This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.
Agricultural exports are significant to farmers and the U.S. economy. With the productivity of U.S. agriculture growing faster than domestic demand, farmers and agriculturally oriented firms rely on export markets to sustain prices and revenue. The trade title of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 farm bill; (P.L. 115-334) authorized export market development programs and export credit guarantee programs from FY2019 to FY2023 to expand foreign markets for U.S. farmers and food manufacturers. Congress extended the authorization and funding for these programs twice in one-year extensions (P.L. 118-22, Division B, §102 and P.L. 118-158, Division DSubsequent legislation extended the authorizations through FY2026 (P.L. 119-37). These market expansion programs derive their statutory authorities from the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-501), as amended. The trade title of the 2018 farm bill also includes international food assistance programs and international science and technicaltechnical assistance and exchange programs and provisions, which are not addressed in this In Focus.
In 20242025, U.S. food and agricultural exports totaled $176171 billion, and U.S. imports totaled $213212 billion, resulting in a trade deficit of more than $37$41 billion (Figure 1) according to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data. Bulk commodities, such as soybeans, corn, cottoncorn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice, are the leading U.S. farm exports. Leading consumer-oriented exports include tree nuts, dairy, meat and poultry, tree nuts, fruits, and vegetables. In 2024, over 602025, about 50% of U.S. agricultural exports by value were destined for the top four U.S. export markets: Mexico, Canada, China, the European Union, and Japan.
| Figure 1 . Value of U.S. Agricultural Trade |
Figure is interactive in the HTML version of this report.
<script type="text/javascript">//Based on IAG in AP 7.4.1 (Revised 20240624) $(function () { $('#IAG-Source: CRS from USDA's Global Agricultural Trade System data. Data are not adjusted for inflation. Trade balance constructed as imports subtracted from exports.
The U.S. agricultural trade surplus peaked at $40.1 billion in 2011. It has since fallen and was a trade deficit in 2019, 2022, 2023, and 2024 and between 2022 and 2025. Many attribute the rise in U.S. food and agricultural imports to increasing domestic demand for imported, consumer-oriented goods such as fruits, vegetables, alcoholic beverages, beef, and coffee products.
As the margin of exports over imports narrowed and with growing agricultural trade deficits in recent years, some producer groups have sought enhanced export promotion and market development. Some U.S. government officials and industry representatives have expressed interest in addressing certain policies of some U.S. trading partners that may be impeding U.S. food and agricultural exports. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's (USTR's) annual National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers highlights a range of tariff and nontariff concerns, including sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical trade barriers. These and other potential issues for Congress are discussed below.
The 2018 farm bill reauthorized several export market development programs and export credit guarantee programs administered by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service. The 2018 farm bill included other trade and export promotion provisions aimed at developing overseas markets and addressing nontariff barriers.
The trade title of a farm bill generally contains reauthorizations and amendments for agricultural export programs and other trade-related provisions. The 2018 farm bill consolidated four existing USDA export promotion programs .Trade Provisions in the Farm Bill
Export Market Development Programs
Export promotion programs are authorized under a single Agricultural Trade Promotion and Facilitation program and created the Priority Trade Fund, with(ATPF) umbrella program administered by USDA. Programs are authorized to receive mandatory funding of $255 million annually through FY2023, laterFY2026, as extended through FY2025 ((7 U.S.C. §5623§5623, P.L. 119-37).
The 2018 farm bill authorizedauthorizes USDA to fund MAP and FMD activities in Cuba, which had been otherwiseotherwise would be prohibited (7 U.S.C. §§5623(f)(4)).
The 2018 farm bill reauthorized $1 billion annually through FY2023, later extended through FY2025, in export credit guaranteesauthorizes $1 billion in export credit guarantees annually through FY2026, as extended, for exports to emerging markets (7 U.S.C. §5622 note§5622 note, P.L. 119-37). Additionally, $5.5 billion is available annually with no funding expiration date (7 U.S.C. §5641(b)). Export credit guarantees are carried out under two programs.
Under these programs, the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) provides payment guarantees on commercial financing and assumes the risk of default on payments by the foreign purchasers on loans to facilitate U.S. exports.
The 2018 farm bill reauthorized the Biotechnology and Agricultural Trade Program (7 U.S.C. §5679) and authorized $2 million in annual appropriations through FY2023, later extended through FY2025. The program funds grants for public and private sector projects that provide "quick response intervention" and develop protocols as part of bilateral negotiations with other countries. Trade concerns pertain to nontariff regulatory barriers to U.S. exports produced with agricultural biotechnology and other new technologies and requirements involving SPS measures.
The 2018 farm bill also directed USDA, coordinating with other federal agencies, to work with tribal representatives on U.S. trade missions to increase the inclusion of tribal food products in trade-related activities (7 U.S.C. §5608).
In November 2023, USDA announced funding availability of $1.2 billion over five yearsauthorizes appropriations for the Biotechnology and Agricultural Trade Program with discretionary funding of $2 million through FY2026, as extended (7 U.S.C. §5679, P.L. 119-37). The program funds grants for public and private sector projects that address nontariff regulatory barriers (e.g., SPS) to U.S. agricultural exports. Administrative Actions
For FY2024 and FY2025, USDA allocated $300 million annually for a new export promotion program called the Regional Agricultural Promotion Program (RAPP). RAPP is modeled after the Agricultural Trade Promotion Program that was created in 2018 in response to foreign retaliatory tariffs and trade disruptions. In FY2024 and FY2025, RAPP allocated $300 million annually to organizations, targeting markets in Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, and South and Southeast Asia. The FY2026 President's budget proposal would continue obligations for RAPP through FY2026. RAPP isIn November 2025, USDA announced $285 million in funding availability for the America First Trade Promotion Program (AFTPP), a new export promotion program that runs through FY2028 and operates under RAPP regulations (7 C.F.R. §1489). AFTPP and RAPP are authorized and funded by the CCC Charter Act (15 U.S.C. §714c(f)).
USDA uses the same CCC authority to fund the Quality Samples Program (QSP), which promotes U.S. agricultural products. QSP is annually funded at $2.5 million.
The FY2025 budget reconciliation law (P.L. 119-21) is to provide USDA $285 million annually from mandatory CCC funding for a supplemental agricultural trade promotion program indefinitely starting in FY2027 (7 U.S.C. §5623a).
As Congress considers issues related to U.S. agricultural exportstrade promotion, it may evaluate, reauthorize, modify, or end existing programs or establish new programs and initiatives.
Congress may also evaluate U.S. agricultural trade policy and objectives. Export Promotion Programs. Critics of export promotion programs claim the programs provide federal support for activities that private firms could otherwise fund. Supporters claim the programs keep U.S. agricultural products competitive overseas, diversify market opportunities, help generate additional farm income, and increase farm and food sector jobs.
In the 119th Congress, some Members introduced bills addressing MAP and FMD. H.R. 1086 would increase annual funding for MAP and FMD to $400 million and $69 million, respectively. Other bills would authorize $1 million annually for FMD to focus on technical assistance to improve the infrastructure in foreign markets (H.R. 2322/S. 1119). Outside of a farm bill, the House passed H.R. 1, providing for budget reconciliation pursuant to H.Con.Res. 14, the budget resolution for FY2025. H.R. 1 would provide USDA $285 million annually for an agricultural export promotion program beginning in FY2027.
Trade Policy. Some U.S. government officials and industry stakeholders have expressed interest in addressing certain policies of U.S. trading partners that may be impeding U.S. agricultural exports; others seek to address foreign export and import competition. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's (USTR's) annual National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers for 2026 highlights a range of tariff and nontariff trade barriers. In the 119th Congress, the trade title of H.R. 7567, the farm bill as ordered reported by the House Committee on Agriculture, addresses some of the issues mentioned above. Several provisions in H.R. 7567 incorporate aspects of stand-alone bills on export promotion and agricultural trade policy (e.g., H.R. 1086, H.R. 2322/S. 1119, and H.R. 5620). H.R. 7567 would nearly double mandatory CCC funding for ATPF programs beginning in FY2027 for a total of $500 million and further increase to $533 million annually for FY2028 through FY2031. Another provision would create an FMD subprogram that would address infrastructure deficiencies in foreign markets that could damage U.S. agricultural exports. The bill would repeal the export program established by P.L. 119-21 and repeal the provision prohibiting MAP from assisting the U.S. mink industry (7 U.S.C. §5623 note). The trade title in H.R. 7567 also proposes reporting requirements. For example, the Government Accountability Office would be required to submit a report to Congress on policy options for USDA to support the competitiveness of U.S. seafood producers in global and domestic markets. Other provisions would require USDA along with USTR to submit a report to Congress on how potential changes to or termination of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement may affect U.S. agriculture and a report on the effect on U.S. beef and cattle markets due to changes to U.S. tariff-rate quotas on Argentine beef imports.Other bills introduced in the 119th Congress would address trade barriers by directing Some U.S. agricultural trade and producer groups have sought increased funding for export promotion and market development programs.Overview of H.R. 7567 Trade Provisions
maymight otherwise be prohibited due to geographical indication protections. Another provision would establish an interagency agricultural trade enforcement task force to identify agricultural trade barriers that are "vulnerable to dispute settlement" under trade agreements and to enforce trade agreement violations, with a particular focus on India's agricultural subsidies. The bill also would create an interagency working group to monitor and assess trade-related information on seasonal and perishable fruits and vegetables and coordinate on trade actions and investigations. otherwise be prohibited due to geographical indication protections (H.R. 2558/S. 1230).
Other trade-related issues often addressed outside the context of a farm bill may include various multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations that U.S. farm groups generally support. Congress also may review the implications of retaliatory trade tariffs that remain in effect and/or are under consideration, including tariffs imposed on U.S. agricultural exports in response to U.S. tariff actions.
Congress may also debate policy issues related to U.S. agricultural trade and involvement within the World Trade Organization and other trade agreements. In the 119th Congress, one bill would establish an interagency agricultural trade enforcement task force to identify agricultural trade barriers that are "vulnerable to dispute settlement" under trade agreements and to enforce trade agreement violations, with a particular focus on India's agricultural subsidies (S. 743).