Unraveling the Real Impact Behind Tariffs and Federal Program Cuts on U.S. Farmers
The Guardian article sparked user concern by suggesting that “America First” policies may actually be harming American farmers while aiding competing nations like Brazil. With raised eyebrows over bailouts, tariffs, and climate-ravaged harvests, readers submitted this article to verify whether U.S. farmers are indeed being sacrificed by recent federal policies. Let’s break down what’s true, what’s missing, and where nuance is needed.
Understanding the Historical Context
U.S. farmers have long operated in a globalized agricultural economy where export markets, federal subsidies, and international trade affect their bottom lines. Tariffs introduced during Trump’s 2018-2019 trade conflicts notably disrupted access to key foreign buyers, resulting in a $23 billion government bailout through the USDA’s Market Facilitation Program. Concurrently, American farm policy has encouraged the production of export-focused commodity crops, while consolidating control in fewer, often corporate hands. This historical backdrop lends important context to resentments in farming communities as weather disasters, markets, and federal reversals collide today.
Fact-Check of Specific Claims
Claim #1: “All US products destined for China face a 125% tax due to Trump’s tariff war.”
This claim is exaggerated. While it is true that China imposed retaliatory tariffs during Donald Trump’s prior trade war, including on U.S. agricultural goods like soybeans and sorghum, current Chinese tariff levels do not uniformly reach 125% across all U.S. exports. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative and USDA data, tariffs on certain U.S. agricultural products sporadically rose as high as 70–90%, especially on soybeans during the height of tensions. However, post-2020 negotiations led to some reductions, and as of early 2025, no comprehensive evidence confirms a flat 125% tax on all U.S. agricultural products exported to China. While tariffs remain a significant burden, this figure is overstated.
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service – China Trade Data
Claim #2: “Trump dismantled USAID, which purchased $2bn annually in agricultural goods, hurting domestic farmers.”
This claim is partially accurate but missing critical context. USAID typically purchases around $1.5 to $2 billion annually in U.S. agricultural products for international humanitarian relief programs, according to the Congressional Research Service. However, reports show that USAID has not been entirely “dismantled.” Reforms and funding freezes have occurred under the Trump administration, aiming to consolidate or eliminate specific global aid and climate-focused programs. These changes may directly impact procurement, but claiming wholesale dismantlement lacks accuracy unless such actions are officially confirmed by federal legislation or agency closure notices.
Congressional Research Service: U.S. Foreign Aid and Agriculture
Claim #3: “Programs like the $3.2 billion climate-smart commodities initiative have been halted to align with anti-DEI and anti-climate efforts.”
True. Multiple reliable outlets, including Politico and The Washington Post, have confirmed that 15 USDA programs – including Biden-era conservation and climate-smart agriculture initiatives – have been paused or frozen. These include the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities (PCSC), launched in 2022 to promote sustainable practices among commodity crop farmers. These suspensions are being reviewed under new Trump-era directives to eliminate funding tied to diversity, equity, or climate change policies, according to USDA spokesperson statements and internal memos revealed in investigative reporting.
Politico: USDA Freezes Climate-Smart Programs
Claim #4: “Brazil is capitalizing on the U.S. withdrawal through increased grain and soybean trade with China.”
Supported. After the 2018-2019 trade tensions, Brazil emerged as a chief alternative supplier of soybeans and grains to China. USDA trade data from 2023 and 2024 confirms this trend is accelerating, with Brazil significantly increasing exports as U.S. tariffs and climate disruptions hamper competitive pricing. A 2024 report by Gro Intelligence notes Brazil’s soybean exports grew by 17% year-over-year, partly filling the vacuum left by reduced U.S. shipments. As China diversifies its supply chain for geopolitical resilience, Brazil’s agriculture sector is gaining ground — supporting the article’s core claim.
USDA: Brazil’s Role in Global Soybean Markets
Final Takeaway: Are U.S. Farmers Truly Left Behind?
Overall, The Guardian report highlights credible farmer distress rooted in real disruptions – severe weather, tight markets, suspended support programs, and volatile trade policy. While much of the reporting is accurate and built on quotes from named experts and affected stakeholders, the article does stray into exaggeration at times, such as with the flat “125% tariff” claim and the assertion that USAID has been entirely dismantled. That said, the core premise — that U.S. farmers are under mounting pressure while international competitors benefit — holds water. The reader’s question, “How is this ‘America First’?”, captures a sentiment increasingly echoed in rural communities.
Have More Articles You Want Fact-Checked?
Download the free DBUNK app today to submit articles and follow us across platforms to fight misinformation together. Stay one step ahead by equipping yourself with tools to separate fact from fiction, instantly.
