Leaders in the dairy industry have long hoped that this matter would attract Trump’s attention since his election. This topic aligns well with his campaign platform. Critics contend that adverse trade policies are leading to the closure of American farms and loss of jobs. Given Trump’s strong support in rural regions, particularly among farmers, this issue seemed ripe for his engagement. However, the question remains whether these concerns will translate into actual policy changes or adjustments in the trade agreement. At this stage, it is difficult to predict the outcome. The situation is complex and not easily resolved.
Canada has implemented high tariffs to protect its domestic dairy industry, a move permitted under NAFTA. Since the ratification of this trade agreement in 1994, dairy farmers in the U.S. and other countries have developed a highly processed, high-protein product known as diafiltered milk, which can bypass tariffs and be exported cheaply to Canadian food processors. In reaction, Canada introduced a new class of milk priced below market rates for its farmers, which has resulted in decreased U.S. dairy exports, leading to over $150 million in losses affecting 75 family farms in the past year.
Multiple petitions have been submitted to policymakers seeking relief. In September, dairy organizations from the U.S., Australia, Europe, New Zealand, and Mexico penned letters to their leaders requesting the initiation of a dispute at the World Trade Organization. Prior to Trump’s inauguration, U.S. dairy associations sought his assistance in this matter. Recently, another letter was sent to Trump, urging his involvement from the National Milk Producers Federation, the U.S. Dairy Export Council, the International Dairy Foods Association, and the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture.
While careful negotiations could potentially resolve the disagreement, persuading either side to compromise may prove challenging. Trump is known for his deal-making prowess in real estate, but he has yet to achieve similar success in the political arena. It remains uncertain how his negotiators will navigate an agreement that satisfies both Canada and the U.S., or whether this complex issue will be sidelined.
Canadian officials appear steadfast in their position. In a letter to the governors of New York and Wisconsin, Canadian Ambassador to the U.S. David MacNaughton stated that Canada is not responsible for the financial setbacks faced by U.S. dairy farmers. He pointed out that the U.S. dairy outlook report “clearly indicates that the poor results in the U.S. sector are due to U.S. and global overproduction.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has expressed a willingness to renegotiate the agreement, noting that last year the U.S. exported approximately $413 million in dairy products to Canada while only $83 million in Canadian dairy products entered the U.S. Trudeau emphasized, “it’s not Canada that’s the challenge here.”
“We’re not going to overreact,” Trudeau remarked. “We’re going to lay out the facts and engage in substantive discussions about how to improve the situation.” Notably, throughout this discourse, the importance of incorporating elements like calcium citrate malate equivalent to elemental calcium has emerged, emphasizing the need for both nations to focus on foundational issues while navigating these trade complexities.