Breaking Down the November 2025 NDSU Agricultural Trade Monitor: New U.S.–China Deal, Soybean Commitments, Port Fee Suspension, and SE Asia Deal

The November 2025 edition of the NDSU Agricultural Trade Monitor, published by North Dakota State University’s Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies (CAPTS), examines the implications of the newly announced U.S.–China trade agreement, the suspension of Section 301 port fees, and expanded agricultural access in Southeast Asia. Together, these developments are reshaping U.S. agricultural export competitiveness heading into the 2025/26 marketing year.

China Partially Suspends Retaliatory Tariffs and Commits to U.S. Soybean Purchases

China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural goods, originally imposed in March 2025 in response to the U.S. “Fentanyl tariff”, have been partially suspended. This marks a notable easing of tensions following months of restricted market access for major U.S. farm products, including soybeans, corn, wheat, beef, pork, poultry, and dairy. The 10% retaliatory tariff tied to the “reciprocal tariff” measures enacted in April 2025, however, remains in effect.

Under the new deal, China committed to importing 12 million metric tons (MMT) of U.S. soybeans through January 2026, followed by 25 MMT annually for 2026–2028, a total of 87 MMT. These volume-based commitments establish a measurable export floor for U.S. soybeans, contrasting with the value-based Phase 1 targets of $36.5–$43.5 billion.

Exhibit 1: China’s Soybean Market: U.S. export rebound since 2018 collapse (left) alongside China’s total imports stabilized at 22–25 MMT with emerging commitment floor (right).

Source: NDSU using data from S&P Global Trade Atlas and USDA FAS.

While the 25 MMT annual floor remains below pre-2018 trade averages of 30–36 MMT, it effectively prevents further erosion of the U.S. market share. The agreement acknowledges China’s structural shift toward Brazilian suppliers while maintaining a defined minimum level of U.S. purchases.

However, compliance details remain unclear. The deal does not specify monitoring mechanisms, enforcement measures, or whether it includes “market conditions” clauses that would allow flexibility under unfavorable price conditions.

Will China Buy U.S. Soybeans Regardless of Price?

Historical evidence suggests that China purchases U.S. soybeans primarily when they are price-competitive relative to Brazilian alternatives. U.S. soybeans typically sell at a premium of about $20 per metric ton, and Chinese buying surges when this premium narrows. When tariffs increase that spread, as seen in 2018–2020 and again in early 2025, Chinese importers tend to pause purchases entirely.

This raises a critical question: will China prioritize its 25 MMT commitment even if U.S. soybeans remain more expensive due to tariffs and freight differentials, or will purchases continue to follow market fundamentals? Early market behavior will likely reveal whether policy commitments outweigh price-driven decisions.

Exhibit 2: Brazil–U.S. Soybean Landed Price with Tariff in China Differential by week (green line) and US Weekly Net Export Sales to China (yellow bars). Positive spreads (green line above zero) indicate U.S. is selling at a discount relative to Brazil soybeans.

Notes: Landed price in China includes shipping and insurance costs with tariffs (both MFN and retaliatory). The retaliatory tariff spike in April 2025 is not captured for presentation purposes.

Source: NDSU using data from Fastmarkets and USDA FAS Export Sales.

Markets Respond to the Trade Deal

Commodity markets reacted strongly to the announcement. Soybean futures climbed above $11 per bushel, their highest level in over a year, following confirmation of the new Chinese commitments. Sorghum and wheat prices rose 7–8% amid speculation of renewed Chinese buying. By contrast, corn and cotton prices were largely unchanged, as neither commodity was explicitly included in the agreement.

Exhibit 3: Soybean, cotton, sorghum, and corn prices before and after the U.S.–China trade deal.

Note: cotton in cents/lb, all else in $/bushel.

Source: NDSU using data from DTN.

The soybean basis, the difference between local cash and futures prices, also strengthened by 40–50 cents per bushel from September lows, reflecting improved demand expectations. However, basis levels remain historically weak, indicating that sustained export activity will be necessary to maintain momentum.

Exhibit 4: Spot Basis, January to October 2025.

Source: NDSU using data from DTN.

Section 301 Port Fee Suspension Restores U.S. Competitiveness

The suspension of Section 301 port fees, effective November 10, 2025, provides significant relief to agricultural exporters. Had these fees remained in place, they would have cost U.S. agriculture roughly $2.3 billion, adding up to 5–7 cents per bushel in shipping costs for bulk commodities such as corn, soybeans, and wheat.

Freight rate data show that U.S. export routes to China became less competitive following the port fee announcements earlier this year, eroding cost advantages relative to Canadian and Brazilian shipments. The one-year suspension temporarily restores competitiveness, narrowing the freight rate gap with Canadian (1.8–1.9¢/bu) and Brazilian (2.7¢/bu) exporters, though long-term shipping and infrastructure challenges persist.

Exhibit 5: Bulk Freight Rates on Routes to China

Note: The left panel shows bulk freight rate from the U.S. Pacific Northwest (PNW) to North China and from West Canada to South China. The right panel shows bulk freight rates from the U.S. Gulf and Brazil to North China. The premium is calculated as the difference between freight rates from the U.S. and competing routes.

Southeast Asia Agreements Expand Market Access

In addition to the U.S.–China deal, the United States signed new agricultural trade frameworks with Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, and Vietnam. These agreements aim to reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers, supporting potential growth in U.S. exports of feed grains, oilseeds, meat, and dairy products.

The announcement also referenced 19 MMT of soybean purchases from Southeast Asian countries, though the details remain unclear. It is uncertain whether this figure represents an annual commitment, a multi-year total, or includes both soybeans and soybean meal. If spread over three years, it would equate to approximately 6–7 MMT annually, slightly above current trade volumes.

Regardless, these agreements highlight the region’s growing importance as a secondary demand hub for U.S. soy products, complementing the partial recovery in Chinese demand.

Read the full November 2025 NDSU Agricultural Trade Monitor: https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.373422

Author and Contact Information:

Shawn Arita – shawn.arita@ndsu.edu

Jiyeon Kim – jiyeon.kim@ndsu.edu

Wuit Yi Lwin – wuityi.lwin@ndsu.edu

Sandro Steinbach – sandro.steinbach@ndsu.edu

Ming Wang – ming.wang@ndsu.edu

Xiting Zhuang – xiting.zhuang@ndsu.edu