The May 12, 2025 U.S.-China tariff announcement temporarily lowered some duties, but it did not remove China’s separate tariffs on U.S. agricultural products. Farm groups welcomed the de-escalation while warning that the 90-day pause left farmers facing uncertainty over future costs, competitiveness and access to the Chinese market.
What did the 90-day U.S.-China tariff pause mean for farmers?
After talks in Geneva, the United States and China announced a 90-day de-escalation on May 12, 2025. A USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) report dated May 14 said China would suspend 24 percentage points of its 34% additional reciprocal tariff for an initial 90 days beginning May 14, leaving a 10% reciprocal rate on covered U.S.-origin products. The report describes China’s measures and translates Chinese announcements; it is a USDA staff assessment, not necessarily a statement of official U.S. government policy. USDA FAS’s May 14 report gives the terms.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Introduction to Agricultural Economics | $108.98 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Principles of Agricultural Economics | $82.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness | $202.43 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Principles of Agricultural Economics | $23.91 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Principles of Agricultural Economics (Routledge Textbooks in Environmental and Agricultural... | $56.48 | Buy on Amazon |
For agriculture, the key distinction was between that temporary reciprocal-tariff reduction and China’s separate retaliatory duties on U.S. farm goods. The May joint statement did not mention those agricultural duties. The FAS report said they remained in place under the terms it described, so the announcement was not a comprehensive removal of Chinese tariffs on U.S. farm exports.
| Measure described by USDA FAS in May 2025 | What it covered | Effect of the May 12 announcement |
|---|---|---|
| Additional reciprocal tariff | Covered U.S.-origin products; China’s additional rate had been 34% | China suspended 24 percentage points for an initial 90 days starting May 14, leaving 10% in place. |
| Separate retaliatory tariffs on agricultural goods | 10% additional duties on listed goods including soybeans, sorghum, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy; 15% on listed chicken, wheat, corn and cotton | The May joint statement did not mention these duties. The FAS report said they applied on top of then-applicable rates and were not exemptible under the existing bonded and tariff-reduction policies. |
The agricultural tariff schedule above reflects China’s March 4, 2025 announcement as translated in the USDA FAS report on the retaliatory duties. These are the measures described in contemporaneous 2025 reports, not a statement of the tariff schedule in 2026.
#1 Best Overall
Why was the agricultural reaction to the tariff cut muted?
Agriculture.com described the industry as “relatively quiet” in its immediate reaction on May 12. The response was qualified rather than dismissive: farm organizations welcomed relief from escalating trade tensions, but emphasized that a temporary pause was not a lasting settlement.
Farm groups welcomed de-escalation but wanted a durable outcome
American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said, “Farm Bureau appreciates the progress made in resolving the trade dispute between the U.S. and China.” National Farmers Union President Rob Larew called the news a positive next step, but added: “While today’s news is a positive next step, farmers continue to face significant uncertainty.” Both statements appeared in Agriculture.com’s May 12 reaction roundup.
Rank #2
The distinction mattered to producers: reduced escalation could help sentiment immediately, while future tariffs and market access remained unresolved. The groups’ statements do not establish a single view held by every farmer or agricultural business; they show why the organizations speaking publicly paired welcome with caution.
Soybean growers faced a short clock and competitor concerns
The American Soybean Association (ASA) welcomed the first steps toward resolving the dispute, but highlighted two practical risks. First, the remaining tariff burden could leave U.S. soybeans at a disadvantage to supplies from Brazil and Argentina. Second, the announced pause was due to end in August, just before the U.S. harvest season. ASA President Caleb Ragland, a Kentucky soybean farmer, said: “Also important to note, the 90-day pause will end in August—right before our harvest season.” ASA called for a durable outcome that removed retaliatory tariffs and protected market access in its May 12 statement.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Rank #3
China’s importance to soybean sellers helps explain the concern. ASA reported that nearly 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans went to China in the most recent marketing year described in its May 12, 2025 statement. ASA said that represented 54% of U.S. soybean exports and was worth $13 billion. Those figures are the association’s reported export figures for that marketing year, not a forecast of future sales.
Did the May 2025 tariff pause remove China’s tariffs on U.S. soybeans?
No. The May action temporarily suspended part of China’s additional reciprocal tariff, but the FAS report separately listed the 10% retaliatory duty on soybeans imposed in March. Because the May joint statement did not address those agricultural duties, the pause did not, by itself, remove the soybean retaliation described in the FAS report or guarantee restored market access.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What did farmers and markets know at the time?
Early reactions reflected a wait-and-see period, not evidence of the pause’s eventual effect on farm income, exports or prices. The Associated Press reported on May 13 that University of Illinois agricultural economist Joe Janzen said markets had largely rebounded to around April 2 levels and that “Tariffs have not had a major impact on prices yet.” That was his contemporaneous assessment of early market conditions, not a finding about longer-term effects. The AP report also described farmers’ uncertainty amid the short pause and broader pressures on agriculture.
In testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance on May 14, Ragland said markets had not yet reacted and ASA expected possible soybean price reductions if retaliatory tariffs returned or escalated. His testimony also summarized a fall 2024 ASA and National Corn Growers Association scenario study: under one modeled scenario, U.S. soybean exports to China would decline 14–16 million metric tons annually, an average 51.8% reduction from baseline for those years. That was a projection under a particular scenario, not an observed result of the May 2025 pause. Ragland’s May 14 testimony provides that context.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
What remained unresolved after the announcement?
The May 12 agreement reduced one part of the tariff escalation for a limited period. For agricultural exporters, the remaining questions were whether the pause would lead to a lasting agreement, whether separate retaliatory duties would be addressed, and whether U.S. producers could maintain competitive access to Chinese buyers. Farm groups’ immediate welcome reflected the value of de-escalation; their cautions reflected that the announcement did not settle those longer-term questions. Agri-Pulse’s May 12 coverage also noted the temporary nature of the tariff cuts and market-access concerns.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
