Trump Promises Fertilizer Relief, But Moroccan Duties Remain a Major Obstacle
Administration signals help on input costs while trade policy continues to restrict one of the world’s largest phosphate suppliers
President Trump told farmers in Wisconsin this week that fertilizer prices should fall within 90 days, arguing that easing geopolitical tensions and lower energy costs will bring relief to agriculture. The administration is also examining additional measures to address rising fertilizer costs as farmers face another year of tight margins.
Yet one of the most direct actions available to the administration — lifting countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizer imports from Morocco — has not happened.
The question is increasingly being asked by farm groups, fertilizer dealers and lawmakers: If lowering fertilizer costs is a priority, why keep tariffs in place on a major source of imported phosphate?
The Morocco tariff background. The United States imposed countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizer imports from Morocco and Russia in 2021 after a trade case brought by The Mosaic Company, the dominant U.S. phosphate producer. Commerce determined that Moroccan producer OCP received government subsidies that harmed U.S. manufacturers. The duties remain in place today and are undergoing a mandatory five-year “sunset review.”
Current duty rates on Moroccan phosphate fertilizer are roughly 16%-17%, depending on the review period.
The practical effect has been dramatic. Moroccan phosphate imports largely disappeared from the U.S. market after the duties were imposed. Several farm organizations argue that the loss of Moroccan supply reduced competition and contributed to higher fertilizer prices.
Why hasn’t Trump removed them? Several factors are likely at work.
1. Trade law limits presidential flexibility. Unlike Section 232 steel tariffs or many tariffs imposed under executive authority, countervailing duties operate under a quasi-judicial trade process administered by the Commerce Department and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). Removing the duties outside the statutory review process could expose the administration to legal challenges and criticism that it is overriding trade law for political reasons. The current five-year review is already underway, and officials may prefer to let that process play out for later this summer or fall.
2. Domestic fertilizer producers still have influence. The administration faces competing constituencies. Farm groups want lower fertilizer costs. However, domestic phosphate manufacturers want continued protection from subsidized imports. Mosaic and its allies have argued for years that Moroccan subsidies distort the market and threaten U.S. phosphate production. For a White House that has emphasized protecting domestic manufacturing, abruptly removing duties could be politically inconsistent with its broader trade agenda. That is clearly the stance of key officials within the Commerce Department.
3. The administration is divided. Reports indicate there is an active debate within the Trump administration over whether the duties still serve the national interest. Some officials view cheaper fertilizer as a farm-income issue, while others continue to prioritize trade enforcement and domestic industrial capacity. That internal split helps explain why farmers have heard promises of fertilizer relief but have yet to see action on Moroccan phosphate.
4. Fertilizer inflation is being viewed primarily as an energy problem. Administration officials have repeatedly linked current fertilizer inflation to the Iran conflict and disruptions to global energy and fertilizer trade routes. Their focus has largely been on restoring global supply flows and lowering natural gas and energy costs rather than revisiting existing phosphate trade cases. In other words, the White House appears to believe fertilizer prices can fall significantly even without lifting the Morocco duties.
Pressure is growing. The political pressure is intensifying. More than 60 agricultural organizations have urged the administration to revoke the phosphate duties, arguing that they reduce competition and raise costs for growers. Major commodity groups — including corn, soybean, wheat, rice and cotton organizations — have backed efforts to eliminate the tariffs. A bipartisan Senate bill was introduced this spring specifically to remove the Moroccan duties. The timing is difficult for the administration. Fertilizer prices have surged due to Middle East disruptions, and the FTC has opened an investigation into fertilizer pricing practices amid complaints from farmers that input costs have become unsustainable.
Bottom line: If the administration wants a quick and visible reduction in fertilizer costs, removing or suspending the Moroccan phosphate duties is arguably one of the most direct tools available. The challenge is that doing so would conflict with Trump’s broader “America First” trade philosophy and potentially anger domestic fertilizer manufacturers. As a result, the White House appears to be pursuing a less politically risky strategy: waiting for the ongoing trade review process while betting that lower energy prices and improved global fertilizer flows will accomplish much of the same goal. For farmers, however, the contradiction remains difficult to ignore. Washington is promising fertilizer relief while maintaining trade barriers on one of the world’s largest phosphate suppliers. Until that policy question is resolved, skepticism in farm country is likely to persist.
