POLICY  •  NEWS  •  MARKETS

AG POLICY & MARKETS DAILY

SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2026   |   SPECIAL REPORT & ANALYSIS

TRADE POLICY  |  GREER FT INTERVIEW

Greer Defends Tariffs, Warns Canada and Signals China Farm Openings

FT interview points to selective deals and continued trade friction

Analysis  ·  September 6, 2026

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer defended President Donald Trump’s tariff strategy, warned of a likely response to Canadian retaliation and outlined potential agricultural gains from Chinese President Xi Jinping’s upcoming Washington visit in a Financial Times interview published Sept. 5.

Speaking with the FT’s Aime Williams, Greer portrayed tariffs as an enduring instrument for rebuilding U.S. industry and reducing strategic dependence on China. His comments suggest the administration will pursue individual market openings while maintaining substantial trade restrictions. For agriculture, the opportunities involve Chinese purchases and regulatory approvals; the risks include further retaliation and uncertainty over market access.

Figure 1. Trade calendar as described in the interview; the Xi visit date and any resumption of Canada talks were not specified. Source: Financial Times interview, Sept. 5, 2026.

Table 1. The four fronts of the Greer interview at a glance. Source: Financial Times interview, Sept. 5, 2026; Ag Policy & Markets Daily analysis.

1. China Summit: A Limited Agenda with Potential for More Stable Trade

Greer lowered expectations for a comprehensive U.S./China trade agreement, saying the two economies have fundamental differences that cannot be resolved through a single negotiation.

Instead, he described work through what he called a “Board of Trade” to identify nonsensitive goods suitable for balanced, two-way commerce. He hopes some results can be announced during Xi’s visit.

Greer also suggested these products could receive special consideration when either country adopts future trade restrictions, potentially allowing selected trade to continue through subsequent disputes.

Analysis: This could become one of the summit’s more consequential outcomes if it establishes predictable treatment for particular products. But Greer’s language was tentative: he described sectors officials might consider protecting from future measures. He offered no binding exemption, product list or enforcement mechanism. Businesses therefore have an indication of negotiating direction, with the practical details still unresolved.

2. Agriculture: Chinese Facility Approvals and Other Barriers Are in Play

Greer specifically identified agriculture as an area where additional progress is possible. Potential outcomes include resolving Chinese nontariff barriers and registering more U.S. agricultural facilities as eligible to ship to China.

He acknowledged the U.S. agricultural community’s strong interest in retaining China as an export market.

Analysis: Facility registrations can have immediate commercial value when an otherwise competitive supplier lacks permission to export. Their importance will depend on which commodities and facilities are covered, how quickly approvals take effect and whether other restrictions remain.

Table 2. What the interview put on the table for agriculture and what it left out. Source: Financial Times interview, Sept. 5, 2026.

However, export eligibility does not guarantee sales. Chinese demand, delivered prices, tariffs and competition from other suppliers will determine whether improved access produces meaningful purchases. Greer announced no purchase volumes, tariff reductions or commodity-specific commitments in this interview. Those remain key tests for any summit announcement.

3. Canada: Retaliation Could Trigger Another U.S. Escalation

Greer said formal negotiations had not resumed at the time of the interview, although Canadian officials had made informal contact. He expressed doubt that talks would restart before Canadian retaliatory tariffs scheduled for Sept. 8.

Asked whether Trump would respond, Greer answered “Probably” and confirmed that options had already been presented to the president.

He also described an unsuccessful U.S. offer that would have cut U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada in half, reduced the headline automobile tariff to 15% with a pathway to 7%, and removed the supplemental softwood lumber tariff.

Figure 2. The three elements of the U.S. offer Greer described. Source: Financial Times interview, Sept. 5, 2026.

Those were proposed concessions in a negotiation that broke down. Greer said Canada had also offered significant concessions, but he did not detail them.

Analysis: His remarks indicate that another escalation is a concrete possibility. They also provide only Washington’s account of why the negotiations failed.

Greer said the newest U.S. tariffs covered approximately 5% of imports from Canada. That figure should not be interpreted as the coverage of all U.S. tariffs on Canadian goods. Even a measure covering a small share of total trade can cause substantial damage in concentrated industries.

For agriculture, the immediate question is whether subsequent retaliation reaches farm products, food processing or agricultural inputs. The interview did not identify the prospective U.S. response or its product coverage.

4. United Kingdom: Agricultural Standards Complicate Further Negotiations

Greer argued that Britain’s regulatory alignment with the European Union limits its ability to accept products made to U.S. standards, including agricultural goods.

He said Washington has encouraged London to use its post-Brexit flexibility, but British responses sometimes depend on the EU’s position. He also identified what he described as a U.S. agricultural trade deficit with the UK as a sticking point.

Nevertheless, Greer characterized the existing bilateral agreement positively and said further liberalization remains possible. He declined to disclose specific negotiating demands. Scotch whisky arose in the discussion, but he announced no concession involving it.

Analysis: The agricultural obstacle extends beyond tariff rates. Additional market access may require agreement on food safety, production practices and certification.

From Greer’s account, Washington sees closer UK/EU alignment as constraining British concessions. London’s willingness to accommodate U.S. agricultural standards will therefore help determine how far a second agreement can go. The interview offered no evidence that those differences have been resolved.

5. Manufacturing: Greer Claims Stabilization, With Broader Results Still Contested

Greer argued that tariffs are working, citing more than 30,000 net manufacturing jobs added during 2026, factory construction and rising productivity.

Williams challenged that assessment, citing approximately 60,000 manufacturing jobs lost between Trump’s return to office and July 2026. She also questioned whether recent gains were concentrated in computers, electronics and AI-related industries.

Greer responded that the initial objective was to stabilize manufacturing and that new factories take time to build.

Figure 3. The two manufacturing employment figures cited in the interview cover different periods and are not directly comparable. Source: Financial Times interview, Sept. 5, 2026.

Analysis: The employment figures cited in the interview cover different periods. Gains during 2026 could coexist with a decline over the administration’s full tenure.

The more demanding test is whether tariffs produce sustained, broadly distributed gains in employment and output. Greer did not directly resolve the question about industry concentration. Construction and productivity improvements are useful indicators, but neither establishes how many additional jobs tariffs themselves have created.

6. Industrial Policy and China: Security Drives the Case for Protection

Greer presented two principal reasons for tariffs on China: encouraging domestic production and reducing dependence on a single foreign supplier for critical goods.

He emphasized semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals and transportation equipment. He criticized the Biden administration’s subsidies for selected green industries while defending protective tariffs against subsidized foreign competition.

Greer also argued that constructive communication with Beijing supports a tougher economic policy. He said the two governments maintain channels for advance notice of trade measures.

Analysis: His explanation suggests strategic protection will remain central to U.S. policy even when diplomatic relations improve.

Both subsidies and protective tariffs influence where investment occurs. The relevant assessment is whether the resulting capacity and supply security justify the costs. For agricultural businesses, that trade-off can include more dependable domestic suppliers alongside higher equipment or material costs.

7. Inflation: Greer’s Broad Defense Needs Qualification

Greer largely rejected tariffs as an explanation for affordability problems, pointing to housing, education and energy. He also argued that domestic food production and duty-free imports from Canada and Mexico limit agriculture’s exposure.

Analysis: Tariffs can affect domestically produced goods through imported machinery, components and materials. Federal Reserve research explicitly accounts for these indirect cost channels. Domestic production alone does not establish that a product is insulated from tariffs. Federal Reserve analysis

His description of tariffs as fees on foreign goods also leaves out who initially pays: the importer is responsible for duties owed to U.S. Customs. How the economic burden is subsequently divided depends on supplier prices, business margins and customer pricing. U.S. Customs and Border Protection

One statistical claim requires correction. The transcript places a reference to falling core CPI within a discussion of food prices, although core CPI excludes food and energy. It also attributes a 0.4% June decline and a subsequent unchanged reading to core CPI. The BLS July release reports that core CPI was unchanged in June and rose 0.2% in July. BLS July CPI release

Figure 4. Core CPI figures attributed in the transcript compared with the BLS July release. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Financial Times interview transcript.

8. Midterm Politics: Little Indication of a Tariff Retreat

Greer acknowledged that explaining trade policy to voters is difficult when households remain concerned about living costs. He cited supportive business owners and farmers and defended the administration’s willingness to confront trading partners.

He also rejected the suggestion that the approaching midterms would necessarily discourage Trump from escalating against Canada.

Analysis: The interview provides little basis for assuming election pressure will automatically produce tariff relief. Greer’s argument rests on eventual industrial gains and greater economic security, while voters face current prices and business conditions.

Bottom line

For agriculture, the practical measures of success will be implemented market access, competitive export prices, completed purchases and dependable delivery terms. Summit announcements and negotiating offers will matter most when they translate into those outcomes.

AG POLICY & MARKETS DAILY   |   TRADE POLICY  |  GREER FT INTERVIEW — SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2026