
Soybeans: China and EU's secret weapon against Trump's tariff wars?
European Union countries are set to approve a set of retaliatory levies on the United States on Wednesday in response to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on America's trade partners.
The expected tit-for-tat comes as China also retaliated against Trump's tariffs this week. The unfolding tariff spat has destabilised global markets and seen stocks fall across the board.
Trump's latest tariffs put a 20 percent levy on all EU goods. The tariff rate is 104 percent for Chinese goods.
The EU's actions will target US aluminium and steel products, as well as American agricultural imports – key among them being soybeans.
One of America's biggest imports globally, could soy prove to be Washington's Achilles heel that trading partners, including the EU and China, use to hit back effectively?
Here's what to know about what a soybean trade war could mean – and why it could be a big deal for the US, economically and politically:
Soy, in the form of whole beans, animal feed, or oil, is a cornerstone of the US agricultural industry and represents one of America's biggest agricultural revenue earners.
It accounts for about 0.6 percent of GDP. The US has more than 500,000 soybean producers, according to the Department of Agriculture's Census of Agriculture. That includes at least 223,000 full-time jobs supported by the soybean industry, according to a 2023 report for the National Oilseed Processors Association and the United Soybean Board.
The industry is worth $124bn in the US – that's more than the entire economy of Kenya or Bulgaria.
Although local demand for soy in the US is growing, exports form the basis of the crop's success. The US is presently the second-largest exporter of soybeans globally, selling more than half its yield to about 80 countries.
Soybeans contributed more than $27bn of US annual exports in 2023, according to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), an open-source data visualisation platform.
That's more than any other agricultural export.
China, which imports $15bn of US soybeans, is by far the most important market, followed by the EU – and especially Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, which buy about $2bn worth of the oilseed.
Yet, both China and the EU are now at the heart of a global pushback against Trump's tariffs. They were both on the 'worst offender' list of countries hit by a barrage of tariff hikes announced by Trump last week. The list included countries that Washington claimed were unfairly taxing US goods in their countries.
Trump slapped the EU with a 20 percent surcharge, apart from 25 percent levies on steel and aluminum, which form a key part of the bloc's exports to the US.
China, in total, now faces a 104 percent tariff on all its US exports as of Wednesday.Both entities appear to be targeting US soy, a soft spot for Washington, considering the importance of their markets to American farmers.
The EU has promised to target US goods worth up to €26 billion ($28bn) in retaliatory tariffs.
While those tariffs are expected to be enforced in phases, one of the products on the EU's list is soy.
The bloc will vote on a surcharge of up to 25 percent on a list of targeted goods on Wednesday, with no opposition expected. A first set of tariffs will be enforced from April 15.
Meanwhile, US soy exports to China, its biggest market, are also facing a battering. China had earlier honed in on US food products, slapping a 15 percent duty on commodities like chicken, wheat and corn, while imposing a 10 percent levy on soybeans, meat and other farm exports.
On Saturday, China placed an additional 34 percent on all US goods, bringing the surcharge on soy, in particular, to 44 percent. A further 50 percent hike on all US goods will take effect on Thursday, Beijing has announced.
That means American soybeans will now face 94 percent tariffs in China.
Experts say China can afford to gamble with soy because it has increasingly turned to Brazil for its soy imports since 2017 when the first trade war began during Trump's first administration.
US soy exports to China have fallen in the time since, while Brazil now holds more than half of the market share. In 2024, Brazil exported $36.6bn worth of soy to China while the United States exported $12.1bn worth of soy.
https://x.com/ASA_Soybeans/status/1909613301564112985
American soy farmers have urged Trump to remove tariffs on China, the EU, and other top markets like Mexico. Most have emphasised China's importance to US farmers.
'China bought 52 percent of our (soybean) exports in 2024,' the American Soybean Association's chief economist Scott Gerlt told the AFP news agency. Given the size of its purchases, China cannot easily be replaced, he added.
Some farmers say many won't be able to hold out for too long if the trade spat continues, as their produce would become too expensive to be competitive on the global market.
'If this trade war lasts beyond the fall, you're going to see farmers go out of business,' soybean farmer David Walton told US news channel ABC.
The war on soy, and indeed, the tit-for-tat tariff row, could have deep political implications.
So far, Trump has issued the policies as executive decrees, denying Congress the right to weigh in on the matter.
But Republican Congressman Don Bacon, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley and Democrat Senator Maria Cantwell are preparing to introduce legislation that would force Trump to notify Congress of any new tariffs, with its enforcement subject to the House's approval, according to reporting by US publications Politico and Axios. The chances of the bill passing through are slim, however, since Republicans dominate the House and Senate.
Still, whatever happens in Congress, the political consequences might be felt beyond Capitol Hill, too.
Nearly all of the American soybean exports to the EU come from Louisiana alone, the home state of Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson. The politician has nonetheless spoken in favour of the tariff hikes.
In a press statement last week, Johnson said Americans should 'trust the president's instinct on the economy'.
'It may be rocky in the beginning, but I think in the end it will make sense for all Americans, it will help all Americans,' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump-deployed National Guard arrives in LA to crush immigration protests
US National Guard soldiers have begun deploying on Los Angeles streets after United States President Donald Trump sent in 2,000 troops in a bid to suppress protests against a wave of federal immigration raids in the region, sparking a sharp rebuke from California's Democratic leadership. Troops were seen early Sunday at the federal complex in downtown Los Angeles, including around the Metropolitan Detention Center, which has been a flashpoint over the past two days. The deployment follows intense confrontations between demonstrators and federal agents near a Department of Homeland Security facility in Paramount, a city south of Los Angeles with a large Latino population. The clashes erupted after federal authorities carried out mass arrests in several locations, including the city's fashion district and a Home Depot store. More than 100 people have been detained over the past week, according to immigration officials. During Saturday's confrontation, agents fired tear gas, stun grenades, and pepper balls, while protesters responded with rocks and debris. Fires burned in the streets as tensions spiralled. 'This deployment of National Guard troops was done in a very unusual manner,' said Rob Reynolds, Al Jazeera's senior correspondent reporting from Los Angeles. 'Usually, the National Guard presence is requested by the governor of a state. In this case, Trump went around [California Governor Gavin] Newsom using a different provision of the law that allows him to nationalise the State National Guard and call it out in cases of insurrection against the United States government,' said Reynolds. Newsom, who has long been at odds with Trump, condemned the move as 'inflammatory' and warned it would only make the situation more combustible. 'They want a spectacle. Don't give them one,' Newsom posted on X. He accused the administration of using heavy-handed tactics to provoke unrest and distract from its controversial immigration agenda. Trump has denounced the protests as 'a form of rebellion'. 'There has long been a sense of antagonism between Trump and the state of California in general and also particularly against Newsom, who Trump refers to on social media by the somewhat juvenile nickname of Gavin New Scum. He was brandishing that nickname on social media earlier today,' Reynolds noted. The White House defended the decision, saying the Guard was being sent to 'address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester.' The last deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles was in 1992, during the rioting triggered by the brutal police beating by white officers of Black motorist Rodney King, which was caught on video. Robert Patillo, a civil and human rights attorney, called the president's move to bypass the governor and call in troops as 'unprecedented' in recent history. 'Normally, if federal troops are going to be used inside of states, it's going to be at the invitation of the governor of that state. For example, in 1992, the California governor invited federal troops in to put down the LA riots. But if the governor, such as Gavin Newsom, has not asked for federal troops to come in, and these troops are coming in against his will, then there will be challenges,' he said. In Compton, another site of protest, a vehicle was set alight, while in Paramount, hundreds of demonstrators rallied near a doughnut shop as police erected barriers of barbed wire. The protests extended into the night, with crowds also returning to federal buildings in central Los Angeles. Police later declared an unlawful assembly and began making arrests. In a further escalation, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth warned that active-duty Marines based at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and could be mobilised if unrest continues. Progressive Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said the Trump order captured 'a president moving this country rapidly into authoritarianism' and 'usurping the powers of the United States Congress'. Several Republican leaders voiced their support for the involvement of the National Guard.


Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump deploys National Guard against anti-ICE protests in LA
NewsFeed Trump deploys National Guard against anti-ICE protests in LA US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to combat the ongoing protests against ICE immigration raids in Los Angeles, citing 'lawlessness' in the city. Activists have called for a third day of protests Sunday in opposition to the immigration sweeps and national guard deployment.


Al Jazeera
6 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Los Angeles unrest: Is Trump allowed to deploy National Guard troops?
United States President Donald Trump has ordered the deployment of 2,000 members of the National Guard to Los Angeles County to quell protests against coordinated immigration raids, bypassing the authority of the governor of California. The extraordinary development came on Saturday, the second day of protests, amid clashes between law enforcement officers and demonstrators in the city. The Los Angeles Police Department said Saturday's demonstrations were peaceful and that 'the day concluded without incident'. But in the two cities south of Los Angeles, Compton and Paramount, street battles broke out between protesters and police who used tear gas and flashbangs to disperse the crowds. Local authorities did not request federal assistance. On the contrary, California Governor Gavin Newsom called Trump's decision to call in National Guard troops 'purposefully inflammatory'. He accused the Trump administration of ordering the deployment 'not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle'. It all started on Friday, when law enforcement officials in full riot gear descended on Los Angeles, rounding up day labourers at a building supply shop. The raids, part of a military-style operation, signalled a step up in the Trump administration's use of force in its crackdown against undocumented immigrants. The arrests were carried out without judicial warrants, according to multiple legal observers and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Department of Homeland Security said more than 100 undocumented immigrants have been arrested in two days of raids across southern California. After word spread through southern Los Angeles of immigration agents arresting people, residents came out to show their outrage, and a police crackdown followed. It is made up of part-time soldiers who can be used at the state and federal levels. Under the authority of state governors, National Guard troops can be deployed to respond to emergencies, such as the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. It can also be used to tackle social unrest when local police are overwhelmed. During times of war or national emergencies, the federal government can order a deployment for military service – that is, when the National Guard is federalised and serves under the control of the president. The president can federalise, or take control of, the National Guard in very specific cases. The main legal mechanism that a president can use to send military forces is the Insurrection Act to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and civil disorder within the country. If certain conditions are met, the president can send in the National Guard, bypassing the authority of the governor, though that is rare and politically sensitive. Following the breakout of protests in Los Angeles, Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act, but rather a specific provision of the US Code on Armed Services. It says National Guard troops can be placed under federal command when 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority' of the US. But the law also says 'orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors' of the states, making it not clear whether Trump had the legal authority to bypass Newsom. Trump's directive ordering the deployment of troops said 'protests or acts of violence' directly inhibiting the execution of the laws would 'constitute a form of rebellion' against the government. According to Robert Patillo, a civil and human rights lawyer, Trump's order will likely face legal challenges. 'Normally, federal troops are going to be used inside states at the invitation of the governor of that state,' he told Al Jazeera, citing the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, which were put down by federal troops invited by Pete Wilson, then-governor of California. 'But if the governor, such as Gavin Newsom, has not asked for federal troops to come in, and these troops are coming in against his will, then there will be challenges … and this will have to go to the Supreme Court in order to determine who has a legal right to deploy those troops,' Patillo said. In 2020, Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to respond to the protests that followed the killing by a Minneapolis police officer of George Floyd. Then-Secretary of Defense Mark Esper pushed back, saying active-duty troops in a law enforcement role should be used 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations'. Finally, Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act and asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, DC. Those who refused to send them were allowed to do so. But this time around, Trump has already signalled his unwillingness to hold back on calling in troops. When on the campaign trail in 2023, Trump told supporters in Iowa that he would not be waiting for a governor to be asked to send in troops as during his first term. 'The next time, I'm not waiting,' he said.