After last minute polling out of Iowa revealed Donald Trump may not win the deep-red state, the presidential nominee took to his social media platform, Truth Social, over the weekend to declare that no president has ever done more for the agricultural community than he has, dismissing the numbers as fake news from a “Trump hater.”
“No President has done more for FARMERS, and the Great State of Iowa, than Donald J. Trump,” he wrote. “In fact, it’s not even close! All polls, except for one heavily skewed toward the Democrats by a Trump hater who called it totally wrong the last time, have me up, BY A LOT.
He concluded: “I LOVE THE FARMERS, AND THEY LOVE ME.”
However, a recent economic study suggests a renewed U.S.-China trade war — something Trump has hinted at if re-elected — could impact “hundreds of thousands of farmers and rural communities,” potentially challenging the former president’s claim.
The study, which was commissioned by the American Soybean Associated and the National Corn Growers Association and conducted by the World Agricultural Economic and Environmental Services, shows American-imposed tariffs would come at a steep cost to U.S. producers, all while benefiting South American farmers from countries like Brazil and Argentina.
According to the American Soybean Association, many of the tariffs China imposed on U.S. agricultural products from Trump’s 2018 trade war remain in place, but have been granted a waiver that has been renewed annually.
These tariffs could easily be reinstated by China and, if that happens, U.S. soybean exports to China could drop by 14 to 16 million metric tons per year — a decline of over 50% from expected levels. Corn exports face a similarly stark fate, with a potential annual drop of 2.2 million metric tons, an 84% decrease from baseline projections. Although corn represents a smaller share of overall U.S. exports to China compared to soybeans, the magnitude of this reduction remains significant.
Experts suggest that while the U.S. could redirect some of its exports to other countries, global demand is insufficient to absorb the anticipated loss. Meanwhile, Brazil and Argentina stand to benefit, expanding their foothold in global markets as they increase exports to fill the gap left by American goods. Brazil, in particular, may see a pronounced uptick in soybean and corn production, as favorable conditions allow Brazilian farmers to harvest both crops within a single year.
In a scenario where China imposes a steep 60% retaliatory tariff, the impact intensifies. American soybean exports to China could drop by over 25 million metric tons, with corn exports to China nearing a 90% reduction. Under these conditions, the U.S. would lose between 2.9 and 4.6 million metric tons of combined soybean and corn exports annually, while Brazil’s exports could swell by nearly 9 million metric tons each year.
For American farmers, this represents not just a temporary blow to pricing but a potential reordering of global agricultural markets for the long term.
Economists have been warning of this probability for many months, which was even referenced in the lone September presidential debate between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris.
“Let’s drill down on this because your plan is what [Harris calls] a national sales tax,” moderator David Muir said at the time. “Your proposal calls for tariffs, as you pointed out here, on foreign imports across the board. You recently said you might double your plan, imposing tariffs up to 20% on goods coming into this country.”
Muir continued, saying many economists predict that tariffs at that level would pass increased costs onto the consumer. “Vice President Harris has argued it'll mean higher prices on gas, food, clothing medication arguing it costs the typical family nearly $4,000 a year,” Muir said. “Do you believe Americans can afford higher prices because of tariffs?”
Trump responded by saying there wouldn’t be higher prices for Americans. “Who's gonna have higher prices is China and all of the countries that have been ripping us off for years,” he said. “[In] charge, I was the only president ever — China was paying us hundreds of billions of dollars and so were other countries.”
However, as reported by CNBC, Trump’s first-term trade war with China actually cost Americans over $190 billion, according to numbers from the conservative think tank American Action Forum, and also led to the loss of more than 245,500 U.S. Jobs, per the U.S.-China Business Council.
As a result of the new study, the American Soybean Association (ASA) and National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) have both cautioned against a renewed trade war.
“The U.S. agriculture sector is going through a significant economic downturn,” ASA Chief Economist Scott Gerlt said in a written statement. “This work shows that a trade war would easily compound the adverse conditions that are placing financial stress on farmers. Even when a trade war officially ends, the loss of market share can be permanent.”
NCGA Lead Economist Krista Swanson said the study highlights the dangers that come with broad tariffs on imports.
“While launching widespread tariffs may seem like an effective tool, they can boomerang and cause unintended consequences,” Swanson said. “Our first goal should be to avoid unnecessary harm.”
