For Janet Nakamura Knight, a fifth-generation farmer in Redlands, California, a federal program that facilitates food distribution between small and midsize farms and local food banks and assistance organizations has been an important source of funding and community connection. Each week, her farm—which grows citrus, blackberries, and mixed vegetables—packages around one thousand food boxes with a dozen types of fruits and vegetables sourced from 25 different farming families for the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, or LFPA.
But what had become routine abruptly changed at the beginning of March. It was at that time that Knight got some unexpected news: The program was frozen, and March 7 would be the last day of delivery. As her farm’s contract was written to last for 12 more weeks, through the end of June, this freeze represents a $60,000 loss, on top of the decision to abandon the produce that has already been planted. The kale and collard greens that her farm had planted, as well as dates and oranges and pepper seedlings planted by neighboring farms, can no longer be used for this contracted purpose—a loss of $300,000, according to Knight.
“We are really disappointed by the fact that there is no outlet for this, and the suddenness with which this program has been revoked,” Knight said in a briefing organized by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. The freeze comes less than a year after a quarantine on certain farm products due to concerns about the oriental fruit fly; between the summers of 2023 and 2024, her farm was unable to move any oranges, tomatoes, or pumpkins.
“LFPA has been such an important and impactful financial bridge that has helped so many farmers in my region be able to get back on our feet, and connect with community members who really need this fresh produce,” Knight said, adding that the freeze on the program amounted to a “catastrophic loss.”
Knight’s experience is reflected in the difficulties of farmers across the country, who have been affected by the Trump administration’s freeze on key agricultural programs. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins last month announced the release of $20 million to honor contracts already made with farmers. But this is only a small fraction of paused funds distributed by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act—the signature climate law by President Joe Biden that President Donald Trump is now working to dismantle.
In the nearly two months since Trump took office, his policies regarding trade, immigration, and slashing government spending have had a significant impact on the nation’s agriculture industry, affecting farmers and consumers alike.
The impact has been wide-ranging and nearly immediate: Along with the grant freezes for funds that were tied to efforts to combat climate change, the Agriculture Department has experienced mass layoffs, directed by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. (USDA was ordered to reinstate thousands of probationary employees by an independent federal board this week.) Trump has also imposed or threatened tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico, the three largest trading partners with the U.S. for agricultural exports; these countries responded with retaliatory tariffs.
The net consequence has been sudden and stark: American farmers now have a narrower market for their products, while consumers may soon confront higher prices on fruits and vegetables sourced from outside the country. According to the USDA, 60 percent of the fresh fruit eaten in the U.S. is imported, as well as 38 percent of fresh vegetables. Many of the popular fruits, vegetables, and grains produced outside of the U.S.—such as avocado from Mexico and oats from Canada—would be subject to tariffs, which in turn could raise prices for consumers.
“There’s absolutely a conversation to be had about, What would it look like to be more self-sufficient in our food supply and be more self-sufficient in producing more produce domestically?” said Claire Kelloway, the program manager for fair food and farming systems at the Open Markets Institute. “But that is a much more complicated discussion that involves building up regional supply chains and processing, and supporting farmers that are using more sustainable practices and fair labor standards.”
There is also the issue of seasonality, continued Kelloway; if consumers expect certain produce year-round, that would necessarily involve imports of fruits and vegetables that cannot be grown in the U.S. during certain seasons. The cost of tariffs is often pushed onto the consumer: A fruit that is out of season and needs to be imported could be subject to tariffs, which would in turn raise prices.
Then there is the threat of retaliation. Mexico is America’s top trade partner for agricultural exports, according to the USDA, followed by Canada and China; farmers would thus be significantly affected by retaliatory tariffs. Even as crop prices decline, farmers who are unable to export their products will potentially see their fertilizer prices increase, as much of the potash used in fertilizer comes from Canada. (The Trump administration lowered the tariffs on imports of potash from Canada from 25 percent to 10 percent last week.)
“If you were to add the export value of these top three trading partners, it would account for half of our total agricultural exports. The disruption of any of these markets would lead to higher costs, fewer customers to buy our products, and ripple effects across our entire economy,” Zippy Duvall, the president of the American Farm Bureau Association, wrote in a blog post last week. “Farmers and ranchers are already up against rising supply costs, inflation and low commodity prices, and we simply cannot afford to lose ground in global markets.”
The burgeoning trade war with the country’s neighbors was put on hold on Thursday, when Trump announced a one-month exemption on most imports from Mexico and Canada. (The Canadian government has left its retaliatory tariffs in place.) But a primary goal for farmers is to limit uncertainty, said Mike Lavender, policy director at the National Sustainable Agriculture Association. Confusion around tariffs creates an instability that can be antithetical to producers’ farming strategies.
“If you’re a farmer, no matter your scale size or what you’re growing, you’re trying to limit the uncertainty and the variables you’re dealing with,” said Lavender. “Introducing more uncertainty makes thin margins, in terms of operating expenses and financial planning … even if you do think that there will be some sort of subsequent government program that will make a payment to you because of a trade war.”
In 2019, the first Trump administration’s trade war with China resulted in significant losses for American farmers—particularly soybean growers. This resulted in the administration offering billions of dollars for a program to help bail out struggling producers. According to a 2022 USDA report, the U.S. lost $13.2 billion due to retaliatory tariffs of American agricultural exports, with the bulk of losses concentrated among producers of soybeans, sorghum, and pork products.
“If there’s a program structure to make payments to farmers to make them whole following a trade war, if that program is not structured adequately or equitably, it reinforces disparities between different types of farms and perhaps even different scales of farms, which can further exacerbate issues we’re seeing in terms of access to markets,” Lavender said.
Meanwhile, efforts to deport undocumented immigrants may have serious effects for agricultural workers, a large percentage of whom are foreign-born. Trump has embarked on mass deportation efforts, an endeavor that could cost the country billions of dollars; although the president’s priority is ostensibly to deport undocumented individuals convicted of criminal activity, his policies have thus far also targeted migrants without a criminal record. The potential repercussions for American farms would be significant: More than two-thirds of the nation’s crop workers were born outside of the United States, and as many as 42 percent are undocumented.
“We’re fed by the hands of immigrant and undocumented workers,” said Kelloway. “If those workers were to be deported, I don’t think we’re going to be seeing … documented Americans filling those jobs.”
In his joint address to Congress last week, Trump addressed the consequences of a potential trade war, arguing that tariffs would help, rather than hurt, the American consumer. He also asked farmers to “bear with me again,” although he did not mention any additional aid to farmers.
“I love the farmer,” he said.
