Make sure that it’s well done,” he says. “Make sure that folks have access to it, and then stash that away somewhere so that way you can tap on it in a moment’s notice and activate it if you do need it.”

Mexico's President Says the Country Won't Retaliate with More Reciprocal Tariffs on U.S. Products

Wed, 02 Apr 2025 18:06:07 GMT

In what President Donald Trump is calling Liberation Day, the White House plans to officially roll out a plan to combat what he calls unfair trade policies in an effort to bring industrial jobs back to the U.S., the other major unknown is how other countries will retaliate. On Wednesday, the United States’ top trading partner announced it won’t go toe to toe with the president on trade.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says Mexico won’t retaliate with a long list of reciprocal tariffs. In her daily morning press conference, Sheinbaum says instead, Mexico will “announce a comprehensive program, not a tit for tat on tariffs” on Thursday. She adds Mexico’s leadership is still waiting to see what exactly Trump announces on Thursday, but added “we have a plan to strengthen the economy under any circumstance.”

Trump is slated to hold a press conference at 4 p.m. EST at the White House, saying “It’s going to make our country rich again .... We’re basically going to take back the money — a lot of the money that we’ve given away over many decades.”

President Trump has been calling attention to the disaster falsely marketed as "free trade" for decades.

In reality, foreign countries have gotten rich at the expense of the American worker.

Today, he finally levels the playing field. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/XS0ZAiZS6p
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 2, 2025

Can Mexico Afford to Retaliate?
As AgWeb reported in March , the question leading up to April 2 was not only what the president would ultimately decide to do, but also if countries like Mexico could even afford to retaliate.

Here’s why. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Mexico’s GDP grew only 0.9% year over year in fourth quarter 2024, after expanding 2% in 2023 and 4.6% in 2022. Economic growth slowed, mainly due to lower investment, slowing consumption and a contracting energy sector.

The other issue? Mexico is extremely reliant upon demand from the U.S., exporting $41.9 billion worth of agricultural products to the U.S.

In 2023, Mexico accounted for 16.3% of U.S. agricultural exports and 23.3% of U.S. agricultural imports.

By the numbers:

Mexico is the largest source of horticultural imports to the U.S., supplying 63% of vegetables and 47% of fruit and nuts in 2023.
The top agricultural exports from Mexico to the U.S. in 2024 included beer, tomatoes, tequila, avocados, strawberries, raspberries and peppers.

Another important piece is Mexico is now the top ag export destination for the U.S.

According to Krista Swanson, chief economist for National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), Mexico is a huge destination for U.S. corn. More than 40% of U.S. corn exported last year went to Mexico. Not only does that mean the U.S. relies on Mexico, but Mexico is also reliant upon the U.S. due to the strong demand.

“That’s the other key piece here when we think about a Mexico situation, you know, will they retaliate on corn because it’s so important to the consumers in their country,” Swanson told Farm Journal during Commodity Classic this week. “And it’s such a big part of their diets and consumption. It’s a commodity that they consume way more of than what they produce. So they’re going to have to get it from somewhere.”

According to USDA’s Economic Research Service , between 1993 (the year before NAFTA’s implementation) and 2023, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico expanded at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7%, while agricultural imports from Mexico grew at a rate of 9.7%.

“With the economic recovery in the United States and Mexico that followed the pandemic, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico increased at a CAGR of 15.7% between 2020 and 2023, and U.S. agricultural imports from Mexico grew at a CAGR of 11.3%,” according to the USDA report. “In 2023, however, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico decreased by 0.3% compared with the previous year, as the prices of major agricultural exports (such as corn and soybeans) declined.”

‘Farmers for Free Trade’ Speaks Out
Trump will announce his full plan at 4 p.m. EST on Wednesday, and Farm Journal will continue to follow this story as it evolves.

Ahead of Wednesday’s announcement on global tariffs, Farmers for Free Trade Executive Director, Brian Kuehl released a statement condoning the president’s use of tariffs.

“Farmers don’t want tariffs. In the midst of an already struggling farm economy, new tariffs threaten to raise input costs, close off key markets, increase uncertainty—and push more family farms to the brink of bankruptcy,” said Kuehl in a statement.

However, not all farmers agree with that. Iowa farmer Ben Riensche is hoping getting tough on trade will address the record ag trade deficit.

“We’re going to go through an adjustment period. We’re going make things a little less than comfortable for a while here while we make our trade partners be fair trading partners. It could be hard in the short term on farmers,” Riensche says.

You can read more about Rienche’s take on trade here.

Your Next Reads:
BREAKING: CNH Halts Farm Equipment Shipments From North America, Europe To Assess Tariff Situation

Farmers Who Stand Strong With Trump on Tariffs Say Long-Term Gain is Worth Short-Term Pain

Canadian fruit and vegetable growers brace for tariffs

Wed, 02 Apr 2025 16:33:17 GMT

The Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada has released a report that spotlights the impact of U.S. tariffs on Canada’s horticultural sector. FVGC said this report also details the need to quickly adapt federal and provincial safety-net programs in Canada to address new and more extreme challenges.

In Ontario alone, greenhouse growers reported loses of $2.2 million a day in sales from March 4-7 when U.S. President Donald Trump implemented tariffs on a range of goods covered under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, FVGC said.

The organization said 48% of total fruit and vegetable production in Canada is exported to the U.S. Unlike other agricultural sectors, the fruit and vegetable industry has limited tools to manage volatility and external shocks due to the perishability of products, intensive labor requirements and just-in-time supply chains, FVGC added.

Among the measures to mitigate the impact of U.S. tariffs, FVGC recommends the creation of a dedicated emergency fund to provide direct compensation for greenhouse operators and other fruit and vegetable growers, domestic price supports to prevent market collapse during harvest periods and regional support packages addressing unique provincial conditions.

FVGC’s report, “Extraordinary Measures for Unprecedented Times,” also calls for an overhaul of existing business risk-management programs — as safety-net programs are known — to better adapt them to changing and more extreme weather conditions, external shocks and the unique needs of Canada’s fruit and vegetable sector.

Take Our Poll: Do You Agree With President Trump's Use of Tariffs?

Wed, 19 Mar 2025 18:04:51 GMT

Tariff whiplash is consuming the commodity markets — and the possible impact is stirring up quite the debate. At present, President Donald Trump says he’s sticking to his plan to impose additional tariffs on the United States’ top three trading partners starting April 2.

In early February, President Trump announced a 25% additional tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico , a 10% additional tariff on imports from China and a 10% tariff on energy resources from Canada.

Those tariffs were scheduled to go into effect in early March. However, President Trump made the decision to exempt goods from Canada and Mexico under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USCMA) from the 25% tariffs for another month.

What we know today is those exemptions for goods from Canada and Mexico covered under USMCA are scheduled to expire on April 2.

As agriculture waits to see what happens, the commodity markets continue to trade headlines and concerns are mounting about possible retaliatory tariffs. Tariff talk is already impacting input prices for farmers heading into spring.

Share Your Thoughts on Tariffs
In light of the ongoing tariff battle, we have two questions for you:

Do you support President Donald Trump’s use of tariffs as a negotiation strategy?
Do you believe USDA will compensate farmers for losses if agriculture is affected by a trade war, similar to the compensation provided through the Market Facilitation Program?

Click here to share your answers.

NOTE: We appreciate your input. The poll has been closed. Check back on Monday, March 24 for results and analysis.

Can Mexico Afford to Retaliate Against the U.S.?

Wed, 05 Mar 2025 19:46:40 GMT

President Donald Trump followed through on his threats of imposing a 25% tariff on most imports from Canada and Mexico, along with an additional 10% on goods from China. While China and Canada released their list of retaliatory tariffs the same day, Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, says they won’t release their list until the weekend.

Sheinbaum said the country will also respond with a 25% tariff on U.S. goods but will announce the products it will target on Sunday.

But can Mexico afford to retaliate? That was one of the questions asked by USDA chief economist Seth Meyer during Commodity Classic this week. The reason is Mexico’s economy is struggling, due to a number of factors, which includes a large informal sector, high budget deficit and unstable infrastructure.

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Mexico’s GDP grew only 0.9% year over year in fourth quarter 2024, after expanding 2.% in 2023 and 4.6% in 2022. Economic growth slowed, mainly due to lower investment, slowing consumption and a contracting energy sector.

(Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas)

The Dallas Fed says lower investment and consumption was the main driver behind the slow growth.

“Investment contributed three percentage points less to GDP growth in 2024 compared with 2023,” the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas said in a recent report. “The major drop was in nonresidential construction investment, while purchases of imported machinery and equipment also slowed noticeably as the Mexican peso continued to weaken against the dollar. In addition, consumption was impacted by sluggish growth in remittances, high interest rates and flat employment. However, net exports boosted growth in 2024 after dragging it down the previous two years.”

Extremely Reliant Upon Exports
The other issue? Mexico is extremely reliant upon demand from the U.S., exporting $41.9 billion worth of agricultural products to the U.S.

In 2023, Mexico accounted for 16.3% of U.S. agricultural exports and 23.3% of U.S. agricultural imports.

By the numbers:

Mexico is the largest source of horticultural imports to the U.S., supplying 63% of vegetables and 47% of fruit and nuts in 2023.
The top agricultural exports from Mexico to the U.S. in 2024 included beer, tomatoes, tequila, avocados, strawberries, raspberries and peppers.

Mexico is the Biggest Customer of U.S. Ag Exports

The other important piece is Mexico is now the U.S.'s top ag export destination.

According to Krista Swanson, chief economist for National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), Mexico is a huge destination for U.S. corn. More than 40% of U.S. corn exported last year went to Mexico. Not only does that mean the U.S. relies on Mexico, but Mexico is also reliant upon the U.S. do to the strong demand.

“That’s the other key piece here when we think about a Mexico situation, you know, will they retaliate on corn because it’s so important to the consumers in their country,” Swanson told Farm Journal during Commodity Classic this week. “And it’s such a big part of their diets and consumption. It’s a commodity that they consume way more of than what they produce. So they’re going to have to get it from somewhere.”

Bigger Picture
According to USDA’s Economic Research Service , between 1993 (the year before NAFTA’s implementation) and 2023, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico expanded at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7%, while agricultural imports from Mexico grew at a rate of 9.7%.

“With the economic recovery in the United States and Mexico that followed the pandemic, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico increased at a CAGR of 15.7% between 2020 and 2023, and U.S. agricultural imports from Mexico grew at a CAGR of 11.3%,” the USDA report said. “In 2023, however, U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico decreased by 0.3% compared with the previous year, as the prices of major agricultural exports (such as corn and soybeans) declined.”

Trump Sows Confusion on Tariffs for Canada and Mexico, Floats 25% Duty for EU Goods

Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:35:11 GMT

U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday raised hopes for another month-long pause on steep new tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada, saying they could take effect on April 2, and floated a 25% “reciprocal” tariff on European cars and other goods.

A White House official, however, said Trump’s previous March 4 deadline for the 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods remained in effect “as of this moment,” pending his review of Mexican and Canadian actions to secure their borders and halt the flow of migrants and the opioid fentanyl into the U.S. Trump sowed confusion during his first cabinet meeting on Wednesday, when he was asked about the timing for the start of the duties for Canada and Mexico and replied that it would be April 2.

“I have to tell you that, you know, on April 2, I was going to do it on April 1,” Trump said. “But I’m a little bit superstitious, I made it April 2, the tariffs go on. Not all ofthem but a lot of them.”

Trump’s comments prompted jumps in the value of the Canadian dollar and Mexican peso versus the greenback.

Canada’s Finance Ministry and Mexico’s Economy Ministry both declined to comment on Trump’s remarks.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the fentanyl-related actions were paused for 30 days but referred to “overall” tariffs on April 2. He did not specify whether the March 4 deadline was still in effect.

“So the big transaction is April 2, but the fentanyl-related things, we’re working hard on the border,”
Lutnick said during the cabinet meeting. “At the end of that 30 days, they have to prove to the president that they’ve satisfied him in that regard. If they have, he’ll give them a pause, or he won’t.”

EU Tariff Rate

Trump has targeted early April for imposing reciprocal tariffs that would match the import duty rates of other countries and offset their other restrictions. His trade advisers consider European countries’ value added taxes to be akin to a tariff.

Trump, asked whether he has decided on a tariff rate for goods from the European Union, replied: “We have made a decision, and we’ll be announcing it very soon, and it’ll be 25%, generally speaking, and that’ll be on cars, and all of the things.”

He said the EU is a “different case” from Canada and takes advantage of the U.S. in different ways.

“They don’t accept our cars. They don’t accept, essentially our farm products,” Trump said, adding that the EU was formed “in order to screw the United States.”

Roberta Metsola, president of the European Parliament, is in Washington and will meet U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday, a spokesman said. She is not slated to meet with any Trump administration officials.

New U.S. Trade Representative Confirmed

Also on Wednesday, the U.S. Senate voted 56-43 to confirm Jamieson Greer as Trump’s new U.S. Trade Representative, putting a veteran of the Republican president’s first-term trade wars fully on the job.

Greer, who served as chief of staff to former USTR Robert Lighthizer, won the support of five Democrats, including both senators from Michigan, the center of the U.S. auto industry.

Trade groups welcomed Greer’s confirmation, lauding his commitment to consulting with industry and standing up for U.S. businesses, farmers and workers. “We share Ambassador Greer’s desire for an active and pragmatic trade policy that creates

U.S. jobs and more resilient supply chains,” said Jake Colvin, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.

Greer told senators during his Senate confirmation hearing that he wanted to quickly renegotiate the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade to ensure China does not use it as a back door to the U.S. market to avoid other tariffs.

“Right out of the gate, I expect that we’ll be taking a second look at the USMCA,” Greer said.

Asked what changes he would like to see in the pact, Greer zeroed in on further tightening automotive content rules.

“I think we should look at the rule of origin for automobiles and aerospace and other things to look and see if we need to have any kind of restriction on content or value added from foreign countries of concern, or non-market economies,” he said, using language that U.S. trade officials often use to describe China.

(Reporting by David Lawder and Andrea Shalal; additional reporting by Bo Erickson and Ryan Jones in Washington, Brendan O’Boyle in Mexico City and Ismail Shakil in Ottawa; Editing by Dan Burns, David Gregorio and Paul Simao)

Mexico’s Sheinbaum Pushes for USMCA Deal as Tariff Deadline Nears

Tue, 25 Feb 2025 19:32:53 GMT

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reaffirmed her commitment to securing a deal with the U.S. to prevent the imposition of 25% tariffs on Mexican exports, set to take effect on March 4. She emphasized Mexico’s dedication to addressing the U.S. fentanyl crisis and maintaining strong trade relations under the USMCA.

Sheinbaum also noted that Mexico is considering additional tariffs on imports from countries without free trade agreements, particularly China. Bloomberg reported this week that if Mexico imposes tariffs on Chinese imports the direct impact will be limited, as Mexico accounts for only 2.4% of China’s total exports.

Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard remains in Washington for negotiations, as Sheinbaum expressed willingness to speak directly with President Trump if necessary.

Trump said Monday that his planned 25% tariffs on all Mexican and Canadian exports to the U.S. “are going ahead on time, on schedule,” meaning the duties would take effect on March 4 at the conclusion of a one-month suspension.

“This is an abuse that took place for many, many years,” Trump said in justification of the decision to impose tariffs on the United States’ neighbors and North American trade partners. “And I’m not even blaming the other countries that did this, I blame our leadership for allowing it to happen. I mean who can blame them if they made these great deals with the United States, took advantage of the United States on manufacturing, on just about everything,” he said at a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron.

Are Tariff Threats Trump’s Way to Reach a New USMCA Deal?
As the Trump administration decides whether to impose tariffs or not, some argue this negotiation is a precursor to renegotiating USMCA, and this is actually President Trump’s way of renegotiating that agreement.

Is that the case? That’s what Farm Journal asked Gregg Doud who served as the Chief Agricultural Negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) during the Trump administration.

“I think you will intentionally never know the answer to that. That’s what I think,” said Doud. “You saw was it at CPAC last week where the Vice President, J.D. Vance, explained the art of President Trump and the way he negotiates. He never takes anything off the table.... it’s all negotiable. That’s the way he views the world. And he’s never going to let you know really where you’re at until the bottom line. He’s a master at it, I think.”

Parts of Mexico Face Growing Drought
One factor that could impact demand for imports is Mexico’s intensifying drought. Mexico’s northwest region is grappling with extreme drought conditions, with parts of Sinaloa, Sonora, Chihuahua, Durango, and Coahuila classified under the highest drought severity level, “exceptional,” according to the National Water Commission (Conagua).

The ongoing dry spell, exacerbated by the La Niña climate phenomenon, has led to widespread crop failures, dwindling reservoir levels, and looming water shortages.

Mexico’s current drought map.

(Conagua)

Water storage in Sinaloa’s dams has hit a 30-year low, with key reservoirs like Adolfo López Mateos and Huites at critically low levels. The drought has severely impacted agriculture, leaving nearly half of Sinaloa’s farmland unplanted.

In response, the government has launched a cloud seeding initiative, allocating 13 billion pesos ($636 million) to stimulate rainfall. Governor Rubén Rocha assured farmers of continued support for fertilizers, seeds, and price stabilization measures but urged cost reductions in agricultural production. With little to no rain expected before July, water rationing and supply cuts are anticipated in the coming months.

Tariffs and trade: CPMA president shares what’s at stake for fresh produce

Tue, 11 Feb 2025 13:29:13 GMT

BERLIN — What could tariff wars mean for global fresh produce trading partners? It was a key conversation at the recent Fruit Logistica trade show, which took place Feb. 5-7, just days after President Donald Trump ordered a 25% additional tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada, later pushing pause on those tariffs for 30 days.

On the show floor, The Packer spoke with Ron Lemaire, president of the Canadian Produce Marketing Association, to get his take on what’s at stake and what commodities may be impacted most.

What’s the current size of the market — how much produce does Canada export to the U.S. and how much produce does Canada import from the U.S.?

Ron Lemaire: We have quite a dynamic market in North America right now. We receive in Canada just over $5 billion worth of U.S. product — fresh fruits and vegetables — and Canada exports to the U.S. just over $4 billion, so from a Canadian perspective, we are actually at a trade deficit with the U.S. on our fruit and vegetable trade.

Trump has pushed pause on tariffs that would include produce, but only for 30 days. What’s at stake for Canadian produce if these go into effect?

There’s a significant risk for a lot of our commodities in Canada that do enjoy a trading relationship with the U.S., especially when we look at 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 — [we’d be] looking at a change in product flow and potential loss of business and employment.

If we look at the entire market in Canada, we would see potential retaliatory tariffs from the Canadian government, as we saw initially proposed, and that would impact citrus, cherries and a range of other products, so in the end, only driving up the end cost of food and/or putting increased pressure back on the farmer to try and absorb those 25% tariffs into their margins, which we know is impossible.

The key here is, how do we move forward with a strategy that looks at a tariff-free environment but still builds on sound science and clarity of contractual certainty for building a market into the future?

How vital is a strong trade relationship between Canada and the U.S.?

Extremely vital. We have a lot of product meeting Canadian demands when we’re not in season. We function in North America because of the perishability of our product. We move leafy greens; we move strawberries; we move blueberries — highly perishable products in a very short window. When you have a five-day shipping period from California to Canada, you enjoy premium freshness, premium quality, and you’re able to manage price effectively.

If we need to look at a broader global perspective to start bringing product in from around the world, it changes trading channels and trade flows. It changes the modeling of how we actually operate in the country, and there will be a hiccup relative to the timing of business relationships we currently have today and [a need to] increase imports coming from other countries around the world to fill a gap that was satisfied by an integrated North American framework.

Our key is: How do we build out and ensure we are integrated within North America? Building upon success and relationships we’ve had for generations in the produce industry and fulfill other obligations with our partners from around the world. That system has been proven to be successful, and we need to continue to reinforce that relative to ongoing success in the future.

Some are saying this is pre-negotiations to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. When you look at USMCA, is it a valuable trade deal for Canadian growers? (See video below.)

Trump Agrees to Delay Tariffs on Goods From Mexico and Canada for 30 Days

Mon, 03 Feb 2025 16:14:46 GMT

The U.S. has agreed to delay tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada for one month to allow for more time for negotiations. The agreement from both sides happened on Monday, just hours before the tariffs were set to take effect.

Sostuvimos una buena conversación con el presidente Trump con mucho respeto a nuestra relación y la soberanía; llegamos a una serie de acuerdos:

1.México reforzará la frontera norte con 10 mil elementos de la Guardia Nacional de forma inmediata, para evitar el tráfico de drogas…
— Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo (@Claudiashein) February 3, 2025

President Claudia Sheinbaum said U.S. tariffs against Mexico will be delayed for one month after a conversation with President Donald Trump on Monday. Trump then confirmed the news on Truth social.

Mexico’s president said she had reached several agreements with Trump during the phone call and that both countries will start working on trade and security.

Sheinbaum also said her government agreed to reinforce the border with the U.S. with 10,000 National Guard officers to prevent the trafficking of drugs, particularly fentanyl, from Mexico to the U.S.

Trump had announced plans to hold discussions with the leaders of Canada and Mexico on Monday following his recent declaration of imposing significant tariffs on imports from these countries and China.

“I don’t expect anything very dramatic,” Trump said before he held any of the calls. “We put tariffs on. They owe us a lot of money, and I’m sure they’re going to pay.”

Tariffs Also Delayed At Least One Month on Goods from Canada

Just hours after Mexico’s president said Trump agreed to pause tariffs for at least 30 days, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made a similar announcement on X.

I just had a good call with President Trump. Canada is implementing our $1.3 billion border plan — reinforcing the border with new choppers, technology and personnel, enhanced coordination with our American partners, and increased resources to stop the flow of fentanyl. Nearly…
— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) February 3, 2025

In his tweet, Trudeau wrote, “I just had a good call with President Trump.”

Trudeau also committed to appointing a “Fentanyl Czar” and better patrol the border.

Executive Order Over the Weekend Hit Mexico and Canada With Tariffs

Before and after Trump singed the executive order over the weekend, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum vowed to counter with retaliatory measures. On Saturday, Sheinbaum announced Mexico would issue its own retaliatory measures to Trump’s 25% tariffs, but no specifics were unveiled.

Sheinbaum said last week she had told her economy minister “to implement Plan B” which she said “includes tariff and non-tariff measures” though it was not clear what those measures were exactly.Sheinbaum said: “We have Plan A, Plan B, Plan C, depending on what the government of the United States decides. It’s very important that Mexicans know that we will always defend the dignity of our people, respect for our sovereignty and a dialogue among equals [with the U.S.], not with subordinates.”

Sheinbaum noted that Mexico has been open to receiving its citizens sent back under Trump’s plan for mass deportation of unauthorized migrants and that it was prepared to take some from other countries, which represented a concession. Deputy Economy Minister for Trade Luis Rosendo Gutierrez is expected to travel to Washington on Monday, according to reports. But he can’t meet with U.S. trade or Commerce Department officials until they’re formally ratified, they said. Instead, he’ll talk to business leaders and associations. Sheinbaum has also pointed to Foreign Minister Juan Ramon de la Fuente as a key interlocutor to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

High-level teams from Mexico’s foreign ministry and the State Department are in frequent communication working on security and migration, Mexico is the No. 1 trade partner of the United States, and sends 80% of its exports north. Mexico supplies around half of America’s imported fruit and two-thirds of imported vegetables, in dollar terms — tomatoes, berries, bell peppers, cucumbers. And it’s the largest source of imported beer. Mexico also is the No. 1 provider of medical devices to American hospitals and doctor’s offices, from surgical gloves to scalpels. Mexico emerged last year as the top market for American agricultural exports, totaling $30 billion.

Trump announced general tariffs at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida estate. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said the tariffs would be implemented immediately, but as noted, Canada said tariffs would be implemented on their goods on Tuesday. It typically takes weeks for tariffs to take practical effect.

Key points:

Sector-specific tariffs: New duties will target high-tech and industrial sectors, potentially covering more imports by dollar value than previous tariffs on China. Trump also suggested Friday he’d consider new tariffs on oil and gas, potentially by Feb. 18, though it wasn’t clear what he was referring to.
The duties come on top of existing tariffs on those products. The first Trump administration imposed tariffs on more than $300 billion worth of Chinese goods to respond to an array of unfair trade practices, including intellectual property theft. The Biden administration kept all of them in place and increased rates on $18 billion in goods, including electric vehicles, solar panels, medical equipment, lithium-ion batteries, steel, and aluminum.
A second wave of tariffs could follow a comprehensive review of the trade relationship among the three countries (Canada, Mexico and China) that Trump has ordered completed by April 1.
Exemptions and negotiations: There are ongoing discussions about potential carve-outs for critical industries (like oil and automobiles) amid intense lobbying by U.S. business and labor groups. Some hope for exemptions to mitigate domestic economic risks. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday that there was nothing Canada, Mexico and China could do to avoid the tariffs before Saturday. “Not right now,” he said, telling reporters that his tariff threat wasn’t a negotiating tool. “It’s a pure economic [decision],” he said. But he did say he was considering a lower tariff on Canadian crude oil — 10% instead of 25% (and that it was he announced on Saturday). At nearly $100 billion in 2023, imports of crude oil accounted for roughly a quarter of all U.S. imports from Canada, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. The tariff on China would be for what Trump said was failing to stop the manufacturing of fentanyl precursor chemicals.

Reasons for the tariffs”

Trump on Friday said, “We’ll be announcing the tariffs on Canada and Mexico for a number of reasons. Number one is the people that have poured into our country so horribly and so much,” he said about migrants that have entered the United States via its southern and northern borders. “Number two are the drugs, fentanyl and everything else, that have come into the country and number three are the massive subsidies that we’re giving to Canada and to Mexico in the form of [trade] deficits,” Trump said. “I’ll be putting the tariff of 25% on Canada and separately 25% on Mexico and we will really have to do that because we have very big deficits with those countries. Those tariffs may or may not rise with time,” he said.

During a Friday press conference in the Oval Office, Trump criticized the previous administration’s handling of trade agreements. During his previous term, Trump initiated trade disputes, particularly with China, which significantly impacted U.S. agricultural exports. He stated that China had committed to buying $50 billion a year in farm products, but claimed that former President Joe Biden didn’t enforce this commitment. Trump said, “We’re going to enforce it,” referring to this $50 billion annual purchase agreement with China. His recent statements suggest a continuation of this aggressive stance on trade, framing it as necessary to protect American farmers and correct perceived imbalances left unaddressed by the Biden administration.

Trump’s team was initially considering a grace period between the announcement of the tariffs on Saturday and when they would be imposed, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt played down that possibility on Friday. Leavitt said that a Reuters report stating that the tariffs wouldn’t be implemented until March 1 was “false.”

Your Next Read: Trump Officially Signs Three Executive Orders Imposing 25% Tariffs on Canada and Mexico, 10% Tariffs on China

Canada, Mexico Hit Back with Retaliatory Tariffs on U.S. Imports

Sun, 02 Feb 2025 13:56:54 GMT

In response to President Donald Trump’s decision to impose 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods , Canada announced its own 25% tariffs on $155 billion worth of U.S. imports. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum also announced its own retaliatory measures to Trump’s 25% tariffs, but no specifics were unveiled.

Canada Strikes Back
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that the tariffs will roll out in two phases, starting Feb. 4 on $30 bil. targeting American products such as alcohol, produce, household goods, and industrial materials, the same day the American tariffs are set to begin.

The tariffs on the other $125 billion worth of goods will come in 21 days, to allow impacted Canadian companies to adjust their supply chains. Trudeau emphasized that Canada’s response would be “strong but appropriate,” while also considering non-tariff measures like restrictions on critical minerals.

The move has drawn mixed reactions within Canada, with provincial leaders urging strategic countermeasures while ensuring minimal harm to the domestic economy. Meanwhile, the White House justifies the tariffs as a measure against drug trafficking and illegal border crossings, further straining trade relations between the two countries.

American items that Canadians tariffs will be applied to include:

Beer, wine, and bourbon
Fruits and fruit juices including orange juice, as well as vegetables
Perfume, clothing, and shoes
Major consumer products such as household appliances and furniture
Sports equipment
Other materials such as lumber and plastics

The government of Canada says a more detailed list of impacted products will be released soon.

More Tariffs Coming
Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly said on Jan. 31 that Canada’s retaliatory tariffs would be coming in rounds. “There would be a first round of measures, second round of measures, and a third round of measures,” Joly said at a press conference in Washington. “And we’ll keep ourselves also some leverage.”

When asked if Canada would be shutting off oil exports to the U.S., Trudeau said he will be ensuring Canada’s response will be “equitable” and won’t be damaging to one part of the country more than the others. Energy-rich Alberta has strongly opposed any export tariffs on oil, or for Canada to stop oil exports altogether. Trump said on Jan. 31 that the U.S. tariffs will be lower on Canada’s oil and gas exports, at 10%, while other goods will have a tariff of 25%.

Canada’s trade surplus in merchandise with the U.S. was around $100 billion (US$59 billion) last year, according to a report by TD Bank. If Canadian oil exports to the U.S. are removed from the figure, the “scales tip to America’s favor,” the report says, meaning the United States would have a $60 billion (US$41 billion) trade surplus.

Canada and U.S. Conduct Two-way Trade Worth $1.3T Every Year

According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, 2.3 million Canadian jobs are supported by exports to the U.S., and 1.4 million American jobs are supported by exports to Canada. A Bank of Canada analysis says that under a mutual 25% tariffs scenario, Canada’s GDP would take a 2.4% hit.

Mexico Announces Plans for Retaliation
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced its own retaliatory measures to Trump’s 25% tariffs, but no specifics were unveiled. Sheinbaum said she had told her economy minister “to implement Plan B” which she said “includes tariff and non-tariff measures” though it was not clear what those measures were exactly.

China Reacts
China’s Ministry of Commerce denounced Trump’s tariffs, saying they undermine “the normal economic and trade cooperation” between the U.S. and China.

The ministry said it would challenge the U.S. action at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and take countermeasures “to firmly safeguard its own rights and interests.” The WTO dispute settlement mechanism has been dysfunctional for years amid U.S. opposition to the appointment of new judges.

Your Next Read:
Trump Officially Signs Three Executive Orders Imposing 25% Tariffs on Canada and Mexico, 10% Tariffs on China

Trump Moves Forward With Plans to Impose 25% Tariffs on Canada and Mexico Starting Saturday

Fri, 31 Jan 2025 13:02:58 GMT

President Donald Trump announced that his administration will impose 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico starting Feb. 1, citing concerns over trade deficits, illegal immigration, and the fentanyl crisis.

Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump justified the tariffs as a response to what he described as excessive migration, drug trafficking, and unfair trade practices. While he suggested the tariff rate could rise further, he indicated that a decision on whether oil imports would be exempted would come soon.

“Mexico and Canada have never been good to us on trade. They’ve treated us very unfairly on trade,” Trump said, pointing to the huge trade deficits between those countries and the United States. Trump also complained about fentanyl entering the country, especially from Mexico.

Trump also reiterated plans to impose tariffs on China over its alleged role in fentanyl trafficking and suggested additional sectoral tariffs on industries such as pharmaceuticals, semiconductor chips, and steel. The policy shift signals a potentially disruptive turn in North American trade relations, threatening key industries like automotive and energy.

Market Reacts
Market reactions were immediate, with oil prices rising above $73 a barrel, the U.S. dollar strengthening, and the Canadian dollar and Mexican peso dropping. The move has triggered warnings of economic fallout, with both Canada and Mexico vowing to respond with retaliatory measures.

Five Key Questions to Ask

There are five key questions regarding tariff situation:

Will they be announced Sat., Feb. 1?
Will there be a last-minute agreement with Canada and/or Mexico?
What authority will be used to implement any tariffs?
Will there be any exemptions? Ongoing negotiations suggest a possible shift toward targeted measures, particularly affecting steel and aluminum, while oil may receive exemptions.
Will there be an implementation grace period to enable more negotiations?

Tariffs as a Tool to Pressure Canada and Mexico
The proposed tariffs are intended to pressure the two countries into negotiating on migration, drug smuggling, and reforms to the USMCA. The strategy reflects Trump’s preference for using tariffs as a tool to secure compliance with U.S. demands, as seen in a recent, albeit reversed, threat against Colombia.

While both Canada and Mexico have made overtures to address U.S. concerns, Trump’s administration remains unsatisfied. Canadian officials have prepared a list of retaliatory measures and expressed frustration over unclear demands and limited communication. Mexico, meanwhile, has stepped up efforts to curb migration and drug trafficking but faces similar obstacles in negotiating directly with Trump’s yet-to-be-confirmed economic team.

If enacted, the tariffs could disrupt key industries, particularly the ag sector and automotive manufacturing, where supply chains depend on cross-border collaboration. Critics warn of potential economic fallout, including higher consumer prices and a possible recession in Canada.

Despite these risks, Trump’s advisers, including Commerce Secretary nominee Howard Lutnick, advocate for a “tariffs-first” approach to bring trade partners to the table.

If tariffs going into effect on Feb. 1 and the tariff threats materialize, it potentially triggers a new trade war on the continent.

Too Soon?
Some feel Feb. 1 will be too early for any serious tariffs action. Reasons: Trump wants his top trade officials (Commerce Secretary, U.S. Trade Representative, Treasury Secretary, etc.) at their desks. That may take beyond Feb. 1, depending on Senate confirmations.

Also, Trump’s 23 trade executive orders assigned a review of prior trade agreements, trade deficits, practices, etc., with an April 1 deadline. One task involves the White House Office of Management and Budget assessing how foreign government subsidies impact U.S. procurement, with that report due by April 30.

Trump’s Pick for Commerce Secretary Back Tariffs, Slams Canada on Dairy
Howard Lutnick, President Trump’s nominee for Commerce Secretary, strongly defended tariffs and criticized Canada over dairy trade during his Senate confirmation hearing.

Lutnick accused Canada of treating U.S. dairy farmers “horribly” and vowed to secure better trade conditions under the USMCA, which President Trump wants a renegotiation on an accelerated timeline.

Of note: Canadian Pacific Kansas City says it expects shipments in North America to grow this year despite the looming threat of tariffs from the Trump administration.

Lutnick dismissed concerns that tariffs drive inflation, citing China and India’s policies, and expressed support for broad-based tariffs over a selective approach.

Lutnick also linked Trump’s proposed 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico to border security and fentanyl concerns.

Lutnick said he prefers an “across-the-board” approach to imposing tariffs on foreign goods to put pressure on other countries to lower their own barriers to U.S. exports.

“Our farmers, our ranchers and our fishermen are treated with disrespect” by countries around the world, Lutnick said. “We need the disrespect to end.”

To accomplish that, Lutnick said he favors using across-the-board tariffs on all imports from a particular country, rather than a much more targeted approach.

“I think when you pick one product in Mexico, they’ll pick one product,” Lutnick said. “You know, we pick avocados, they pick white corn, we pick tomatoes, they pick yellow corn. All you’re doing is picking on farmers, which is just not going to happen.”

UPDATED: No big changes anticipated with start of USMCA

Thu, 22 Sep 2022 02:12:54 GMT

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement became effective July 1, but it brings no sweeping changes to North American produce companies who have operated with the North American Free Trade Agreement for more than two decades.

Produce will generally move with no tariffs between the U.S., Mexico and Canada, as was the case under the NAFTA, which began in January 1994.

“For the produce sector, it doesn’t really change that much from that we had from NAFTA,” said Dennis Nuxoll, vice president of federal government affairs for Western Growers .

Big markets

NAFTA saw the importance of Mexico and Canada grow as destinations for U.S. fruit and vegetable exporters, and the overall agriculture sector. Mexico and Canada accounted for 21% of all agricultural exports in 1993. By 2019, that share of exports increased to 29%, according to the U.S. Department Agriculture. Total agricultural exports to Canada and Mexico jumped from $9 billion to about $40 billion in that time period.

The U.S. shipped 55% of its fresh fruit and vegetable exports to Canada and Mexico in 1993, and that rose to 61% of total fresh produce exports in 2019. U.S. fresh produce exports to Mexico and Canada rose from $1.4 billion in 1993 to $4.2 billion in 2019, USDA statistics show.

U.S. imports of agricultural commodities from Canada and Mexico also rose in importance compared with the rest of the world during NAFTA. U.S. imports from Mexico and Canada accounted for 29% of all agricultural imports in 1993, rising to 40% of all agricultural imports by 2019. The value of agricultural imports from Mexico and Canada rose from $7.3 billion in 1993 to $52 billion in 2019.

For fresh fruits and vegetables, Mexico and Canada accounted for 44% of U.S. total fresh fruit and vegetable imports in 1993, rising to 65% of all fresh produce imports in 2019. The value of fresh produce imports from Mexico and Canada rose from $1.3 billion in 1993 to $15.6 billion in 2019, according to the USDA.

Small changes

The USMCA trade agreement does have a slightly different customs process for rules of origin, Nuxoll said. Exporters must attest to certain data to validate their product is of North American origin.

USMCA also strengthened some labor protections in Mexico, and Nuxoll said U.S. producers hope those provisions could help narrow the wage gap between Mexican and U.S. farm labor.

Mexico has committed to bolstering some of the country’s child labor laws. Together, the labor provisions may help to equalize some of the labor standards between the U.S. and Mexico, he said.

“Is it going to eliminate the spread? Clearly it won’t do that, but we hope there will be some improvement,” Nuxoll said.
In a column published in the North Carolina Fayetteville Observer, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said USMCA will support the use of biotechnology and will improve the flow of trade with rules that ensure sanitary and phytosanitary measures are transparent and based on science.

With nearly half a billion dollars in annual sales to Mexico and Canada each year, apple growers are relieved the USMCA is in place, Jim Bair, president and CEO of the U.S. Apple Association , said in a statement.

“With about 30% of the fresh apple crop exported each year and half of that destined for Mexico and Canada, maintaining duty-free access to these top two markets has been a top priority for U.S. Apple,” he said in the statement.

The USMCA also maintains important dispute resolution provisions, Bair said in the statement. U.S. apple exports to Mexico increased from $56 million in 1993 to $265 million in 2019, according to the USDA.

Taking exception

Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried continues to be a harsh critic of USMCA.

In a virtual press conference July 2, she released a new study called “ Putting Florida’s Farmers First: Mexico’s Ag-Exports Impacts on Florida Agriculture ,” conducted by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Florida producers lost sales of up to 20% due to Mexico’s agricultural export expansion since 2000, according to the report.

“The decrease in market share for Florida farmers and the significant increase for the Mexican farmers really highlights why it’s important to buy locally, to make sure that you’re buying fresh Florida grown and domestically grown produce,” she said in an interview.

Some highlights of the report are:

Mexico has expanded its share of the U.S. domestic market by 217% since 2000, while Florida’s market share dropped by 40%;
Mexico’s seasonal crop imports have increased by 551% from 2000 to 2019;
An $11 billion gap exists between Mexican agricultural exports and Florida’s total agricultural market value.

Fried said U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer has committed to releasing a plan to address unfair trade practices in the next 60 days.

“The concerns of Florida’s farmers with the USMCA remain the same as when NAFTA was being renegotiated two years ago — it lacks urgently needed protections against unfair trade practices that have devastated our growers’ ability to compete,” Fried said in the release. “ ... I look forward to working with Ambassador Lighthizer and our agriculture community to ensure seasonal producers get the enforcement tools they need to remain competitive.”

The USTR Office, USDA and Department of Commerce were scheduled to hear testimony from growers in Florida and Georgia in April, but the hearings were cancelled because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I do think that USTR will (uphold) their commitment to us,” Fried said. “They have said as much, but it’s important for us to continue to bring light to this issue.”

Related articles

USMCA brings clear roadmap for the future

USMCA easily clears House

Senate passes USMCA by a large margin