Ag groups are apprehensive of Trump’s plan to charge port fees on Chinese-built ships

President Trump is considering imposing port fees on Chinese-built ships. It is a move being floated right now to strengthen his America First agenda further.

Several groups, like the World Shipping Council, support the move to build up the U.S. maritime sector, but they warn that adding fees to Chinese-built ships would hurt American farmers, particularly when it comes to buying inputs like fertilizer and seed.

Growth Energy submitted its comments to the U.S. Trade Representative, urging them to change course.

“The noted fees and costs of compliance with the proposed requirements to use U.S.-flagged and operated vessels will be significant and result in higher, less-competitive prices and decreased demand for U.S. exports while also increasing the price of imported inputs for ethanol’s production. This will upend domestic supply chains while increasing port consolidation, port congestion, costs, other compliance requirements, and clearance time by customs that will add to the burden and cost of producing and exporting U.S. ethanol...These new requirements would cause a significant upheaval that American producers can ill afford,” said Growth Energy Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Chris Bliley.

Mike Steenhoek with the Soy Transportation Coalition says the proposals on the table would diminish the ability of U.S. farmers to compete in the international marketplace.

Related Stories
ASA President Scott Metzger says soybean growers remain focused on trade, the Farm Bill, renewable fuels, and market stability as Congress weighs additional assistance for farmers and export opportunities.
Renewable Fuels Association CEO Geoff Cooper discusses record public support for year-round E15, congressional legislation, the Renewable Fuel Standard, 45Z guidance, and ethanol trade with Brazil.
The Public Lands Council says the decision restores grazing access while protecting special areas.
The proposal would provide up to $12 billion for producers facing high production costs and trade-related challenges.
For producers who depend on overseas markets, the lack of progress leaves uncertainty over future trade policies.
The proposal maintains key cattle industry priorities but omits several livestock provisions included in the House version.