link to page 1  link to page 1 

 
 
July 5, 2022
Farm Bill Primer: Trade and Export Promotion Programs
Agricultural exports are significant to farmers and the U.S. 
and agricultural exports. The Office of the U.S. Trade 
economy. With the productivity of U.S. agriculture growing 
Representative in its annual National Trade Estimate 
faster than domestic demand, farmers and agriculturally 
Report on Foreign Trade Barriers highlights a range of 
oriented firms rely heavily on export markets to sustain 
tariff and nontariff concerns, including sanitary and 
prices and revenue. The trade title of the 2018 farm bill 
phytosanitary (SPS) and technical trade barriers. These and 
(P.L. 115-334) authorizes programs to expand foreign 
other potential issues for Congress are discussed below. 
markets for U.S. farmers and food manufacturers through 
export market development programs and export credit 
Trade Provisions in the 2018 Farm Bill 
guarantee programs. These market expansion programs 
The 2018 farm bill reauthorized several export market 
derive their statutory authorities from the Agricultural 
development programs and export credit guarantee 
Trade Act (P.L. 95-501). The trade title of the farm bill also 
programs, administered by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural 
includes international food assistance programs and 
Service. The 2018 farm bill included other trade and export 
international science and technical exchange programs and 
promotion provisions aimed at developing overseas markets 
provisions, which are not addressed in this In Focus.  
and addressing nontariff barriers. See CRS Report R46760, 
U.S. Agricultural Export Programs: Background and Issues 
Trade Situation Overview 
for more background on these programs. 
U.S. food and agricultural exports totaled $177 billion, and 
U.S. imports totaled nearly $171 billion in 2021, resulting 
Export Market Development Programs  
in a trade surplus of more than $6 billion (Figure 1), 
The 2018 farm bill consolidated four existing USDA export 
according to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data. 
promotion programs under a single Agricultural Trade 
Bulk commodities, such as wheat, rice, coarse grains, 
Promotion program and added to it a newly created Priority 
oilseeds, cotton, and tobacco are the leading U.S. exports. 
Trade Fund, with mandatory funding of $255 million 
Leading consumer-oriented products include dairy 
annually through FY2023 (7 U.S.C. §5623).  
products, meat and poultry products, oilseeds, vegetable 
  Market Access Program (MAP) provides cost-sharing 
oils, fruits, vegetables, and beverages. About one-half of the 
of overseas marketing and promotional activities that 
value of U.S. agricultural exports in 2021 were destined for 
help build commercial markets for U.S. agricultural 
China, Mexico, Canada, Japan, and the European Union. 
exports ($200 million per year).  
Figure 1. Value of U.S. Agricultural Trade 
  Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program 
funds projects that address long-term opportunities to 
reduce foreign import constraints or expand export 
growth opportunities ($34.5 million per year). 
  E. (Kika) de la Garza Emerging Markets Program 
provides cost-sharing for technical assistance to support 
generic U.S. agricultural exports ($8 million per year). 
  Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops funds 
projects addressing SPS and technical trade barriers to 
U.S. specialty crop exports ($9 million per year). 
  Priority Trade Fund supports activities to access, 
  
develop, maintain, and expand markets for U.S. 
Source: CRS from USDA’s Global Agricultural Trade System data 
agricultural exports ($3.5 million per year). 
(FATUS product group). Data are calendar year. 
The once sizable U.S. agricultural trade surplus, which 
Funding allocations by program are available at USDA’s 
reached $40.1 billion in 2011, shrunk to below $10 billion 
Directory of Market Development Program Participants 
in 2018. The United States posted a deficit in 2019 before 
(https://apps.fas.usda.gov/pcd/PCD_HelpSearch.aspx), 
returning to a surplus in 2020 and 2021. This trend reflects 
which lists agricultural commodities and export 
both rising U.S. imports and generally slower growth in 
destinations. The 2018 farm bill also allows USDA to fund 
U.S. exports (Figure 1). As the margin of exports over 
export promotion activities in Cuba (7 U.S.C. §5623(f)(4)).  
imports has narrowed, some producer groups have sought 
enhanced export promotion and market development. Some 
Separately, the Quality Samples Program, which promotes 
U.S. government officials and industry representatives have 
U.S. agricultural products, is authorized under the 
expressed an interest in countering regulatory policies of 
Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act and is funded 
some U.S. trading partners that may be impeding U.S. food 
through its borrowing authority (15 U.S.C. §714c(f)). 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Farm Bill Primer: Trade and Export Promotion Programs 
Export Credit Guarantee Programs 
Supporters of these trade programs, such as the Coalition to 
The 2018 farm bill reauthorized $1 billion annually through 
Promote U.S. Agricultural Exports and the National 
FY2023 in direct credits or export credit guarantees for 
Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA), 
exports to emerging markets (7 U.S.C. §5622 note). 
claim various benefits of developing U.S. agricultural 
Regulations at 7 C.F.R. Part 1493 cover two programs:  
export markets. They cite helping to keep U.S. food and 
agricultural products competitive in foreign markets and 
  GSM-102 Program provides credit guarantees to 
diversifying U.S. market opportunities and assert that U.S. 
finance commercial U.S. agricultural exports mainly to 
spending on export promotion often lags behind that of U.S. 
developing countries. Available FY2022 GSM-102 
foreign competitors, such as China and European Union 
allocations totaled $3 billion, with about one-half of 
member countries. The coalition and NASDA further cite 
allocations for approved financial institutions in Latin 
market studies indicating that USDA’s export programs 
American countries and the remainder destined for Asia, 
have helped raise producer cash receipts and generate jobs. 
Africa, and the Middle East. An eligible “agricultural 
commodity” are those referenced at 7 U.S.C. §5602.  
Questions about whether export promotion programs are as 
  Facility Guarantee Program (FGP) provides payment 
effective as they could be, and whether new approaches to 
guarantees to improve or establish agriculture-related 
facilitate and promote U.S. farm exports may be needed, 
facilities in emerging markets. Available FY2022 FGP 
could be topics of discussion in a new farm bill. The 
allocations totaled $500 million. Eligible “destination 
eligibility of certain types of organizations and producer 
countries” are listed at 7 C.F.R. §1493.210. 
groups and the levels of funding for various programs may 
also come up for debate. Congress could consider whether 
Under these programs, the Commodity Credit Corporation 
to reauthorize and further expand the Biotechnology and 
provides payment guarantees on commercial financing and 
Agricultural Trade Program or other related programs to 
assumes the risk of default on payments by the foreign 
address nontariff and other technical trade barriers to U.S. 
purchasers on loans to facilitate U.S. exports. 
agricultural exports. Congress also may review policy 
options to help facilitate implementation of the recently 
Other Export-Related Provisions 
enacted Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-
The 2018 farm bill created the Biotechnology and 
146), which addresses ocean shipping costs and shipping-
Agricultural Trade Program (7 U.S.C. §5679) and provided 
related obstacles to U.S. food and agricultural exports.  
$2 million in annual appropriations through FY2023 to fund 
grants for public and private sector projects that provide 
Other trade-related issues often outside the context of the 
“quick response intervention” and develop protocols as part 
farm bill—but debated in view of lower farm export sales in 
of bilateral negotiations with other countries. Trade 
recent years—may include various multilateral and bilateral 
concerns pertain to nontariff regulatory barriers to U.S. 
trade negotiations that U.S. farm groups generally support. 
exports produced with agricultural biotechnology and other 
The Biden Administration’s plans to launch its Indo-Pacific 
new technologies and requirements involving food safety, 
Economic Framework initiative involving discussions with 
plant and animal disease, or other SPS measures. The 
several Asian nations has gained support from several U.S. 
program was previously part of the 1990 farm bill (Food, 
farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau 
Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990; P.L. 
Federation. Congress also may review the implications of 
101-624) and was appropriated $6 million annually (2002-
various retaliatory trade tariffs that remain in effect and/or 
2007) before being allowed to lapse in 2007. 
are under consideration, including tariffs imposed on U.S. 
exports to China in retaliation for U.S. Section 301 duties 
The 2018 farm bill also directed USDA, coordinating with 
on Chinese goods that may be limiting certain U.S. food 
other federal agencies, to work with tribal representations 
and agricultural exports.  
on U.S. trade missions to increase the inclusion of tribal 
food products in trade-related activities (7 U.S.C. §5608).  
Congress also may debate policy issues related to U.S. 
Issues and Options 
commitments and obligations within the World Trade 
Organization (WTO). As a WTO member, the United States 
Federal support for agricultural export market promotion 
has committed to abide by WTO rules and disciplines, 
has raised questions about the appropriateness of 
including those that govern domestic farm policy and other 
government support for private sector export promotion and 
trade-related rules. Recently, WTO members (including the 
the effectiveness and impact of these programs. Although 
United States) agreed to enhance rules governing SPS 
some support these programs, citing benefits to the U.S. 
measures in food and agricultural trade. In addition, since 
farm sector, others have expressed concerns about whether 
2018, USDA has initiated large ad hoc program spending—
the federal government should play an active role in helping 
valued at more than $55 billion cumulatively through 
agribusiness entities market their products overseas.   
2021—in response to international trade retaliation and 
economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. 
During the run-up to the 2014 and 2018 farm bills, deficit 
This additional spending increased U.S. farm payments, 
reduction proposals targeted MAP for cuts or elimination. 
raising questions among some policymakers about whether 
Detractors claim these programs are forms of corporate 
the United States may exceed its annual spending limits on 
welfare, funding activities that private firms could and 
domestic farm support under WTO rules. 
would otherwise fund. Other critics contend that the 
principal beneficiaries are foreign consumers and that funds 
Renée Johnson, Specialist in Agricultural Policy   
could be better spent, for example, by instructing U.S. firms 
on how to export and on overcoming trade barriers. 
IF12155
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Farm Bill Primer: Trade and Export Promotion Programs 
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12155 · VERSION 1 · NEW