Connect with us

Politics

A trade war under Trump would bring major losses for California agriculture, experts warn

Published

on

A trade war under Trump would bring major losses for California agriculture, experts warn

As President-elect Donald Trump vows to impose tariffs on imports from China, Mexico and Canada, economists are warning that a retaliatory trade war could cause major financial damage for California’s agriculture industry.

In an analysis published before the presidential election, researchers examined potential scenarios of tariffs and retaliatory measures, and estimated that if a significant trade war occurs, California could see the value of its agricultural exports reduced by up to one-fourth, bringing as much as $6 billion in losses annually.

The experts at UC Davis and North Dakota State University said some of the most vulnerable commodities include pistachios, dairy products, wine and almonds, all of which are exported in large quantities to China.

“The worst-case scenario is pretty bleak,” said Sandro Steinbach, director of North Dakota State University’s Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies. “Basically, tariffs are harmful to U.S. agriculture, and to California agriculture in particular, because they will invite tariff retaliation.”

Advertisement

The researchers analyzed three scenarios of potential U.S. tariffs, two of them based on proposals floated by Trump and his campaign. They wrote that if the Trump administration were to impose large tariffs under the most extreme scenario, retaliatory measures by other countries “would have a ripple effect across the state, from the large almond orchards in the Central Valley to the small family vineyards scattered throughout wine country.”

Steinbach co-authored the research with UC Davis emeritus professor Colin A. Carter and North Dakota State doctoral researcher Yasin Yildirim.

They noted that California’s farmers previously experienced financial losses during Trump’s first administration, when the adoption of U.S. tariffs in 2018 prompted China to retaliate with tariffs on American agricultural goods. That hit California’s exports of major farm products, bringing losses for growers of walnuts, almonds and other crops.

The researchers said farmers in the Midwest received significant federal subsidies to cushion the blow in 2018 and 2019, but that California farmers were largely left out of the government compensation.

“If a new wave of aggressive protectionist policies is enacted, California’s agricultural exports could face similar consequences — up to $6 billion in annual losses — especially in key industries like pistachios, dairy, and wine,” the economists wrote.

Advertisement

“Rather than pursuing policies that invite global retaliatory measures, the United States should work toward more balanced trade agreements that protect domestic industries without sparking harmful trade wars,” they said. “All countries involved in a trade war lose, and California agriculture simply cannot afford another trade war.”

The research was published by the University of California’s Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics.

The researchers studied one scenario in which the U.S. would impose a 10% import tariff on all goods from every country. They also examined an extreme scenario in which the U.S. would impose a 60% tariff on Chinese goods and a 10% tariff on imports from all other countries.

More recently, Trump has promised to impose 25% tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico, and also an additional 10% tariff on imports from China.

“The scale of a potential trade war and subsequent retaliation is considerably larger than we have seen before,” Steinbach said.

Advertisement

The extent of the economic damage for California’s agriculture industry, and for producers of different crops, will depend on which approach Trump takes, Steinbach said. For example, if large U.S. tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods trigger retaliatory measures by those countries, California sellers of processed tomatoes would be hit especially hard because they depend on those countries to buy more than half of their exports.

In addition to the immediate losses the industry would face in a trade war, the costs of the disruptions probably would be lasting, Steinbach said, as foreign competitors take a larger market share and as uncertainty leads investors to put less money into California agriculture.

“We have climate uncertainty already. We have water policy uncertainty,” Steinbach said. “And if you add now an additional layer of trade and tariff policy on top of it, why would I want to invest a large amount of money into producing agricultural commodities?”

The researchers said farming areas in the Central Valley and Southern California are especially vulnerable to economic damage. They projected that five counties — Fresno, Kern, Tulare, Merced and Imperial — probably would bear the brunt of the losses in a trade war, accounting for 53% of the estimated total losses.

A majority of voters in each of those five counties voted for Trump in the election.

Advertisement

In the case of pistachios, the crop is considered especially vulnerable because China accounts for a large share of California’s exports. Growers have also planted vast new pistachio orchards over the last decade, dramatically expanding production as they have sought to capitalize on the lucrative crop.

The researchers said that in a worst-case scenario, pistachio exports alone could suffer annual losses of up to $1 billion.

Other commodities that are projected to see substantial declines in exports include hay, walnuts, rice, beef, grapes, oranges and cotton.

Agriculture uses much of the water that is diverted and pumped in California. But Steinbach said the potential effects on farms’ water use, both regionally and statewide, are uncertain and will depend on a complex mix of factors.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has strongly criticized Trump’s plan to impose tariffs on Mexico and Canada. During a visit to the U.S.-Mexico border in San Diego County on Thursday, Newsom described the planned tariffs as a tax that would boost food prices for Americans and add to inflation.

Advertisement

“Don’t think for a second this won’t impact you,” Newsom said.

The governor said that California will be affected more severely than any other state, and that farmers and ranchers “will be impacted disproportionately if these tariffs go into effect.” He said that’s before considering Trump’s plan to carry out mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, who are a large portion of California’s farmworkers.

“I hope we could all agree the impacts on this region and your pocketbook will universally be felt regardless of your politics,” Newsom said. “That’s a betrayal that needs to be revealed to those that embraced and supported this agenda. That betrayal is taking place in real time. You are being betrayed by these policies.”

Trump’s transition team responded in a written statement, saying the president-elect’s policies will benefit all Americans.

“President Trump has promised tariff policies that protect the American manufacturers and working men and women from the unfair practices of foreign companies and foreign markets,” Trump transition team spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said in the statement.

Advertisement

Shannon Douglass, president of the California Farm Bureau, said in an email that the state’s agriculture business “has faced significant challenges due to past trade disputes.”

“We advocate for fair trade practices and urge the federal government to prioritize policies that protect and strengthen the viability and sustainability of our nation’s agricultural sector,” Douglass said.

The plans for tariffs bring additional uncertainty for almond growers who have already been struggling because of declines in prices over the last decade. Some of those declines resulted from the last round of retaliatory tariffs imposed by China in 2018.

This year, almond prices have begun to increase again.

“The market’s rebounding. It’s coming back. Growers are still hurting,” said Jake Wenger, general manager of the Salida Hulling Assn., which runs an almond-hulling plant in Modesto. “This year, people should at least be able to pay their bills, but I do know of growers that have had to sell off some of their land to pay bills, to pay debts, just to stay in business.”

Advertisement

Wenger said there are about 110 growers in his co-op, but he hasn’t heard anyone voicing concerns about tariffs.

“I don’t think anybody’s that worried,” he said. “There are going to be some changes, yep, but we’ll see what happens, what changes do come, and we’ll roll with the punches, like farmers always do.”

Keith Schneller, the trade policy advisor for the Almond Board of California, said the almond industry “continues to support reducing barriers to trade.”

“We are following these discussions,” he said, “but until the next administration’s agriculture and trade policy positions are more defined, it is difficult to know what the implications might be for California almonds.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

Published

on

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

new video loaded: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

transcript

transcript

President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake which looks like under investigation is going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.” “Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here. But that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You crossed the border illegally — we’ll find you. Break our laws — we’ll punish you.” “Did you bid out those service contracts?” “Yes they did. They went out to a competitive bid.” “I’m asking you — sorry to interrupt — but the president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. Did it correctly —” Did the president know you were going to do this?” “Yes.” “I’m more excited about just ready to get started. There’s a lot of work we can do to get the Department of Homeland Security working for the American people.”

Advertisement
President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

By Jackeline Luna

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

Published

on

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is continuing its investigation into former President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen in the final months of his administration — focusing on pardons and commutations — though a senior official said Biden is unlikely to face criminal exposure.

A senior DOJ official told Fox News the autopen investigation is ongoing and not closed, adding investigators are reviewing clemency actions taken in the final months of the Biden administration.

The official also pointed out, however, that the use of an autopen by a sitting president is “established law.”

The issue under review is whether the autopen was used in violation of the law, specifically, whether Biden personally approved each name included on pardon and commutation lists.

Advertisement

A framed portrait shows former President Joe Biden’s signature and an autopen along “The Presidential Walk of Fame” outside the Oval Office of the White House.  (Andrew Harnick/Getty Images)

“These types of cases are tough. Executive privilege issues come into play,” the official said.

What is also clear, the official indicated, is that the target of any potential prosecution would not likely be Biden.

“It’s hard to imagine how [Biden] could be criminally liable for pardon power,” the senior DOJ official said.

BIDEN’S AUTOPEN PARDONS DISTURBED DOJ BRASS, DOCS SHOW, RAISING QUESTIONS WHETHER THEY ARE LEGALLY BINDING

Advertisement

The use of the autopen by former President Joe Biden remains under investigation. (AP Photo)

The official noted that one reason the former president would be unlikely to face charges stems from a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that originally involved current President Donald Trump but would also apply to Biden.

“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States in 2024. 

“At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.”

Sources familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team continues to review the Biden White House’s reliance on an autopen, contradicting a recent New York Times report that indicated the investigation had been paused.

Advertisement

DOJ SIGNALS IT’S STILL DIGGING INTO BIDEN AUTOPEN USE DESPITE REPORTS PROBE FIZZLED

President Donald Trump has pushed for consequences for former President Joe Biden’s alleged use of the autopen. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Trump has pushed for consequences over the autopen controversy, alleging on social media that aides acted unlawfully in its use and raising the prospect of perjury charges against Biden.

Biden has rejected those claims, saying in a statement last year he personally directed the decisions in question.

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,” Biden said. “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

Advertisement

The House Oversight Committee has homed in on Biden’s clemency actions, including five controversial pardons for family members in the final days of his presidency, citing what it described as a lack of “contemporaneous documentation” confirming that Biden directly ordered the pardons.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The committee asked the DOJ to investigate “all of former President Biden’s executive actions, particularly clemency actions, to assess whether legal action must be taken to void any action that the former president did not, in fact, take himself.”

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Oliver contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Related Article

Top Biden officials questioned and criticized how his team issued pardons, used autopen: report
Continue Reading

Politics

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Published

on

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Despite a plea from the head of the California Democratic Party for underperforming candidates to drop out of the governor’s race, all but one of the party’s top hopefuls spurned the request.

Party leaders fear the growing possibility that the crowded field will split the Democratic electorate in the state’s June top-two primary election and result in two Republicans advancing to the November ballot, ensuring a Republican governor being elected for the first time since 2006.

His advice largely unheeded, state party Chairman Rusty Hicks on Thursday said the fate of a Democratic victory now rests squarely on the gubernatorial candidates who flouted him.

“The candidates for Governor now have a chance to showcase a viable path to win,” Hicks said in a statement Thursday.

Eight top Democratic candidates filed the official paperwork to appear on the June ballot after Hicks released a letter on Tuesday urging those “who cannot show meaningful progress towards winning” to drop out. Friday is the deadline to file to appear on the primary election ballot. On March 21, the secretary of state’s office will formally announce who will appear on the June ballot.

Advertisement

“It sounded like someone who has his head in the sand,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said of Hicks’ open letter. “[Most] of us filed within 24 hours of getting that letter. It created some press but not much else. It didn’t impact [most] of the candidates and it certainly didn’t impact my candidacy.”

Democratic strategist Elizabeth Ashford said it was appropriate for Hicks and other Democratic leaders to make a public plea as opposed to keeping such discussions solely behind closed doors.

But the response showed the limited power of the modern-day party bosses.

“It’s definitely not Tammany Hall,” said Ashford, referring to the storied Democratic political machine that had a grip on New York City politics for nearly a century. “The party and Rusty are influential and they are helpful and that is their role. I don’t think anyone would be comfortable with outright public strong-arming of specific candidates.”

Ashford, who worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with former Vice President Kamala Harris when she served as state attorney general, added that the minimal power of the state GOP is likely a factor in the dynamics of Democrats’ decision to stay in the race. Democratic registered voters outnumber Republicans by almost a 2-to-1 margin in the state, and Democrats control every statewide elected office and hold supermajorities in both chambers of the California Legislature.

Advertisement

“If there were a strong viable opposition that existed, if the Republican Party was actually relevant in California, I think that would sort of force greater unity amongst Democrats,” she said.

Just one of the nine major Democrats did heed the party chair’s message. Ian Calderon, a former Los Angeles-area Assemblyman who consistently polled near the bottom of the field, withdrew from the race and endorsed Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) on Thursday.

Candidates cannot withdraw their name from the ballot once they officially file to run for office, leading to some fears that even if other candidates drop out of the race, a crowded primary ballot could still split California’s liberal votes.

“I’m disappointed most of them will be on the ballot,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the head of the California Federation of Labor Unions, which will announce whether it endorses in the governor’s race on March 16. But “I do still think you can have people drop out of the race or become viable. I think that there are candidates who know viability is a real thing they have to show in coming weeks” before ballots start being mailed to voters.

Jodi Hicks, chief executive and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said she is “still worried” about the prospect of two Republicans winning the top two spots in the June primary, shutting Democrats out of any chance of winning the governor’s office in November.

Advertisement

“I didn’t have any specifics of who I wanted to do what,” she said. “I’m just very, very concerned and the stakes are really high right now and seem to be getting worse by the day.”

Republican candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, said he is “confident that I’ll be in the top two” along with a Democratic candidate. “I find it very difficult to believe that the Democratic Party will just surrender California and allow two Republicans to be in the top two.”

Hilton made the comments Thursday after a gubernatorial forum in Sacramento hosted by the California Assn. of Realtors focused on housing and homeownership. Villaraigosa, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and former Rep. Katie Porter also attended. Swalwell, who is currently in Washington, joined the panel virtually.

During the panel, candidates were in broad agreement about the need to reduce barriers and costs in order to build more housing in California, where the median single-family home costs more than $820,000. Many also endorsed proposals to disincentivize private investment firms from buying up homes as well as a $25-billion bond proposed by former Sen. Bob Hertzberg to help first-time homebuyers afford a down payment.

“This really isn’t a debate because we’re agreeing so much with each other,” Hilton said at one point during the event.

Advertisement

That political alignment on one of the most pressing issues facing California may explain why voters are having such a difficult time deciding who to support.

A recent poll of the Public Policy Institute of California found that the five candidates topping the crowded field were within 4 percentage points of one another: Porter, Swalwell, Hilton, Democratic hedge fund founder Tom Steyer and Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. Earlier polls had Hilton and Bianco leading the field, though many voters remained undecided.

Some candidates took issue with Hicks’ push to cull the field, noting that most of the lower-polling candidates he asked to drop out are people of color.

“Our political system is rigged, corrupted by the political elites, the wealthy and well connected,” state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, who is Black and Latino, said in a video posted on social media in response to the open letter. “The California Democratic Party is essentially telling every person of color in the race for Governor to drop out.”

Villaraigosa argued that enough voters remain undecided that it was too early for quality candidates to call it quits.

Advertisement

“Most people don’t even know who’s in the race,” said Villaraigosa. “It’s premature to be thinking about getting out of the race. I certainly am not considering it and I feel no pressure.”

Aside from the opinion polls, other indicators on who may emerge from the pack a candidates are slowly emerging.

Though it wasn’t enough to win the party’s endorsement, Swalwell won support from 24% of delegates at the state Democratic convention last month, the most of any party candidate.

While spending is no guarantee of success, Steyer has donated $47.4 million of his own wealth to his campaign. Mahan, who recently entered the race and is supported by Silicon Valley leaders, has quickly raised millions of dollars, as have two independent expenditures committees backing his bid.

Ashford said part of candidates’ decisions to remain in the race could have been driven by their lengthy political careers, as well as Democrats’ crushing November redistricting victory.

Advertisement

“In several cases, these are people who have won statewide office,” she said. “It’s tough to feel like there may not be a sequel to that.”

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta from Los Angeles.

Continue Reading

Trending