By Clint Thompson
The U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement was officially terminated on Monday. The controversial agreement failed to stop Mexican tomato companies from dumping their product into the U.S. market.
Its termination also led the Trump administration to impose a 17% antidumping duty on more than $1 billion of tomato imports from Mexico.
The Commerce Department’s decision to terminate the agreement, which started with its announced intention on April 14, came in response to a 2023 petition from the tomato industry, which was supported by more than 60 bipartisan members of Congress from 11 states, the American Farm Bureau Federation, state farm bureaus from all nine major tomato-producing states and 15 fruit and vegetable trade associations across the country.
Statement from Florida Tomato Exchange
Robert Guenther, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, discussed Monday’s historic decision.
“Today’s decision is an enormous victory for American tomato farmers and American agriculture. We’re grateful for the decisive, bold and crucial action taken by the Trump administration to terminate the U.S.-Mexico Tomato Suspension Agreement. This decision will protect hardworking American tomato growers from unfair Mexican trading practices and send a strong signal that the Trump Administration is committed to ensuring fair markets for American agriculture,” Guenther said.
“Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick recognized that five previous agreements with Mexico had failed and that strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws is needed to protect the stability of our food supply chain.
“By standing up for American agriculture, the Trump administration has defended the rule of law and prioritized fairness in trade. This action ensures that American consumers will have more choices and higher quality products, while strengthening America’s food system against future disruptions. We commend Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick for his clear-eyed assessment and courageous action in finally terminating this flawed and ineffective agreement.”