Imperial Valley Press

Free, fair and open trade would benefit U.S. farmers

- BY JOHN NEWTON John Newton is director of market intelligen­ce for the American Farm Bureau Federation. He may be contacted at jnewton@fb.org

Following multiple years of large harvests in the United States, projection­s for record livestock, dairy and meat production in the current year and farm income at concerning­ly low levels, U.S. farmers and ranchers are actively seeking to enhance access in existing foreign markets like Canada, China, Japan, Mexico and South Korea, and to gain access in new markets, for example by re-entering the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p.

Efforts to improve U.S. agricultur­al trade include a North American Free Trade Agreement modernizat­ion, re-negotiatio­n of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, agricultur­al concession­s as a result of U.S.-China Comprehens­ive Economic Dialogue, and renewed interest by the White House in the countries that comprised the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p. Additional­ly, there is interest in engaging with Japan—our fourth-largest agricultur­al trading partner—on a bilateral level.

During 2016, $85 billion in U.S. agricultur­al exports were delivered to China, South Korea, Canada, Mexico and the former TPP areas. Since 2000, trade with China, South Korea, Canada, Mexico and the TPP areas has represente­d between 56 percent and 63 percent of all U.S. agricultur­al trade.

Gains have already been made in efforts to reduce long-standing trade barriers. China is now allowing U.S. beef meeting certain specificat­ions to enter the country, and a World Trade Organizati­on ruling against China will result in lower tariffs on U.S. poultry exports. A revised NAFTA, which, among other improvemen­ts, could address Canada’s dairy pricing provisions, would go a long way to making U.S. farmers and ranchers more competitiv­e. Finally, Farm Bureau estimated the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p would have increased net farm income by $4.4 billion.

Challenges also exist. First, trade negotiator­s from Canada, Mexico and the United States have had six rounds of NAFTA negotiatio­ns, and rhetoric around a NAFTA terminatio­n remains. In the event of a NAFTA withdrawal, and barring congressio­nal action denying the request, U.S. agricultur­al products would see substantia­lly steeper barriers to trade.

Second, the Trump administra­tion recently unveiled new tariffs on imports of Vietnamese-diverted Chinese steel, as well as on solar panels and washing machines. These products are primarily made in China and South Korea, which represent our second- and fifth-largest agricultur­al trading partners, respective­ly. These recently imposed tariffs could potentiall­y complicate recent gains for beef and poultry in China or efforts to improve the U.S.-Korea FTA. Additional­ly, South Korea and China could retaliate by imposing tariffs or non-tariff barriers on our agricultur­al products.

Third, the remaining 11 countries party to the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p recently resurrecte­d and signed a new multilater­al trade agreement, known as CPTPP. U.S. trade in agricultur­al products to these 11 countries—minus Mexico and Canada—represente­d 15 percent of our agricultur­al exports. Without being party to CPTPP, the United States will not have favored access to the agricultur­al markets in these countries and could lose market share in this high-growth and geopolitic­ally important part of the world.

Finally, the European Union recently completed the Comprehens­ive Economic and Trade Agreement with Canada, the EU-Japan Economic Partnershi­p Agreement, and the EU and Mexico are currently negotiatin­g to modernize their trade agreement. EU trade agreements will increase competitio­n for U.S. agricultur­al exports in these critical markets.

The U.S. Department of Agricultur­e Global Agricultur­al Trade System database provides state-level agricultur­al export data. It reflects where shipments are consolidat­ed, and not necessaril­y where a commodity is produced, but can illustrate the importance of China, NAFTA, CPTPP and South Korea on U.S. agricultur­al trade.

On average, 62 percent of U.S. agricultur­al exports are delivered to China, NAFTA, CPTPP and South Korea. During 2016, about 61 percent of California agricultur­al exports went to those areas. Two-thirds of states had a higher export percentage to these areas than the U.S. average.

While most of the attention in U.S. agricultur­e has focused on a NAFTA modernizat­ion, there are several other opportunit­ies available simultaneo­usly to improve U.S. agricultur­al trade and boost farm income.

A modernized NAFTA with key Canadian concession­s, more access into China, entering CPTPP, improving the U.S.-South Korea agreement or negotiatin­g a bilateral trade agreement with Japan would improve the top markets in which the United States trades — but challenges also exist. With more than 62 percent of U.S. agricultur­al exports represente­d by these areas, including NAFTA, the stakes are high. For obvious reasons, complicati­ons in other sectors such as autos, pharmaceut­icals or manufactur­ing make agricultur­e anxious.

However, if the administra­tion is successful, improved access in these areas will further enhance the importance of trade to the agricultur­al economy and rural America. Consider a recent analysis from USDA indicating that “each dollar of agricultur­al exports stimulated another $1.28 in business activity. The $134.7 billion of agricultur­al exports in [2016] produced an additional $172.1 billion in economic activity, for a total economic output of $306.8 billion.”

With record harvests and livestock production coming online, free, fair and open trade is key to U.S. agricultur­e’s success. Now is the time to make agricultur­al trade great again by enhancing NAFTA, negotiatin­g a U.S. position in CPTPP, engaging with Japan, improving KORUS and getting more access to the important Chinese market.

 ??  ?? ADOBE STOCK PHOTO
ADOBE STOCK PHOTO

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States