While Southern California ports are now seeing a 13% decrease in incoming cargo ships, U.S. exports had jumped in March ahead of President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs and retaliatory actions from trading partners.
California’s exports that month saw nearly 8% year-over-year growth, hitting more than $16 billion, according to a new analysis from Beacon Economics. U.S. exports overall “jumped by a robust 6.5%”. Founding partner Christopher Thornberg said the strong numbers likely represent foreign buyers accelerating purchases before the tariff window closed.
Yet Jock O’Connell, the research and consulting firm’s international trade advisor, does not expect April’s numbers “to be anywhere near as robust” when they are released.
Take note: California ag exports dropped nearly 5%, to $3.6 billion, in the first quarter this year, compared to the same period last year.
The analysis attributes that to Canadians and other consumers abroad, who actively shunned American goods like California wines, tree nuts and dairy products. Wine shipments to Canada dropped 34% and fresh fruit exports fell more than 9%.
EU outlines tariff response if negotiations fail
President Donald Trump has his first deal toward his goal of 90 in 90 days. Eighty-nine more to go. And there’s still more work that may be done on the deal announced Thursday with the U.K.
The European Union on Thursday laid out exactly what is at stake for U.S. farmers if negotiations to avoid U.S. reciprocal tariffs falter.
The EU Commission unveiled potential countermeasures that would affect some 95 billion euros of U.S. exports, or $107 billion. Among the list of products it is collecting public input on are fruits, nuts and vegetables, cereal grains, oils, shellfish, bourbon and food products.
“The EU remains fully committed to finding negotiated outcomes with the U.S.,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement. “At the same time, we continue preparing for all possibilities.”
But, but, but: The move clearly rankled some in the administration.
“For them to publish stuff like that, I don't think it's in the interest or the spirit of negotiations," Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro told reporters.
Trump’s first trade pact leaves door open to further US-UK dealmaking
Officials from both sides of the Atlantic said Thursday that a new trade pact between the United Kingdom and the U.S. would be the start of further negotiations. One former Trump administration official tells Agri-Pulse that, “At some point it may actually end up looking more like a traditional free trade agreement.”
“This could open up negotiations with a long tail,” said Everett Eissenstat, who served as deputy director of the National Economic Council.
In a press briefing in the Oval Office, U.K. Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson said the deal is a “springboard” to foster more valuable cooperation in the future.
Cut through the clutter! We deliver the news you need to stay informed about farm, food and rural issues. Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse here.
Take note: Many in the U.S. ag community are also hoping that the agreement outlined on Thursday isn’t the final word on U.S.-UK agricultural trade. “[T]his is an important first step in expanding markets,” American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said in a statement. But he said in a reference to sanitary and phytosanitary standards, “More work is needed … to remove the arbitrary barriers that have excluded American-grown food from grocery stores in the U.K.”
The U.K.’s Department of Business and Trade said in a statement that the agreement contains "no weakening of UK food standards on imports."
Read more about the deal at Agri-Pulse.com.
FDA extends comment period for FOP labeling proposal
FDA is allowing 60 more days to comment on its proposed rule on front-of-package labeling.
The long-awaited proposal came out in the final days of the Biden administration, which made the labeling a big piece of its 2022 National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition and Health. Consumer and nutrition advocates also see food labeling as a key tool for Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to implement his "Make America Healthy Again" priorities.
The agency said in a constituent update that it had received multiple requests to extend the comment period. The proposal has already received nearly 9,500 comments, according to the Federal Register docket. The original comment period was set to end May 16.
Deputy HHS secretary nominee calls for better nutrition research, labeling
Trump’s pick for deputy secretary of Health and Human Services raised concerns about healthy food access, labeling and nutrition advice during his confirmation hearing on Thursday.
If confirmed, James O’Neill would lead many of the daily operations at HHS. In his appearance before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, O’Neill indicated he was in lockstep with his boss-to-be, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
He said many Americans try to be healthy but “junk food” is often cheaper adding that it’s also difficult for shoppers to know what is healthy because of confusing labels.
O’Neill said the nutrition science behind the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which HHS puts together with USDA every five years, often lags by decades. However, he said it’s difficult to conduct “real nutrition science” because of outside influence.
Kennedy and others in the MAHA movement have also criticized the DGA for alleged conflicts of interest on the scientific advisory board and called for better nutrition research.
Take note: O’Neill said there should be more studies conducted using a National Institutes of Health facility that isolates participants for weeks to measure each calorie consumed. Researchers used this facility in a 2019 study that found participants assigned to a diet with ultraprocessed foods ingested more calories and gained more weight than those with an unprocessed foods diet.
The researcher behind that study, Kevin Hall, accepted an early retirement offer from HHS last month. He cited censorship from the agency as his reason for leaving.
Overriding parliamentarian on clean air rules would be bad precedent, Democratic senators say
Senators are warning their colleagues that efforts to revoke California’s Clean Air Act waivers by overruling the Senate parliamentarian would set a dangerous procedural precedent.
Alex Padilla, D-Calif., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., took to the Senate floor Thursday to discuss recent Republican efforts to scale back the state’s waivers. Last week, the House voted to revoke three waivers for the clean cars and trucks program.
However, the Government Accountability Office determined that the waivers are not rules under the Congressional Review Act. The Senate parliamentarian also clarified that any CRA resolutions on these waivers would require 60 votes in the Senate rather than the simple majority.
In his floor speech, Padilla said Republicans are trying to bypass a filibuster and use the CRA to revoke the waivers with a 51-vote threshold.
“If successful, it would open the door to ignoring the parliamentarian on any ruling that you don’t like,” Padilla said in his speech. “And if Republicans can ignore the parliamentarian on a CRA, then why not the tax bill that they’re working so hard on? Or health care? Or anything else?”
Final word
“If there was a puddle, we were fishing it.” — Jacob Katz, lead scientist at California Trout, reflecting on his entree point into wildlife conservation alongside his father, rice farmer David Katz, who was involved in water policy in the Brown administration at the time. The two have pioneered a growing movement to flood rice fields to restore floodplains for fish and waterfowl habitat.
