In 2018, the U.S. imposed tariffs on over $250 billion worth of Chinese products, leading to Chinese retaliation with tariffs on over $110 billion worth of U.S. products, including agricultural products like soybeans, pork, and ethanol.

By December 2019, the average U.S. tariff rates on Chinese products had increased to 24.3%, while Chinese tariffs on U.S. exports were set to reach 25.9%.

These retaliatory tariffs significantly impacted U.S. agricultural exports, leading to a decline of $27 billion between mid-2018 and the end of 2019. Soybeans were most affected, accounting for 71% of the decline.

China purchased only 58% of the US exports it had committed to purchase under the agreement, not even enough to reach its import levels from before the trade war.

The trade war led to a significant drop in U.S. soybean exports to China, declining by 75% in 2018.

To mitigate the impact on farmers, the Trump administration provided $28 billion in aid, a sum exceeding the annual budget of various government agencies, including the Navy’s shipbuilding program and the cost of maintaining the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Despite the trade war, a survey of Midwestern farmers conducted in early 2019 revealed that over 56% remained supportive of President Trump’s tariffs. This sentiment persisted even though over 80% reported experiencing income losses due to the trade disruptions.

A key takeaway from this that the trade war primarily hurt U.S. farmers and consumers, and the tariffs did not achieve the intended outcome of benefiting U.S. industries. The “Phase One” agreement signed in January 2020, while halting further tariff escalation, did not fully resolve the issues, and China fell short of its purchase commitments.
Experts argue that a more effective approach would involve lowering or eliminating tariffs and focusing on constructive trade policies that promote economic growth and competition.