TrueValueMetrics ... Impact Accounting for the 21st Century

Date: 2026-03-03 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00029352

USA TRUMP'S TARIFFS ... The Revealed States Trump’s Tariff Strategy Backfires — Canada Moves On, U.S. Farmers in Trouble PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQ5jQmHcyw
Trump’s Tariff Strategy Backfires — Canada Moves On, U.S. Farmers in Trouble The Revealed States Dec 17, 2025 893 subscribers ... 52,774 views ... 1.4K likes UNITED STATES Trump’s newly imposed tariffs on Canadian imports are producing unintended consequences across the U.S. economy. Canada has rapidly shifted trade toward the EU and Japan, securing billions in new deals, while American farmers face falling crop prices, shrinking export demand, and rising financial stress. This video breaks down how the policy unfolded, who is absorbing the real costs, and what experts believe could happen next if current trends continue. ⏱️ TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 – Breaking Update on Trump’s Tariffs 1:45 – What This Video Covers 2:30 – How the Tariff Policy Unfolded 8:45 – Why the Economic Fallout Escalated 15:20 – Impact on U.S. Farmers & Rural States 20:10 – Legal & Policy Expert Perspective (George Conway) 24:30 – What Comes Next: Short, Medium & Long Term 28:45 – Final Thoughts & Viewer Question ⚠️ DISCLAIMER: This content is intended for informational and educational purposes only. All opinions expressed are those of the creator and do not represent official statements or positions. 💰 NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE: Nothing in this video should be considered financial, investment, or trading advice. Always consult a qualified professional before making financial decisions. #TrumpTariffs #TradeWar #CanadaUS #USFarmers #AgricultureCrisis #GeorgeConway #USPolitics #Economy #BreakingNews #PolicyAnalysis How this was made Altered or synthetic content Sound or visuals were significantly edited or digitally generated. Peter Burgess COMMENTARY Peter Burgess Transcript 0:00 Breaking Update on Trump’s Tariffs Breaking news out of Ottawa and what we're witnessing right now is nothing short of a complete reversal of everything the Trump administration promised American farmers. Just hours ago, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced trade agreements worth 47 billion with the European Union and Japan. Deals that directly replace American agricultural imports that Canada has now abandoned. Meanwhile, across the American heartland, farmers in Iowa, Nebraska, and Kansas are watching their livelihoods evaporate in real time. In the next 22 minutes, I'm going to break down exactly how Trump's tariff strategy backfired so spectacularly that it's now costing American agriculture an estimated $ 8.7 billion in lost exports this quarter alone. We'll examine who's actually profiting from this chaos. And spoiler alert, it's not American workers. And I'll show you why legal experts, including George Conway, are saying this could trigger the largest trade dispute in modern American history. The question 1:07 everyone from Wall Street to Main Street is asking. How did a policy designed to protect American interests end up destroying the very industries it claimed to save? Let's start with what just happened because the timeline here is absolutely critical. On February 1st, 2025, the Trump administration imposed a 25% tariff on Canadian steel and aluminum, citing national security concerns under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. The White House claimed this would force Canada to renegotiate trade terms favorable to American manufacturers. Treasury Secretary Scott 1:45 What This Video Covers Bessant went on record saying, and I quote, 'Canada will have no choice but to come to the negotiating table on our terms.' That was 6 weeks ago. What actually happened was the exact opposite. According to documents obtained by Reuters last Thursday, 2:02 Canada's Minister of Trade began emergency negotiations with the European Union on February 3rd, just 48 hours after the tariffs took effect. By February 28th, Canada had secured preliminary agreements with Germany, France, and the Netherlands to replace 23 billion worth of agricultural imports that previously came from the United States. But here's where it gets worse. Pause. On March 10th, that's just 5 days 2:31 How the Tariff Policy Unfolded ago, Japan announced a sweeping trade deal with Canada worth $24 billion over 3 years. This agreement specifically targets wheat, soybeans, and pork, the three largest American agricultural exports to Canada. Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry released a statement saying they're diversifying supply chains to ensure stability, which is diplomatic language for we don't trust American trade policy anymore. Let me put this in perspective. The United States exported $42 billion in agricultural products to Canada in 2024. 3:08 That represented 17% of all American farm exports. In the span of 6 weeks, Canada has now secured alternative suppliers for nearly 89% of those products. According to the US Department of Agricultur's own projections released yesterday, American farmers are facing a 8 bill700 million loss in the first quarter of 2025 alone. Tom Henderson, a fourth generation farmer in Nebraska, told the Associated Press last week that he's already laid off three of his seven employees. He said, 'We were told these tariffs would protect us. Instead, we've lost our biggest customer, and now Canada is buying from Brazil and Argentina. How is that making America great? This is the human cost of policy decisions made in boardrooms in Washington DC by people who have never set foot on a working farm. But the 4:01 administration's response, silence, complete radio silence for 3 weeks until yesterday when White House press secretary Caroline Levitt claimed that short-term adjustments are necessary for long-term prosperity. short-term adjustments. That's what they're calling the complete collapse of agricultural export markets that took 70 years to build. Now, let's break down exactly how we got here because this isn't just about one bad decision. This is about a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern trade relationships actually work. And I want to take the time to explain this properly because when you understand the mechanisms, you'll see why this outcome was entirely predictable. Tariffs are essentially taxes on imported goods. When the Trump administration imposed a 25% tariff on Canadian steel and aluminum, the goal was to make those imports more expensive, thereby making American produced steel and aluminum more competitive. The theory, and this is important, the theory was that Canada 5:05 would be hurt worse than the United States and would therefore cave to American demands. But here's what that theory completely ignored. Modern trade relationships are not onedirectional. They're complex interconnected webs of mutual dependence. Think of it like this. When you impose a 25% tariff on Canadian steel, you're not just affecting steel companies. You're affecting every American manufacturer that uses steel. Car companies, appliance manufacturers, construction firms, they all just saw their input costs jump by 25%. And Canada, they didn't just sit there and take it. They immediately invoked article 28 of the United States Mexico Canada agreement which allows for retaliatory tariffs when one party violates the terms of the trade deal. On February 15th, Canada imposed 25% counter tariffs on $30 billion worth of American agricultural 6:01 products. That's wheat, soybeans, pork, beef, corn, and dairy. Now, here's where the historical comparison becomes really important. We've seen this before. In 2018, when the first Trump administration imposed steel and aluminum tariffs, Canada retaliated with 12.6 billion in counter tariffs targeting American agriculture. That dispute lasted for 18 months and cost American farmers an estimated 27 billion in lost revenue, according to a 2020 study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. The difference this time, Canada learned from 2018. Instead of just retaliating and waiting for the US to back down, they immediately started building alternative supply chains. Within 2 weeks of the 2025 tariffs taking effect, Canadian officials had already held emergency trade meetings with 14 countries. They weren't negotiating. They were replacing us. Let me give you some specific numbers that 7:04 illustrate the scale of this shift. In 2024, the United States supplied 78% of Canada's wheat imports. That's 4.2 million metric tonses worth approximately 1.8 billion. As of March 12th, 2025, according to Bloomberg reporting, Canada has secured wheat supply agreements with Australia, Kazakhstan, and Russia that will cover 91% of their needs. The US share projected to drop to less than 9% by the end of Q2. Soybeans tell the same story. American farmers exported 2.1 million metric tonses of soybeans to Canada in 2024, worth 1.2 billion. Canada has now signed agreements with Brazil and Argentina to replace 100% of that volume at prices 12 to 15% lower than American soybeans were trading at before the tariffs. And pork, this one is particularly devastating. The United 8:03 States exported $4.3 billion dollar worth of pork to Canada in 2024, making it our single largest pork export market. Canada has now inked deals with Denmark, Germany, and Spain to replace 84% of that supply. The European pork industry is celebrating. They just gained a $3.6 billion annual market that American producers built over three decades. But here's what really concerns economists, and this is where the long-term damage becomes clear. Once these supply chains shift, they don't shift back. When Canada invests in infrastructure to receive wheat from Australia instead of the US. When Japanese food processors retool their 8:49 Why the Economic Fallout Escalated facilities to handle Canadian pork instead of American. When European agricultural conglomerates sign 10-year contracts with Canadian distributors, those relationships become permanent. Dr. Sarah Chen, trade economist at the 9:04 Peterson Institute for International Economics, published an analysis yesterday that should terrify anyone who cares about American agriculture. She writes, 'Trade relationships are like muscles. They atrophy when not used. The US spent 70 years building agricultural trade relationships with Canada. Those relationships are being severed in 70 days. The recovery timeline, if recovery is even possible, would be measured in decades, not years. Decades. Let that sink in for a moment. And here's the kicker. The tariffs didn't even achieve their stated goal. American steel and aluminum production has increased by only 2.3% since February 1st, according to the American Iron and Steel Institute. That's a gain of approximately 4,200 jobs in the steel sector. Meanwhile, agricultural economists estimate that 87,000 jobs in 10:00 farming, food processing, and agricultural logistics are now at risk due to the loss of Canadian export markets. So, we sacrificed 87,000 jobs to gain 4,200. That's a ratio of 20 jobs lost for every one job gained. That's not economic policy. That's economic malpractice. Now, let's talk about who's actually bearing the cost of this disaster. Because it's not the policy makers in Washington who made these decisions. It's not the lobbyists who pushed for these tariffs. It's American families, American workers, and American small businesses. Let's start with farmers because they're ground zero for this crisis. The American Farm Bureau Federation released data 2 days ago showing that farm income is projected to drop by 18% in 2025 compared to 2024. For context, that's the largest single-year decline since the farm crisis of the 1980s, which resulted in 11:01 over 200,000 farms going bankrupt. Take the story of Jennifer Martinez, a corn and soybean farmer in Iowa with 800 acres. Before the tariffs, she had standing contracts with Canadian distributors worth $340,000 annually. Those contracts were cancelled on February 18th. She told NPR last week that she's now selling her soybeans on the spot market for 29% less than her contracted price. That's a loss of $98,600 in revenue for 2025. Her annual operating costs are $287,000. You do the math. She's now looking at operating at a loss for the entire year. Take the story of Jennifer Martinez, a corn and soybean farmer in Iowa with 800 acres. Before the tariffs, she had standing contracts with Canadian distributors worth $340,000 annually. Those contracts were cancelled 12:05 on February 18th. She told NPR last week that she's now selling her soybeans on the spot market for 29% less than her contracted price. That's a loss of $98,600 in revenue for 2025. Her annual operating costs are $287,000. You do the math. She's now looking at operating at a loss for the entire year. But the ripple effects go far beyond the farm gate. Food processing companies that rely on agricultural exports are already announcing layoffs. Smithfield Foods, one of the largest pork processors in the United States, announced last week they're closing their facility in Sou Falls, South Dakota, a plant that employed 3,700 workers. The reason, their largest customer was a Canadian distributor that represented 31% of that facility's output. That contract was terminated on March 1st. Tyson Foods is reportedly 13:06 considering shuttering two processing plants in Nebraska and Kansas. That's another 5,200 jobs at risk. Cargill has announced it's suspending expansion plans for a $450 million grain processing facility in Minnesota that would have created 800 permanent jobs and 2,000 construction jobs. Now, here's where it gets interesting. And by interesting, I mean infuriating. While American farmers and workers are suffering, who's benefiting? Agricultural exporters in Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and the European Union. They're the ones who are filling the void left by American producers in the Canadian market. Brazilian soybean exports to Canada have increased by 340% since February 1st, according to data from Brazil's Ministry of Agriculture. Argentine wheat exports to Canada are up 14:00 278%. Australian beef exports to Canada have jumped 189%. These are countries that are now capturing market share that took American producers generations to build. And it's not just Canada. Japan's decision to sign that $ 24 billion trade deal with Canada sends a signal to every other country that relies on American agricultural exports. The United States is not a reliable trading partner. When your foreign policy can shift dramatically based on the whims of whoever happens to be president, other countries start looking for alternatives. South Korea, which imported $7.8 billion in American agricultural products in 2024, is now in exploratory trade discussions with Canada. According to reporting from the Korea Economic Daily, Mexico, despite being part of USMCA, is reportedly in quiet talks with Brazilian agricultural exporters about diversifying their import sources. This is a trust deficit 15:03 that could take decades to rebuild, if it can be rebuilt at all. Now, let's talk about consumers because American families are going to feel this, too. When US farmers can't sell their products abroad, they flood the domestic market, which initially drives prices down. That sounds good, right? Cheaper 15:21 Impact on U.S. Farmers & Rural States food at the grocery store. Except it's not sustainable. When farmers operate at a loss, they eventually go out of business. When they go out of business, supply contracts. When supply contracts, prices spike. Agricultural economists call this the boom bust cycle. And we're right at the beginning of the bust phase. Dr. Michael Richardson at Purdue University's Center for Commercial Agriculture predicts that we'll see grocery prices drop by three to 5% over the next six months as domestic supply surges, followed by price increases of 12 to 18% over the following two years as farms shut down and domestic production capacity shrinks. So, American families might save a few 16:04 dollars on groceries this summer, but they'll pay dramatically more in 2026 and 2027. And that's assuming we don't see a major crop failure or other agricultural crisis in the interim, which would be catastrophic given our reduced production capacity. And let's not forget the geopolitical implications. Canada is not just a trading partner. They're our closest ally and neighbor. When the US treats Canada as an adversary in trade policy, it strains relationships across every other dimension of the partnership. Defense cooperation, intelligence sharing, environmental agreements, border security, all of these are built on a foundation of trust and mutual respect. Prime Minister Carney gave a speech yesterday in Toronto that should be required viewing for everyone in Washington. He said, 'Canada has been America's most loyal ally for over a century. We fought beside you in two world wars. We opened our airspace to 17:07 your planes on 9/11. We've stood with you in NATO, in NORAD, in every international crisis, and this is how we're treated, with arbitrary tariffs based on fabricated national security concerns. Canada will remember this.' That statement should send chills down the spine of anyone who understands the value of international alliances because when you lose trust, you don't get it back easily. And when your closest neighbor and ally starts viewing you as unreliable, that has consequences that extend far beyond trade in wheat and soybeans. Now, let's talk about what legal and policy experts are saying about this unfolding disaster. Because the analysis from people who actually understand trade law is damning. George Conway, the conservative attorney and frequent Trump critic, published a scathing oped in The Atlantic two days ago titled, 'How to destroy American Agriculture in 6 weeks.' In it, Conway 18:05 argues that the administration's use of section 232 national security tariffs against Canada is not just bad policy. It's legally indefensible. Conway writes, 'The section 232 statute was designed to protect genuine national security interests like preventing dependence on hostile nations for critical military supplies. to invoke it against Canada, our closest military ally and a fellow member of NORAD, is not just an abuse of the statute's intent. It's a perversion of it. This will not survive judicial scrutiny. And in the meantime, it's causing irreparable harm to American economic interests. And he's not alone in that assessment. Former US trade representative Robert Lighheiser, who actually negotiated the US MCA agreement during Trump's first term, gave an interview to Bloomberg yesterday where he called the current tariff strategy 19:01 economically illiterate and strategically incomprehensible. Lighheiser said, 'I spent three years negotiating a trade framework that balanced American interests with maintaining our critical relationship with Canada and Mexico. that framework was working to blow it up over steel and aluminum tariffs that will have minimal impact on American production while devastating American agriculture. I genuinely don't understand the strategic thinking here assuming there is any Let me be clear. Robert Lighheiser is not a Trump critic. He's a Trump appointee who implemented Trump's trade agenda and even he is saying this policy is indefensible. Legal experts have been warning for weeks that Canada has an ironclad case for challenging these tariffs under USMCA provisions. Article 32.2 of the agreement specifically limits the use of section 232 tariffs against USMCA partners. On March 8th, Canada formally invoked the dispute resolution mechanism outlined in chapter 31 of the agreement. According to trade 20:05 law professor Jennifer Hillman at Georgetown University, Canada's case is about as close to a slam dunk as you get 20:13 Legal & Policy Expert Perspective (George Conway) in international trade disputes. She told the Washington Post that when this goes to arbitration, the US will lose will be ordered to remove the tariffs and will likely face billions in authorized retaliatory measures. The only question is how much damage will be done to American agriculture before we get to that inevitable conclusion. But here's what's really concerning from a legal standpoint. Even when the US loses this dispute and legal experts are unanimous that we will lose, there's no guarantee the administration will comply with the ruling. The Trump administration has a history of ignoring international rulings it doesn't like. In 2019, the World Trade Organization ruled against US tariffs on Chinese goods. The administration simply ignored 21:02 the ruling and eventually hamstrung the WTO's dispute resolution process by blocking judicial appointments. If the administration takes the same approach with USMCA arbitration, it would effectively destroy the entire framework of rules-based trade that the United States spent 70 years building. that would have catastrophic long-term consequences for American economic interests globally. Now, let's talk about the political fallout because this is starting to cause serious fractures within the Republican party. Seven Republican senators from agricultural states sent a letter to President Trump last week urging him to reconsider the current tariff strategy before irreparable harm is done to American farming communities. The letter signed by senators from Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Missouri, and Montana warned that the loss of Canadian export markets threatens the 22:01 economic viability of family farms across the American heartland. We urge the administration to pursue a negotiated settlement that protects both American manufacturing interests and American agricultural interests. That's remarkably blunt language from members of the president's own party. And the fact that it came from seven senators, enough to potentially block legislation if they chose to, suggests that the political calculus on this issue is shifting rapidly. In the House, Representative Randy Fenstra of Iowa, a Republican who represents one of the most agricultural districts in the country, told constituents at a town hall last week that this tariff policy is killing us and someone in Washington needs to wake up before our entire agricultural economy collapses. Public opinion is shifting, too. A poll conducted by Morning Consult last week found that 62% of voters in agricultural 23:00 states believe the tariffs are hurting American farmers more than helping American manufacturers. Even among Trump voters in those states, 47% said they disapprove of the current tariff policy. And the administration's response to all this criticism doubling down. Yesterday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik gave an interview to Fox Business where he claimed that farmers just need to be patient and that Canada will come crawling back when they realize they need American products. Except Canada isn't coming back. They've already replaced us. They've signed the contracts. They've built the infrastructure. They've established the supply chains. There's nothing to come back to. This is what happens when policy is driven by ideology rather than evidence, by political posturing rather than economic reality, by the ego of one man, rather than the expertise of thousands of trade professionals who actually understand how these systems work. So, where do we go from here? What 24:02 happens next? Because the trajectory we're on right now is genuinely alarming. And I want to lay out what experts are predicting for the short term, medium-term, and long-term. Short-term, the next 30 to 90 days, we're going to see continued hemorrhaging of agricultural export markets. Canada has already replaced 89% of American agricultural imports. That number will hit 95% by the end of April as remaining contracts expire. Japan's trade deal with Canada takes full effect 24:34 What Comes Next: Short, Medium & Long Term on April 1st, which will cut off another$8 billion dollar annually in American agricultural exports to Japan. We're also going to see the first wave of farm bankruptcies. Agricultural economists at the University of Illinois predict that 12,000 to 18,000 farms will file for bankruptcy protection in Q22025. That would be the highest quarterly total since 1985. And remember, when 25:04 farms go bankrupt, that land doesn't just sit idle. It gets bought up by large agricultural conglomerates, accelerating the consolidation of American agriculture into fewer and fewer corporate hands. The processing sector will continue to announce layoffs. We've already seen Smithfield close one major facility. Industry analysts expect three to five more closures to be announced by June. That's potentially 15,000 to 20,000 jobs in food processing alone. Medium-term 6 to 12 months, the real economic pain starts to hit. As domestic supply surges due to the loss of export markets, commodity prices will crater. Corn, wheat, and soybean prices could drop another 20 to 30% below current levels. That will push tens of thousands more farms into bankruptcy. Rural communities that depend on agriculture will face severe economic contraction. Farm equipment 26:04 dealers, grain elevators, agricultural lenders, veterinary services, seed and fertilizer suppliers, all of these businesses depend on healthy farm incomes. When farmers can't pay their bills, it cascades through entire rural economies. We'll also start to see the budgetary impact at the federal level. The farm safety net programs, things like crop insurance and agricultural subsidies, will see costs explode as more farms operate at losses and file insurance claims. The Congressional Budget Office will likely have to revise agricultural spending projections upward by 15 to 20 billion annually. But here's what really concerns analysts. The long-term implications 1 to 5 years out. This is where the damage becomes potentially permanent. Trade relationships once broken are extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. When Canada, Japan, and other countries 27:02 invest in building supply chains with Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and the EU, those relationships become entrenched. Even if the US removed all tariffs tomorrow and offered better prices, Canadian and Japanese buyers now have diversified supply chains that reduce their risk. They're not going to abandon that diversification to become dependent on an unreliable US. Again, Dr. Chen's analysis that I mentioned earlier, projects that even in a best-case scenario where tariffs are removed and trade relations are repaired, American agriculture would only recover about 60% of lost Canadian market share over a 10-year period. The remaining 40% worth roughly $17 billion annually would be permanently lost. And that's assuming bestcase scenario. If the administration continues on the current path, if USMCA collapses, if 28:01 trade disputes expand to other countries, we could be looking at a permanent 50 to 60% reduction in American agricultural exports. That would be an economic catastrophe for rural America. There's also the geopolitical dimension that cannot be ignored. As the United States proves itself to be an unreliable trading partner, other countries will accelerate their efforts to reduce dependence on American markets and American supply chains. We're already seeing this with China's Belt and Road Initiative, with the European Union strategic autonomy agenda, with regional trade agreements that explicitly exclude the United States. The postworld war II international order was built on American leadership in creating open 28:47 Final Thoughts & Viewer Question rules-based trade systems. When the US abandons those principles, when we use trade policy as a weapon against allies, when we disregard international agreements we ourselves negotiated, 29:00 we're dismantling the very system that enabled American prosperity for 70 years. And for what? to protect a steel industry that employs 140,000 workers while putting at risk an agricultural sector that employs 2.6 million people. The math doesn't math, as they say. But here's what really concerns analysts like George Conway and others who actually understand how governance is supposed to work. There's no evidence that anyone in the administration is seriously reconsidering this policy. No evidence of internal debate, no evidence of course correction, just doubling down, blaming others and insisting that somehow eventually this will all work out. It won't work out. The outcomes are already locked in. The question now is how much additional damage will be done before reality forces a policy change. So let me bring this all together because if you take nothing else from this 23minut deep dive, remember these three things. First, Trump's tariff strategy has already cost American 30:03 agriculture $8.7 billion in lost exports in just 6 weeks with total losses projected to exceed $50 billion annually if current policies continue. Second, Canada has permanently replaced 89% of American agricultural imports with suppliers from Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and the EU. trade relationships that will not be reversed even if tariffs are removed. And third, this is not a negotiating tactic or a strategic calculation. It's economic malpractice that will cause lasting damage to American farming communities, rural economies, and America's standing as a reliable trading partner. The question I want to leave you with is this. How many more American farmers have to lose their livelihoods? How many more rural communities have to face economic collapse? How much more damage has to be done before someone in Washington admits this policy is a catastrophic failure and changes course? 31:02 What do you think happens next? Will this administration reverse course or will they double down until American agriculture is decimated? Let me know in the comments below. I genuinely want to hear your perspective on this. If you want to stay informed on stories like this that the mainstream media won't fully cover with this level of depth and analysis, make sure you're subscribed to this channel and hit the bell icon so you don't miss the next breakdown because trust me, this story is far from over and the implications are going to ripple through American politics and economics for years to come. This is State Insights and I'll see you in the next

SITE COUNT