Hormuz Shutdown Threat Deepens as U.S. Holds Back Tanker Escorts

USTR opens sweeping Section 301 overcapacity probes | RFS update rumors | Year-round E15 a no-go on Farm Bill 2.0

LINKS

Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, March 6 (Interview with USDA Deputy Stephen Vaden) 

Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, March 6 (Vaden interview)

Updates: Policy/News/Markets, March 12, 2026

UP FRONT

TOP STORIES

— Oil market shock: Crude briefly topped $100 as attacks on tankers, Iraqi disruptions, and Oman’s vessel evacuation deepened fears over Middle East supply flows, even as the U.S. and IEA moved toward emergency stock releases.

— Hormuz risk escalates: Iran’s attacks on commercial shipping and the Pentagon’s hesitation to provide escorts are increasing the odds of a prolonged Strait of Hormuz disruption, amplifying pressure on oil markets, Gulf exporters, and the Trump administration.

— USTR opens broad new trade probes: The Trump administration launched sweeping Section 301 investigations into manufacturing overcapacity across China, the EU, and 14 other partners as it looks for new tariff tools ahead of the July expiration of Section 122 duties.

— Tariff refund deadline arrives: The administration must tell the trade court how it plans to repay billions in now-invalid IEEPA tariffs, with Customs signaling automated refunds may not start until late April.

— EPA biofuel rule may slip: EPA’s final Renewable Volume Obligations are still expected by the end of March, but analysts now think the Iran conflict could push the release beyond next week while markets focus on refinery-waiver reallocation.

— E15 complicates farm bill path: Senate Ag Chair John Boozman warned that trying to attach year-round E15 to the farm bill could create jurisdictional problems and threaten the broader package.

— USDA export reporting overhaul: USDA will launch its new Export Sales Reporting and Query System on March 26, replacing ESRMS while keeping public reports and API access open without login requirements.

— USDA prepares to push back Biden-era poultry rule: The Trump administration is expected to soon delay a Biden-era poultry grower rule that was set to take effect July 1, signaling another pause for regulations aimed at tightening oversight of broiler payment systems and capital upgrade demands on growers.

—USDA sends plans to OMB on implementing provisions to allow whole milk in schools: An interim final rule is to bring rules in line with statutory provisions allowing agencies to publish a final rule that becomes effective soon after publication, without going through the proposed rule stage.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

— Global markets turn risk-off: Rising oil prices hit equities, pressured bonds, lifted the dollar, and added to investor anxiety already heightened by strains in private credit markets.

— Stocks mixed on Wednesday: The Dow fell sharply, while the Nasdaq edged higher and the S&P 500 slipped slightly.

— Dollar firms as Fed-cut hopes fade: The greenback rose for a third straight session as higher oil prices reinforced inflation concerns and reduced expectations for near-term Federal Reserve easing.

AG MARKETS

— Brazil fertilizer risks mount: Brazilian officials warn that a prolonged Iran conflict and Hormuz disruption could tighten fertilizer supplies, raise costs, and threaten yields for soybeans, corn, coffee, and sugarcane.

— Commodities mixed: Grain and oilseed futures mostly rose on March 11, while cotton and livestock contracts ended lower.

ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY

— Thursday oil rally: Crude prices climbed again as new Gulf attacks reinforced fears of prolonged supply disruption, with traders doubting emergency reserves can fully offset lost flows.

— Wednesday oil rally: Prices surged after additional Hormuz vessel strikes and regional infrastructure outages, with analysts warning supply tightness could outlast the immediate conflict.

TRADE POLICY

— Japan potato push: Senate Finance leaders are urging President Donald Trump to press Japan to open its market to fresh U.S. potatoes during Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s visit.

— Strawberry dumping case advances: The ITC found enough evidence of injury to let the Commerce Department continue its antidumping probe into Mexican fresh winter strawberries.

— Chinese onions undercut U.S. shipments: Lower Chinese production costs and cheap ocean freight can make onions landed in New Jersey cheaper than trucked shipments from Washington state, though no clear onion-specific subsidy has been identified.

FOOD POLICY & FOOD INDUSTRY

— SNAP lawsuit targets MAHA waivers: SNAP recipients are suing USDA over state waivers that restrict purchases of soda, candy, and energy drinks, arguing the policy unlawfully narrows food choices and harms vulnerable families.

TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS

— Rail merger worries farm shippers: Farm Bureau economist Daniel Munch argues a Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger would leave farmers with fewer shipping options, weaker leverage, and greater exposure to higher rail costs and service risks.

— Case for the merger: Supporters counter that the deal could streamline coast-to-coast service, reduce interchange delays, improve investment and network efficiency, and potentially boost U.S. export competitiveness.

WEATHER

— Storms, wind, and fire risk: The forecast calls for heavy snow in the Upper Great Lakes, strong winds from the northern Rockies to the Upper Midwest, critical fire danger in the High Plains, heavy Pacific Northwest rain and mountain snow, and unusually warm western U.S. temperatures heading into the weekend.

TOP STORIES—Oil climbed back above $100 a barrel before retreating some after Oman evacuated vessels from one of the last remaining ports still able to ship Middle Eastern crude. Iraq also suspended operations after two tankers were attacked in its waters.Iran said any ceasefire would hinge on a U.S. and Israeli commitment not to strike the country again. President Donald Trump, however, vowed to “finish the job” against Tehran, while the U.S. plans to release 172 million barrels from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help ease pressure on energy prices. The International Energy Agency is also due to publish its monthly oil market report.—Hormuz shutdown threat deepens as U.S. holds back tanker escortsIran’s latest strikes on commercial vessels and the Pentagon’s reluctance to send warships into the Strait of Hormuz are heightening fears of a prolonged closure that could rattle oil markets, squeeze Gulf producers and intensify pressure on the Trump administration  Iran’s attacks on ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz are raising the stakes for the global economy as the U.S. stops short of immediately providing naval escorts for oil tankers through the narrow waterway. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps struck three cargo vessels on Wednesday and warned that any additional ships attempting the passage could also be targeted, underscoring the risk that the world’s most critical oil chokepoint could remain shut for an extended period. The reluctance of the U.S. military to move ahead with escorts reflects the danger of sending warships into what defense officials describe as a highly exposed corridor. Iran retains the ability to target vessels with drones, antiship missiles, mines and small fast-attack craft despite recent U.S. strikes on its naval assets. Military analysts say escort missions in Hormuz would be far more difficult than recent Red Sea operations because of the strait’s narrow geography and the proximity of Iranian launch sites along the coastline. The market fallout is already spreading. Oil briefly surged above $100 a barrel, gasoline prices are rising and Gulf producers are being forced to cut production as crude backs up with limited export options. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iraq and Bahrain have reportedly reduced output by nearly 7 million barrels a day, while Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. are trying to redirect some exports through alternative pipelines that bypass the strait. Even so, those workarounds are limited and, in Saudi Arabia’s case, come at the expense of refinery supply, tightening refined-fuel markets. The disruption is becoming a growing political problem for President Donald Trump as higher energy prices threaten to feed inflation and consumer anxiety at home. While Trump and the White House have left open the option of naval escorts, Navy officials say they have not been ordered to begin such operations and warn that any convoy system would be dangerous, resource-intensive and capable of moving only a limited number of ships at a time. Shipping executives and maritime risk analysts say the bigger challenge is not only reopening the strait, but restoring confidence after the fighting ends. Even if military escorts are deployed, many shipowners may still refuse to transit the route until they believe the danger to crews and vessels has materially eased. That suggests the economic effects could linger well beyond any ceasefire, especially with more than 600 trading ships already backed up inside the Persian Gulf waiting to exit. The broader implication is that only a halt in hostilities is likely to restore normal traffic through Hormuz. Until then, Iran’s ability to disrupt a route that handles a massive share of the world’s seaborne crude trade gives Tehran leverage over global energy markets — and leaves the U.S. balancing military risk against mounting economic pressure. Now What? The most effective steps are the ones that lower Iran’s incentive to keep using Hormuz as leverage while also reducing the immediate risk to shipping. First, the U.S. and Israel could create a clearer diplomatic off-ramp. Tehran is using the disruption to impose global economic pain as it absorbs military pressure, and Reuters has reported that the closure is already feeding oil-price spikes and broader growth concerns. That means a limited, face-saving channel — through Oman, Qatar, Switzerland, or another intermediary — aimed specifically at maritime deconfliction could matter even if a broader ceasefire is not immediately reachable. A narrow deal focused on “no attacks on commercial shipping” would be easier to achieve than a full political settlement. Second, Washington and Jerusalem could narrow their military objectives and messaging. If Iran believes the campaign is open-ended or aimed at regime collapse, it has more reason to keep escalating in the strait. By contrast, a public signal that attacks are aimed at defined military targets — not an unlimited war — could reduce Tehran’s perceived need to keep choking off oil flows. That would not solve the crisis by itself, but it can help lower the temperature. Reuters reporting shows the conflict is already in a phase where Hormuz disruption is central to Iran’s leverage strategy. Third, the U.S. could shift from promising broad tanker escorts right now to building the conditions for safer passage later. Reuters reports the Navy currently considers escorts too dangerous because the strait is narrow and Iran still has mines, missiles, drones, and small attack craft in play. So the near-term focus should be suppressing mine-laying capacity, improving surveillance, expanding air and missile defense coverage, and preparing convoy lanes only after the threat is reduced. In other words, degrade the threat first, escort second. Fourth, the U.S. should intensify coordination with Gulf producers on bypass routes and emergency supply management. Reuters reports that Saudi Arabia and the UAE are already trying to use alternative pipelines, while Gulf states have cut output sharply because crude is backing up. Expanding those workarounds, paired with coordinated strategic stock releases and temporary shipping-insurance support, would not fully replace Hormuz volumes but could blunt the market shock and reduce Tehran’s ability to weaponize panic. Fifth, Washington could organize a broader multinational maritime and political coalition rather than making this look like a purely U.S.-Iran naval contest. A coalition including European and Gulf partners would spread risk, strengthen legitimacy, and give Iran more actors to answer to if it continues hitting merchant ships. Reuters notes that shipping firms remain highly sensitive to perceived safety, so restoring confidence will require more than military capability alone. Sixth, Israel can help by avoiding actions that widen the theater unnecessarily. Strikes that materially weaken Iranian anti-shipping capabilities are one thing; actions that broaden the conflict to additional fronts can make commercial traffic even less likely to resume. Shipping executives told Reuters that even after attacks stop, owners may still stay away until risk is clearly lower. That means avoiding further expansion is itself part of reopening Hormuz. The practical sequence is: open a maritime deconfliction channel, keep military goals limited and explicit, reduce Iran’s anti-shipping capabilities, expand alternative export routes and market backstops, and only then consider escorted transits at scale. The hard truth is that there is no clean military shortcut here; Reuters’ reporting suggests traffic is unlikely to normalize fully until the fighting itself is meaningfully curtailed. Bottom Line: The U.S. and Israel need to give Iran less reason to escalate or eliminate their capability to escalate, less ability to strike ships, and less economic leverage from keeping Hormuz unstable.  —USTR opens sweeping Section 301 overcapacity probesThe Trump administration is launching new trade investigations into China, the EU, and 14 other partners as USTR Jamieson Greer looks for replacement tools ahead of the July expiration of Trump’s temporary Section 122 tariffs The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on Wednesday opened a broad new set of Section 301 investigations into what it calls “structural excess capacity” in manufacturing across China and 15 other trading partners, marking the first major step in the Trump administration’s effort to rebuild its trade arsenal after the Supreme Court struck down the president’s emergency-powers tariffs. Greer said the administration’s strategy has not changed despite the court ruling, arguing that while the legal tools may shift, the policy objective remains the same. The new probes will examine whether countries have built production capacity far beyond what market demand would justify, creating distortions that U.S. officials say harm American industry. The investigations cover China, the European Union, Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, South Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan and India. Greer said USTR expects the probes to uncover a range of unfair practices tied to overcapacity, including industrial subsidies, export promotion, wage suppression, state-backed production, market-access barriers, weak labor and environmental standards, subsidized lending, and currency-related distortions. A Federal Register notice (link) lays out a public comment process and hearings beginning May 5, with responsive action possible after that. Greer said the agency is not prejudging the outcome, but he made clear that tariffs are one option, alongside services fees, negotiations, and other trade measures. He pointed to the first Trump administration’s China Section 301 case as a model, noting that it led not only to tariffs but also tighter export controls, stronger foreign investment screening, and WTO litigation. The timing is significant because Trump’s current 10% Section 122 tariff on most imports is set to expire July 24 unless Congress extends it. Greer said he wants the new Section 301 investigations concluded as quickly as possible and ideally before that deadline, underscoring how central they are to the administration’s next phase of tariff policy. Greer also said a second Section 301 action could be launched as soon as Thursday on forced labor, covering about 60 countries and examining whether they maintain laws that block imports made with forced labor, similar to U.S. enforcement under Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930. He indicated more Section 301 probes are coming as well, potentially targeting pharmaceutical pricing, discrimination against U.S. technology firms, digital services taxes, ocean pollution, and trade practices affecting seafood, rice, and other products. The overcapacity case spans a wide range of sectors USTR says are already under strain, including aluminum, automobiles, batteries, cement, chemicals, electronics, energy goods, glass, machine tools, machinery, non-ferrous metals, paper, plastics, processed food and beverages, robotics, satellites, semiconductors, ships, solar modules, steel and transportation equipment. USTR argues that in many of those industries, the United States has already lost meaningful production capacity or fallen dangerously behind foreign competitors. Greer said the probes should not surprise trading partners, especially since the administration had warned it would pivot to other authorities if the Supreme Court blocked Trump’s earlier tariff approach. He also said many of the countries now under investigation have recently negotiated trade arrangements with the United States, but stressed those deals are “standalone” and will not prevent the Section 301 process from moving forward. —Tariff refund plan faces court deadlineTrump administration must tell the trade court by 2 p.m. ET how it will repay illegal IEEPA tariff collections, with Customs signaling refunds may not begin until late April  The Trump administration is due back in the U.S. Court of International Trade today with a status report explaining how it plans to refund tariffs collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act after the Supreme Court struck those duties down. Judge Richard Eaton set the 2 p.m. ET deadline for U.S. Customs and Border Protection to outline its proposed refund process and next steps. CBP has told the court it cannot quickly process the refunds through its existing systems and instead wants roughly 45 days to build an automated mechanism, which would put the start of refunds in late April. The agency has said the scale is unprecedented, covering more than 330,000 importers and about $166 billion in tariff collections that must be repaid with interest. The court is pushing for a broad, streamlined refund process to avoid forcing thousands of companies into separate lawsuits. That matters because the tariff repayments have become one of the biggest financial consequences of the Supreme Court’s ruling against Trump’s emergency-tariff authority, with outside estimates putting total refunds as high as roughly $182 billion. The key development is the deadline itself: the court expects a concrete update today, but the public record available so far indicates CBP is still working toward a late-April launch for automated refunds rather than immediate repayment. —EPA biofuel rule seen slipping past next week as Iran war crowds agendaAnalyst Brett Gibbs still expects EPA to finalize the Renewable Volume Obligations by the end of March, while now projecting a 70% reallocation of 2023-25 small refinery exemptions and an April decision on 2025 waivers Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Brett Gibbs says EPA’s final Renewable Volume Obligations, now under White House review, are increasingly likely to come out after next week as the Trump administration remains focused on the war in Iran. Even so, Gibbs still expects the final rule by the end of March, keeping EPA broadly within the timeline market participants have been watching for the 2026 and 2027 Renewable Fuel Standard volumes. Gibbs also now expects EPA to reallocate 70% of the 2023-25 small refinery exemptions, a notable shift because the reallocation decision will determine how much of the waived blending obligation is pushed back onto non-exempt refiners. Reuters reported earlier this year that EPA was weighing a wide range of options — from no reallocation to full reallocation — making Gibbs’ 70% call an important middle-ground signal for both the refining and biofuels sectors. The broader backdrop remains that EPA’s “Set 2” rule would lock in biofuel blending requirements for 2026 and 2027, with the June 2025 proposal calling for higher overall volumes and a larger biomass-based diesel mandate than in 2025. Industry reporting in late February said EPA still aimed to finalize both the RVO rule and outstanding refinery-exemption issues by the end of March, even as timing risk grew. On the exemption side, the administration has been working through a large backlog of small refinery waiver petitions. In November 2025, EPA approved a mix of full and partial waivers and still had pending petitions left to resolve, including requests tied to the 2025 compliance year. That helps explain why the market is watching April closely for a fresh decision on 2025 SREs. Rumored biomass-based diesel targets and small refinery exemption reallocation scenarios fueled intense speculation across the market Wednesday, as traders and stakeholders tried to gauge how aggressive EPA’s coming announcement might be. Talk of the forthcoming EPA announcement intensified Wednesday, with market chatter centering on a possible 2026 biomass-based diesel renewable volume obligation of 5.4 billion gallons. The bigger focus, though, was not just the headline number — it was how EPA might handle the reallocation of previously granted small refinery exemptions, which could materially raise the effective mandate borne by the rest of the market. Under the most widely circulated scenario, about 70% of prior exemptions would be reassigned to non-exempt refiners, pushing the effective 2026 obligation closer to 5.61 billion gallons. Some speculation went further, suggesting EPA could reallocate as much as 75%, which would raise compliance expectations even more. That possibility helped drive industry attention because even a modest change in reallocation policy can significantly affect obligated parties, Renewable Identification Number values, and demand expectations for biomass-based diesel feedstocks. The rumors underscored how much uncertainty is hanging over the biofuels market ahead of EPA’s formal release. For producers, blenders and refiners, the final numbers will matter not only for nominal mandate levels but also for the real-world stringency of compliance. A 5.4-billion-gallon target may look supportive on paper, but if paired with aggressive SRE reallocation, the practical obligation could be meaningfully higher — and that is where much of the market’s attention appears to be focused. The practical takeaway is that the administration does not appear to be backing away from finishing the rule this month, but the final release may slide beyond next week as White House attention is pulled toward the Middle East conflict. That would delay, but not necessarily derail, the expected end-of-March RVO action and an April decision on 2025 refinery waivers. —Boozman warns E15 push could complicate Farm Bill 2.0 pathJurisdictional hurdles and refinery-state concerns are threatening efforts to attach year-round E15 sales to the broader farm bill package. Senate Ag Committee Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) is cautioning that a push to include year-round E15 sales in the farm bill could end up slowing — or even jeopardizing — the legislation’s path through Congress. While Midwest lawmakers and biofuels advocates see E15 as a priority measure to boost corn demand, Boozman told Politico noted that the issue falls under the jurisdiction of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, not Senate Agriculture. That means moving forward without EPW’s approval could expose the farm bill to a point of order on the Senate floor and potentially invalidate the package. Supporters such as Sens. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) argue E15 is unlikely to pass as a stand-alone bill and must be attached to a larger legislative vehicle, whether the farm bill or a supplemental disaster package. But the effort faces resistance from lawmakers tied to states with small and midsized refiners, who want broader exemptions to limit the impact on the oil sector. Boozman is also said to have concerns about the economic effects of year-round E15 in Arkansas. In the House, the issue faces similar jurisdictional problems, with Chairman GT” Thompson (R-Pa.) backing E15 in principle but ruling it outside the Agriculture Committee’s authority. —USDA sets March 26 launch for new export sales reporting systemAgency will replace the current ESRMS with the new ESRQS, shifting exporters to a new reporting portal while keeping public reports, query access, and Application Programming Interface (API) availability open without login requirements  USDA said it will launch its new Export Sales Reporting and Query System, or ESRQS, on Thursday, March 26, 2026, marking a transition away from the current Export Reporting and Maintenance System. The existing ESRMS platform will shut down around midday on Monday, March 23, and the new system will open that Thursday afternoon for new data entry. Under the change, exporters will need to begin entering weekly data in ESRQS starting March 26, while data users will still be able to access reports, the query system, and the API without needing to log in. USDA said it will migrate both outstanding sales and exports data, along with all historical data, into the new platform and has tested the new system to ensure reports match those produced by the legacy system. To support the rollout, USDA said it will provide the ESRQS web address ahead of deployment and is offering training and help through email, Microsoft Teams, and recorded demonstrations. Exporters are being urged to finish all data entry in ESRMS for the week ending March 19 by 12:00 p.m. Eastern on Monday, March 23, complete registration for ESRQS as soon as possible, review training materials, and practice using the test portal before the system goes live. USDA also encouraged exporters to enter data early once the portal opens at 10:00 a.m. Eastern on March 26. The reporting window will remain open until 12:00 p.m. Eastern on Tuesday, March 31, giving users time to report early and contact the ESR Help Desk if problems arise. —USDA prepares to push back Biden-era poultry ruleThe Trump administration is expected to soon delay a Biden-era poultry grower rule that was set to take effect July 1, signaling another pause for regulations aimed at tightening oversight of broiler payment systems and capital upgrade demands on growers USDA is expected to announce a delay to the Poultry Grower Payment Systems and Capital Improvement Systems final rule, which was finalized in January and scheduled to take effect July 1, 2026. The rule was designed to curb certain payment practices in broiler grower “tournament” systems, require poultry companies to maintain policies for fair grower comparisons, and force added disclosures when companies ask growers to make capital improvements. USDA has not yet publicly indicated how long the delay would last. The final rule said it was intended to protect fair trade, financial integrity, and competitive poultry markets by addressing deception and unfairness in grower payments, tournament operations, and capital investment requirements. —USDA moves whole milk school rule to OMBInterim final rule would quickly align child nutrition regulations with the new law restoring broader fluid milk options in schools  USDA has sent the Office of Management and Budget an interim final rule to implement the new law allowing whole milk in school nutrition programs. The rule, titled Expanding Fluid Milk Options in Child Nutrition Programs, reflects changes approved by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump. Because USDA is using an interim final rule, the measure can take effect soon after publication without first going through the normal proposed-rule process, allowing the department to more quickly bring federal regulations in line with the new statute.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

—War markets: Global markets turned lower as surging oil prices fueled fresh concerns about inflation, growth and prolonged instability in energy markets. Stocks fell across regions, with S&P 500 futures, European shares and Asian equities all retreating as traders reacted to escalating disruptions in Middle East oil shipping.

Brent crude briefly moved back above $100 a barrel after Iraq halted oil terminal activity following attacks on two tankers, while Oman temporarily evacuated a key export hub. The renewed jump in oil underscored fears that the conflict could impair crude flows for an extended period, with emergency reserve releases seen as only a limited and temporary buffer.

The move in oil reverberated across asset classes. The dollar strengthened as investors sought safety (see next item), while bond markets also came under pressure, erasing this year’s gains in a global debt gauge. Treasury yields were little changed, but European and Asian yields moved higher as markets reassessed inflation risks tied to energy.

Investor sentiment was further weakened by stress in private credit markets after Morgan Stanley and Cliffwater capped withdrawals from major funds amid rising redemption requests and concerns about loan quality. Together, the energy shock and credit-market strain added to a broader risk-off tone across global markets.

—Equities yesterday: 

Equity Index	Closing Price  March 11	Point Difference  from March 10	% Difference  from March 10
Dow	47,417.27	-289.24	-0.61%
Nasdaq	22,716.13	+19.03	+0.08%
S&P 500	6,775.80	-5.68	-0.08%

—Dollar strengthens as oil rally clouds Fed cut outlook

Greenback extends gains for a third straight session as surging crude prices add to inflation concerns and reinforce expectations that the Federal Reserve will stay on hold 

The dollar index pushed toward 99.5 on Thursday, marking its third consecutive advance as oil prices resumed climbing and deepened concerns that the Iran conflict could keep inflation pressures elevated. Crude rallied for a second day as fears of a prolonged war and supply disruptions outweighed the market impact of the International Energy Agency’s record 400 million-barrel coordinated oil release.

Fresh supply risks added to the pressure after Iraq suspended operations at its oil terminals following attacks on two tankers in Iraqi waters, underscoring how fragile regional energy flows have become. While February consumer inflation came in largely as expected and remained steady, it is still running above the Federal Reserve’s target, and the latest energy shock has yet to fully filter into the data.

With inflation risks rising again, markets now see little chance of near-term Fed easing. The central bank is broadly expected to leave interest rates unchanged next week, and traders are pricing in just one quarter-point cut this year, potentially in September.

AG MARKETS

—Brazil fertilizer risks rise as war threatens supplies

Brazilian officials are warning that a prolonged Iran conflict and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz could tighten fertilizer supplies, raise input costs, and threaten yields for major crops ahead of the 2026/27 season 

Brazil’s Agriculture Ministry is warning that the country faces a severe fertilizer risk if the war involving Iran drags on and disrupts shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for energy and fertilizer-related inputs. Technical assessments reviewed by ministry officials show a “very high” risk of supply strain, with the worst-case scenario pointing to phosphate fertilizer shortages equal to as much as 20% of national demand this year.

The concern is especially acute because Brazil imports about 85% of its fertilizer needs, leaving farmers heavily exposed to global disruptions. Officials said the conflict could drive up the cost of key inputs such as urea, worsen delivery delays, and tighten purchasing conditions in the second half of 2026. If disruptions persist, the impact could move beyond higher prices and become a true supply shortage.

The ministry also flagged China’s export restrictions on phosphate fertilizers as a second major threat. Analysts estimate Brazil could face a deficit of 1 million to 3 million tonnes of phosphate inputs this year, potentially undermining productivity in the 2026/27 crop season, which begins in July. Reduced fertilizer availability could cut yields for some crops by more than 20%, adding pressure to food prices.

Major Brazilian commodities at risk include soybeans, corn, coffee, and sugarcane. In the most adverse scenario, ministry analysts said the federal government may need to activate emergency agricultural financing tools to support the most affected producers.

The supply warnings were first revealed by Folha de S.Paulo and confirmed to Reuters by a ministry source. Recent trade data reinforce the concern: Chinese phosphate exports have fallen to their lowest level since 2013, while China’s share of Brazil’s fertilizer imports has declined without an immediate replacement from other suppliers.

—Agriculture markets yesterday:

Commodity	Contract month	March 11 close	Difference vs. March 10
Corn	May	$4.60 1/4	+8 cents
Soybeans	May	$12.14	+12 1/4 cents
Soybean meal	May	$315.40	+$0.90
Soybean oil	May	67.16 cents	+154 points
SRW wheat	May	$5.94 3/4	+3 3/4 cents
HRW wheat	May	$6.13 1/2	+4 3/4 cents
Spring wheat	May	$6.38	+3 cents
Cotton	May	65.17 cents	-13 points
Live cattle	April	$230.15	-$2.225
Feeder cattle	March	$348.725	-$4.625
Lean hogs	April	$95.20	-87 1/2 cents

ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY

—Thursday: Oil jumps as Gulf attacks deepen supply fears

Crude prices climbed after Iran intensified attacks on oil and transport targets across the Middle East, stoking fears of a longer conflict, further disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, and a deeper global supply squeeze

Brent crude rose about 4.9% to $96.45 a barrel and U.S. crude gained about 4.6% to $91.30 in early trading, after Brent briefly pushed back to $100. The move extended a period of extreme volatility, with Brent having surged as high as $119.50 earlier this week before retreating on hopes the war might end quickly.

The latest leg higher was driven by fresh evidence that the conflict is spreading beyond rhetoric and into regional energy logistics. Two foreign tankers carrying Iraqi fuel oil were attacked in Iraqi territorial waters, and Iraqi officials’ preliminary findings pointed to Iranian explosive boats. Analysts say the market is unlikely to see a sustained pullback unless oil can move normally through the Strait of Hormuz again.

A record 400-million-barrel release from the International Energy Agency, including 172 million barrels from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, may offer temporary relief, but traders remain skeptical it can fully offset prolonged shipping disruptions or regional production outages. That concern was reinforced by China’s move to halt refined fuel exports in March to protect domestic supply, adding another layer of stress to already-tight fuel markets.

—Wednesday: Oil jumps as Hormuz attacks deepen supply fears

Fresh strikes on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and broader regional infrastructure disruptions pushed crude prices sharply higher, while analysts said even a record strategic reserve release would do little to offset sustained supply losses

Oil prices climbed Wednesday as renewed attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz heightened fears of prolonged supply disruptions across global energy markets.

Brent crude settled at $91.98 a barrel, up 4.8%. 

U.S. West Texas Intermediate closed at $87.25, up 4.6%, after reports that three more vessels were struck in the waterway.

The latest attacks brought the total number of ships hit in the region to at least 14 since the conflict with Iran began, adding to concerns over the security of a passage that typically handles about 20% of the world’s oil supply. Shipping traffic through the strait has slowed sharply as risks to tankers and crews mount.

Markets also weighed the International Energy Agency’s proposal to release 400 million barrels from strategic reserves — the largest coordinated draw in its history — but analysts cautioned that the volume would equal only about four days of global production and would likely provide only temporary relief if disruptions continue.

Additional pressure came from damage to regional energy infrastructure, including the shutdown of Abu Dhabi’s Ruwais refinery after a drone strike. Analysts estimate the conflict is already removing roughly 15 million barrels per day of oil and refined products from global markets, reinforcing expectations for higher prices.

Even if the conflict eases soon, analysts warned that the rebound in production and shipping could take weeks, suggesting supply tightness may persist well beyond the immediate military confrontation.

TRADE POLICY

—Senators press Trump on Japan potato access

Finance Committee leaders say Tokyo visit should be used to open a long-closed market to U.S. fresh potatoes.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) are urging President Donald Trump to make fresh potato access to Japan a priority during Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s upcoming U.S. visit, arguing the issue represents a major missed export opportunity for American growers. In a letter (link) highlighted by the Finance Committee and first reported by Bloomberg, the senators said Japan is a large, high-value market and that opening it to U.S. potatoes should be part of the administration’s broader trade discussions.

The push underscores a long-running frustration for the U.S. potato industry. Japan remains a major buyer of processed U.S. potato products, but it still does not allow imports of fresh U.S. potatoes, despite years of negotiations and repeated lobbying from lawmakers and industry groups. That became an even bigger sore point last fall, when a U.S./Japan agreement still failed to secure fresh market access.

The bipartisan appeal from Crapo and Wyden signals that specialty crop market access remains a live priority on Capitol Hill, especially for Northwest and Idaho growers. It also fits with a broader Finance Committee push to expand export opportunities for fruit, vegetable, nut and other specialty crop producers, as lawmakers look for trade wins that can deliver tangible gains for U.S. agriculture.

The timing matters. Tokyo and Washington are already engaged in broader trade and investment talks ahead of a Trump-Takaichi summit later this month, giving U.S. lawmakers an opening to press for concrete agricultural concessions alongside bigger-ticket issues such as tariffs, investment and industrial cooperation.

—ITC clears path for Mexican strawberry dumping probe

Commerce Department now moves to the next phase after trade panel finds signs of harm to U.S. growers.

A U.S. trade case targeting fresh winter strawberry imports from Mexico is moving forward after the International Trade Commission concluded there is enough evidence to continue investigating whether those shipments are being sold in the U.S. at unfairly low prices.

The ITC said imports of Mexican strawberries appear to be causing injury to domestic producers, a key threshold needed for the case to advance. That finding does not mean dumping has been proven, but it allows the Commerce Department to begin its own review of pricing and sales data to determine whether Mexican exporters are selling strawberries below fair market value.

If Commerce ultimately finds dumping occurred, it would calculate proposed antidumping duties designed to offset the price advantage. The case is significant for U.S. strawberry growers because winter imports from Mexico play a major role in the market during a period when domestic production is more limited, increasing concerns that lower-priced imports can pressure grower returns and market share.

The investigation now enters a more detailed phase focused on whether unfair pricing took place and, if so, how large any dumping margins may be. A final outcome could lead to new trade penalties on Mexican strawberry imports if both unfair pricing and injury to U.S. producers are confirmed.

—Imported onions undercut Washington state shipments

Lower production costs and cheap ocean freight can make Chinese onions less expensive in New Jersey than U.S. onions trucked across the country from Washington

Chinese onions can sometimes land in New Jersey at a lower cost than Washington-grown onions because ocean shipping is extremely cheap per pound, especially when spread across large volumes. Combined with lower labor and production costs overseas, that can outweigh the higher domestic costs of storing, packing, and trucking onions cross-country from Washington to East Coast markets.

Of note: Beijing provides broad agricultural support, but there is no clear public evidence of a specific onion-export subsidy aimed at undercutting U.S. producers. China does provide substantial government support to agriculture, which can indirectly benefit exporters through lower financing, insurance, input, and infrastructure costs. But there is no clear public evidence of a specific subsidy program targeted at onion exports, meaning China’s price advantage may stem more from broad farm support, lower production costs, and cheaper shipping than from a direct onion subsidy.

FOOD POLICY & FOOD INDUSTRY

—SNAP waiver lawsuit targets MAHA food restrictions

Plaintiffs say USDA-approved limits on soda, candy, and energy drinks unlawfully narrow food choices for low-income families and create hardship at the checkout line

Five SNAP recipients sued USDA in federal court in Washington on Wednesday, seeking to block the Trump administration’s push to let states bar purchases of items such as sugary drinks, energy drinks, and candy with food stamp benefits. The suit challenges USDA-approved food restriction waivers now in place across 22 states, arguing the policy destabilizes food access for households that rely on the program.

The lawsuit takes aim at a key piece of the administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, backed by USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Plaintiffs argue USDA exceeded its authority and approved the waivers without the kind of reasoned analysis required under federal law. They are asking the court to void the waivers.

The plaintiffs, from Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia, say the restrictions would do real harm to families with specific dietary and medical needs. According to the complaint, some rely on the affected products to manage conditions such as diabetes, allergies, and eating disorders, while others say the new rules will force painful tradeoffs between buying restricted foods with cash and covering essentials like rent and transportation.

USDA declined to comment on the pending litigation. The plaintiffs are represented by the National Center for Law and Economic Justice and private counsel. The case adds to a broader legal fight over Trump administration SNAP policy, which has already included separate court battles over USDA demands for recipient data from states.

TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS

—Rail merger raises stakes for farm shippers

Daniel Munch of the American Farm Bureau Federation argues the proposed Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger would leave farmers with fewer transportation options, weaker bargaining power and greater exposure to higher shipping costs and service disruptions 

The proposed Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern rail merger would come at the expense of farmers by further concentrating an already highly consolidated freight market, according to Daniel Munch, economist at the American Farm Bureau Federation. In his analysis (link) for Farm Bureau, Munch says the deal would reduce the limited competitive pressure that still exists across key gateways and interchange points, leaving more agricultural shippers dependent on a single railroad for end-to-end service.

Munch contends that agriculture is especially vulnerable because rail demand is highly inelastic in many rural areas, where trucking is too costly and waterways are unavailable. That means when rail rates rise, farmers often cannot switch modes or reduce shipments and instead absorb the hit through lower basis and tighter margins. He notes that roughly 95% of grain elevators are served by only one railroad, underscoring how little local competition many shippers already have.

According to Munch’s Farm Bureau analysis, Surface Transportation Board data show agriculture is carrying a growing share of railroads’ cost recovery, with farm product-related rail revenue above variable costs more than doubling from 2004 to 2023. He argues that a larger combined railroad would increase the number of captive movements where railroads have greater pricing power, raising the risk that future revenue gains come from reduced competition rather than genuine efficiency improvements.

Munch also warns the merger could heighten systemic risk for agriculture by reducing network redundancy and making supply chains more vulnerable to weather events, congestion, labor disputes or technology failures. He points to past rail service breakdowns and merger-related integration problems as evidence that promised efficiencies do not always translate into better outcomes for shippers. For rural America, he argues, the question is less about operational scale and more about whether farmers will face higher costs, weaker service and less accountability in a market where alternatives are already scarce.

The Farm Bureau analysis concludes that the merger would not create new competition for agriculture, but instead remove what little leverage remains for farmers and rural communities that depend on rail to move crops, fertilizer and feed.

Case for the mergerSupporters argue a Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern tie-up could streamline coast-to-coast rail service, improve efficiency and strengthen the network without meaningfully reducing direct competition in most agricultural lanes The main arguments against Munch’s conclusion would be that the merger could improve service, lower some shipping frictions, and strengthen the rail network overall, rather than simply increasing shipper harm. First, supporters say this is an “end-to-end” merger, not a merger of two railroads that directly compete across the same lanes. Union Pacific is dominant in the West and Norfolk Southern in the East, so the companies would argue the merger does not remove much head-to-head competition. Instead, it could create a seamless coast-to-coast route, reducing interchange delays, paperwork, handoffs, and scheduling problems that now occur when freight moves between two railroads. Second, proponents argue that single-line service can reduce total transportation costs, even if the published rail rate itself does not fall. Faster transit, fewer interchanges, less dwell time, and improved car utilization could lower the full logistics cost for grain handlers, processors, and exporters. They would say farmers benefit if crops move more reliably to ports, feed mills, ethanol plants, or crushers, especially during peak harvest periods. Third, the railroads argue that a larger combined system could support more capital investment. A merged network with greater scale may have more resources for locomotives, crews, terminals, track upgrades, technology, and resilience planning. The counterpoint here is that bigger networks are not automatically worse for service — they can sometimes be more efficient and better able to absorb shocks if managed well. Fourth, opponents of the Farm Bureau view say regulation still exists as a constraint on abuse. Even if some farmers are captive shippers, the Surface Transportation Board remains in place to review the merger, impose conditions, and oversee service and competition issues. The argument here is that the merger would not occur in a vacuum; it would be subject to public-interest scrutiny and potentially significant remedies. Fifth, merger supporters argue that the current rail system is already inefficient for many agricultural shippers, and preserving the status quo is not the same as preserving meaningful competition. If a farmer or elevator already has only one serving railroad, then the merger may not materially worsen that local reality. In that view, the relevant question is whether the combined railroad can offer better service than the current fragmented network, not whether it preserves a theoretical form of competition that many rural shippers do not actually experience. Sixth, they challenge the idea that higher railroad revenue above variable cost automatically proves anti-competitive harm. Railroads would argue that higher cost recovery can also reflect inflation, network investment, fuel costs, labor costs, tighter capacity, or the need to earn returns sufficient to maintain infrastructure. In that framing, stronger railroad economics are not necessarily evidence of exploitation. Finally, supporters say the merger could improve U.S. export competitiveness if it creates a more unified national freight network. Faster and more predictable rail service to Gulf, Atlantic, Pacific, and inland processing destinations could help U.S. grain and oilseeds compete better globally, particularly against Brazil and other exporters. Why these arguments matter: they rest on a different assumption than Munch’s. His analysis assumes that less structural independence means less competitive discipline and more risk for farmers. The opposing case assumes that operational efficiency and network integration can outweigh the loss of formal carrier separation, especially if regulators impose safeguards. The strongest pro-merger case is probably this: if the railroads do not meaningfully overlap, then the transaction may create more service value than competitive harm. The strongest anti-merger case remains this: even without parallel tracks, independent carriers at gateways and interchanges still provide bargaining leverage, and once that disappears, farmers may have little protection against higher costs and weaker service.

WEATHER

— NWS outlook: Intense clipper-like system will bring a swath of moderate to heavy snow across the Upper Great Lakes Thursday night… …Widespread high wind event expected from the northern Rockies to the

Upper Midwest today; Critical Risk of fire weather for the central/southern High Plains… …Active Atmospheric River pattern bringing heavy lower elevation/coastal rain and high elevation snow to the Pacific Northwest and northern Rockies… …A prolonged period of well above average heat for March will begin to build over the western U.S. heading into the weekend.