FACT FOCUS: Trump blames Biden for the agricultural trade deficit. It’s not that simple

Trump’s $12B Farm Aid Package Draws Attention to US Agricultural Trade Deficit

President Donald Trump announced a $12 billion farm aid package this week aimed at helping American farmers impacted by tariffs, while simultaneously placing blame for the U.S. agricultural trade deficit squarely on former President Joe Biden.

The announcement came during a White House roundtable where Trump stated, “In my first term, we had an agricultural trade surplus by a lot. We had a big surplus. We knew we were exporting American agricultural products all over the world, making a net profit and, in many cases, a very substantial profit. He came in and ruined it.”

However, economic experts and agricultural analysts point to a more complex reality behind the shifting trade balance, citing multiple factors spanning both administrations and global market conditions.

The U.S. agricultural trade balance, which had remained positive for nearly six decades, first tipped into deficit territory in 2019 during Trump’s first term. According to Department of Agriculture data, the agricultural trade surplus stood at approximately $16.3 billion at the end of 2016, before declining to $13.66 billion in 2017, Trump’s first year in office.

This downward trend continued until becoming a deficit of about $481 million in 2019. While the balance briefly returned to a surplus in 2020 ($3.39 billion) and increased further in 2021 during Biden’s first year, it reverted to a deficit in 2022 that eventually grew to approximately $36.45 billion by late 2024.

“I don’t want to let U.S. trade policy off the hook here, but it’s one element of a broader, more complicated kind of story,” explained Cullen Hendrix, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

The ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China have significantly contributed to the agricultural deficit. Trump initiated tariffs on imported Chinese solar panels in January 2018, triggering a series of escalating trade measures from both countries that continued throughout both administrations.

Though the countries signed a Phase One trade deal in January 2020—where China committed to purchasing an additional $200 billion in U.S. goods and services over two years—the Peterson Institute later determined China had purchased “essentially none” of the promised goods.

Since returning to office, Trump has implemented additional tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting retaliatory measures targeting U.S. agricultural products. Farmers producing soybeans and sorghum have been particularly affected, facing difficulties selling their crops while confronting rising costs.

In October, following Trump’s meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in South Korea, the White House announced that China had committed to purchasing at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by year-end, plus 25 million metric tons annually for the next three years. So far, China has purchased over 2.8 million metric tons—approximately one-quarter of the promised amount—though Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has stated China remains on track to meet its goal by February.

“China’s been refusing large U.S. purchases in favor of other trade partners,” Hendrix noted. “This is a lamentable, but kind of predictable, consequence of the United States engaging in this trade war and weaponizing trade policy.”

Beyond the U.S.-China trade relationship, other significant factors have influenced the agricultural trade deficit. The strong U.S. dollar has increased Americans’ purchasing power for imported goods while simultaneously making U.S. exports more expensive and less competitive globally.

Additionally, Brazil and Argentina have emerged as major exporters of soy, corn, and beef, directly competing with American producers and driving down global prices. Global events beyond direct U.S. government control—including the COVID-19 pandemic, climate variability, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict—have further disrupted agricultural markets.

Joseph Glauber, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former Department of Agriculture chief economist, summarized: “The tariffs can exacerbate the situation, but generally the fact that you may have a deficit or a surplus is really more dependent on global prices.”

When questioned about Trump’s attribution of blame, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly stated that “farmers suffered for years under Joe Biden,” while emphasizing Trump’s commitment to “helping our agriculture industry by negotiating new trade deals to open new export markets for our farmers and boosting the farm safety net for the first time in a decade.”

As the administration implements its agricultural support package, the complex interplay of global trade dynamics, policy decisions spanning multiple administrations, and market forces continues to shape the challenges facing American farmers.