IFB is dedicated to advancing trade. One of our national legislative priorities for 2024 is to “Strongly call for a more determined approach to seeking additional free-trade agreements,” and we are actively raising the issue with policymakers.

We recently joined other state commodity groups in a letter sent to members of Illinois’ congressional delegation, expressing concern about the negative impacts on farmers and consumers that could result from an increase in tariffs and the widening ag trade deficit.

I also emphasized the importance of AFBF communicating with U.S. administrations about the negative impacts of tariffs. And I plan to highlight this issue while in Washington, D.C. for the July AFBF state presidents meeting, which will correspond with an IFB Leaders to Washington trip.

IFB farmer members and leaders in their Capitol Hill meetings will explain to their federal representatives how exports of Illinois soybeans, corn, pork and biofuels translate to meaningful contributions to the Illinois farmer’s bottom line.

Disrupting that flow of goods via increased tariffs, such as those proposed by both presidential candidates, will bring significant financial strain to farmers and consumers. Escalating import tariffs will likely cause our trade partners to respond with their own tariffs on U.S. agricultural goods, harming the ag and export sectors.

Illinois corn and soybean farmers could face significant losses — ranging from $20 to $152 per acre — under federal policies affecting exports, according to ag economists at the University of Illinois.

Also contributing to our concerns around trade is the continuously widening gap between U.S. ag exports and imports, on track to reach a record $32 billion deficit for fiscal year 2024.

USDA’s Economic Research Service recently reported that although U.S. ag exports are projected at $170.5 billion for FY 2024, U.S. ag imports are forecast to reach $202.5 billion.

If realized, the FY 2024 agricultural trade deficit would surpass the $16.7 billion record deficit set in FY 2023, and represent the fourth ag trade deficit in the last 50 years. More information about the deficit can be found in this AFBF Market Intel.

Both drafts of the farm bill released by Republicans on the House and Senate Agriculture Committees would double funding for the Market Access Program and Foreign Market Development Program, two vital initiatives for boosting U.S. ag trade.

Increased funding for MAP and FMD would be a good step toward advancing U.S. agricultural trade, but more needs to be done. I previously outlined areas for trade reform in a FarmWeek op-ed earlier this spring, and discussed potential solutions and action steps around ag trade in Episode 2 of the Taking Stalk with IFB podcast.

Those efforts are just part of IFB’s ongoing mission to put trade back on the agenda in Congress and the White House, and I’m confident they’ll yield significant returns.