When President Donald J. Trump declared he would not renew the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the remark sent a chill through American agriculture. Even if the statement was a negotiating tactic, the administration has now officially decided against a full renewal, leaving the pact on a 10-year path to expiration. For US farmers, who have seen exports to Canada and Mexico rise 47% under the deal, the stakes could not be higher.
The USMCA, which replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement in 2020, will now undergo annual reviews for the next decade. These reviews offer opportunities for renegotiation, and the non-renewal gives Washington bargaining leverage. However, if no full renewal is agreed within that period, the deal will expire. So far, administration negotiators are holding separate bilateral talks with Canada and Mexico over specific irritants rather than a comprehensive tripartite renegotiation.
Canada and Mexico are American agriculture’s largest export markets. According to House Agriculture Committee Chair Glenn Thompson, agricultural and seafood exports to the two countries contribute $149 billion to the US economy and support half a million jobs. More than 350 commodity groups across the three nations are pushing for a full 16-year renewal. Jamie Beyer, a Minnesota soybean grower and member of the American Soybean Association’s executive committee, told the House Agriculture Committee earlier this year, “Failure to renew USMCA would be catastrophic.”
Trump’s Priorities: Manufacturing Over Agriculture
President Trump remains eager to keep farmers and ranchers on his side, but agriculture is not his top concern when he thinks about the trade deal. His priority is bringing manufacturing back to the United States. The fact that many manufacturers serve the US from Canada and Mexico irks him. As one observer noted at a recent conference, Trump sees USMCA as a “car deal.”
The US trade deficits with Canada and Mexico also offend Trump’s deep aversion to trade imbalances. In 2025, the US ran a trade deficit of $196.9 billion with Mexico and $46.4 billion with Canada. Many economists argue that trade deficits are not inherently harmful, but the president loathes them. He has stated that the US does not need anything Canada or Mexico produces—a claim easily contradicted by the reliance of many farmers on Canadian potash (85% of US potash is imported from Canada, according to the Fertilizer Institute) and the year-round demand for Mexican berries and avocados.
Not everyone in US agriculture is entirely satisfied with the current USMCA. Mexico’s lower labor costs make specialty-crop production labor-intensive, and some growers in Florida and Georgia complain that Mexico dumps products on the US market during their harvest seasons, driving down prices. US dairy farmers are also unhappy: they argue that Canada created import quotas for US milk but gave them to Canadian competitors, who often let them lapse, and that Canada evades USMCA-imposed caps on exports of certain milk-solid products by gaming tariff categories.
Despite these grievances, even specialty-crop producers are not advocating for terminating the agreement. Farm groups understand that if USMCA disappears, a wave of tit-for-tat tariffs would follow, and US exports would suffer. The only major agricultural group supporting non-renewal is R-CALF, a ranchers’ organization.
For the rest of agriculture, the mantra is clear: fix it, don’t scrap it. Farmers know that Canada and Mexico are not only their biggest markets but also their most reliable trade partners. This reliability stands in sharp contrast to China, which is actively striving to reduce its dependence on the US for agricultural and food products. As China and the EU launch a permanent trade consultation mechanism, Beijing’s pivot away from American farm goods underscores the value of the North American partnership.
If President Trump seriously intends to abandon USMCA, farmers and ranchers will have to hope that some administration during the next 10 years decides to negotiate for renewal. If he is merely engaging in negotiating talk—if what he really wants are changes in the agreement—then many in agriculture want changes, too. The question is whether Washington can deliver a fix before the clock runs out.
