For much of its modern history, the United States has stood as a titan of agricultural production, sustaining a robust trade surplus and feeding not only its own population but also a significant portion of the world. That image, however, is beginning to erode as complex global forces—ranging from political tensions to evolving trade alliances—reshape the agricultural landscape. Recent analyses from researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Texas Tech University reveal that, for the first time in decades, U.S. agrarian imports have surpassed exports. This reversal has created a growing trade deficit projected to reach an estimated $49 billion by the end of 2025. Lead researcher William Ridley, an associate professor in agricultural and consumer economics at the University of Illinois, underscores that what was once a “persistent surplus” has transformed into a “persistent and growing deficit,” reflecting profound structural changes in the global food economy.

The study highlights a significant increase in U.S. agricultural imports, particularly of high-demand products like avocados from Mexico and canola oil from Canada. These figures contrast with the stagnation of American exports, even in staple commodities like corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton—the so-called “row crops” that have long served as the backbone of U.S. agricultural might. According to Ridley and his co-author, Stephen Devadoss, professor of agricultural and applied economics at Texas Tech, the forces driving this decline are not limited to natural market cycles. They are, instead, the product of mounting trade disputes and geopolitical realignments that have eroded confidence in traditional trade relationships. Among the most consequential of these disputes is the ongoing tariff war with China, which has profoundly disrupted the flow of agricultural goods between the two nations.

When the U.S. government imposed tariffs on Chinese goods, China retaliated by targeting American agricultural exports that were both economically significant and politically sensitive. Key crops such as soybeans, wheat, corn, and sorghum—mainly produced in regions supportive of the Republican administration—became casualties in the crossfire. The economic repercussions were swift and severe. Between 2017 and 2018, the value of U.S. exports to China plummeted: soybeans fell by an astounding seventy-three per cent (a $9 billion loss), wheat by sixty-seven per cent, corn by sixty-one per cent, and sorghum by thirty-seven per cent. In total, the trade conflict erased roughly $14 billion in export value, marking one of the steepest downturns in modern agricultural trade history. Although the Phase One trade deal brokered in 2020 briefly revived Chinese purchases of U.S. commodities, that momentum was short-lived. China quickly shifted to alternative suppliers, effectively cutting off imports of major U.S. crops and cementing new partnerships with other exporting nations.

This reconfiguration of trade patterns has coincided with the rapid ascent of global competitors. Brazil, in particular, has emerged as the world’s foremost soybean exporter, surpassing the U.S. through a combination of expanded farmland, improved crop yields, and significant state-backed investments in transportation infrastructure. Canada, Australia, and Ukraine have likewise strengthened their positions in global grain markets, eroding the competitive edge once firmly held by American producers. Ridley and Devadoss argue that while U.S. agricultural productivity has remained steady, it has not advanced at the same pace as that of its rivals. This comparative stagnation underscores the need for renewed investment in agricultural innovation, as other countries’ efficiency gains have steadily narrowed what was once a decisive gap. Meanwhile, China is pursuing agricultural self-sufficiency through heavy investment in research, biotechnology, and genetically modified crop development—further diminishing its reliance on U.S. imports.

Beyond trade disputes and competitive pressure, domestic policy decisions have also contributed to America’s slipping agricultural dominance. The researchers warn that reductions in public funding for agricultural research—especially at universities—pose a significant long-term threat to productivity. Innovation in crop science, soil health, and climate adaptation has historically underpinned the resilience of U.S. farming. With dwindling investment in these areas, the capacity to respond to environmental challenges and maintain global competitiveness is weakened. Ridley stresses that there is “a strong link between research funding and productivity,” noting that underfunding not only affects output but also the broader ability of the U.S. agricultural sector to maintain leadership in a rapidly evolving global market.

Despite the sobering data, a faint yet vital glimmer of optimism remains. The U.S. government is reportedly pursuing new bilateral trade agreements with a range of international partners, which could help reopen markets and stabilise export demand. Ridley believes that such efforts are essential for ensuring the future viability of American agriculture, even if progress is slow and politically fraught. Expanding market access, he argues, must remain a central objective for policymakers seeking to restore confidence among farmers and exporters alike. As the world’s food systems continue to evolve, the United States faces a pivotal choice: to reinvest strategically in innovation, diplomacy, and infrastructure, or to risk relinquishing its century-long status as the bedrock of global agricultural trade.

More information: William Ridley et al, Row Crops and the U.S. Agricultural Trade Deficit: Recent Trends and Policy Issues, Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. DOI: 10.1002/aepp.70022

Journal information: Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy Provided by University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences