Corn, Soybean and Wheat Growers Unite Against Bayer Petition Seeking Tariffs on Chinese Glyphosate Imports
July 1, 2026 Three of the nation’s largest commodity organizations are voicing strong opposition to Bayer Crop Science’s request for new tariffs on glyphosate products imported from China, warning the move could significantly increase production costs for farmers already grappling with a difficult agricultural economy.
The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), American Soybean Association (ASA), and National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) each issued statements criticizing Bayer’s petition, filed by Monsanto Company and its subsidiary Ruveon LLC with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and U.S. Department of Commerce. The petition seeks antidumping and countervailing duties on glyphosate imports from China, alleging the products are being sold at unfairly low prices.
Grower organizations argue that while Bayer says the tariffs are necessary to protect domestic manufacturing, the practical effect would be higher herbicide prices and fewer purchasing options for farmers who depend on glyphosate as one of the most widely used crop protection tools in U.S. agriculture.
NCGA President Jed Bower, an Ohio farmer, accused Bayer of putting corporate interests ahead of its farm customers.
“Agricultural companies like to position themselves as a partner to American farmers,” Bower said. “This is no act of partnership. They are taking this step purely for benefit of the company and its shareholders, once again at the expense of the American farmer and at a time when the ag economy is facing one of its most difficult periods in decades.”
NCGA said Bayer’s filing represents a growing pattern of agricultural input suppliers using trade remedy laws to reduce foreign competition and strengthen their market position. The organization pointed to previous countervailing duty cases involving phosphate fertilizer and the herbicide 2,4-D, arguing those actions increased costs without adequately considering their impact on farmers.
“The American corn grower has shown up repeatedly to defend access to important tools in our toolbox,” Bower said. “Unfortunately, we are being forced to defend our access to these tools again, but now we’re doing so thanks to the actions of companies we’ve previously partnered with.”
Despite its criticism of Bayer’s petition, NCGA emphasized it has consistently supported continued access to glyphosate. The organization previously joined other agricultural groups in legal efforts supporting Bayer in litigation over glyphosate labeling and product availability, underscoring what it views as the importance of maintaining farmer access to the herbicide.
The American Soybean Association echoed many of those concerns, stressing that affordable access to glyphosate is essential as soybean producers continue to face narrow profit margins and rising production expenses.
ASA noted that Bayer is currently the only domestic manufacturer and supplier of glyphosate while China remains the world’s largest producer and exporter. The organization warned that restricting imports through antidumping and countervailing duties could reduce market competition, increase prices and create additional supply challenges.
“Glyphosate remains a critical crop protection tool that soybean farmers rely on to produce an efficient and reliable crop,” ASA said in its statement.
The soybean organization also highlighted its long-standing opposition to similar trade actions involving agricultural inputs. ASA pointed to its efforts opposing tariffs on imported phosphate fertilizers and 2,4-D herbicide, arguing those cases demonstrated how trade restrictions can ultimately increase costs for producers.
According to ASA, a recent Texas A&M University study estimated phosphate fertilizer duties imposed between 2021 and 2025 cost growers approximately $6.9 billion. The organization recently applauded President Donald Trump’s executive order suspending phosphate fertilizer duties for eight months and continues to advocate for their permanent removal.
As Bayer’s glyphosate petition moves through the federal review process, ASA said it is evaluating the potential implications and plans to advocate for policies that preserve reliable, affordable access to crop protection products while maintaining competitive agricultural input markets.
The National Association of Wheat Growers also warned that new glyphosate tariffs would arrive at an especially difficult time for wheat producers already facing weak commodity prices and elevated production costs.
NAWG CEO Sam Kieffer compared the proposal to previous fertilizer tariffs, saying wheat farmers have already experienced the financial consequences of higher input costs tied to trade actions.
“Wheat farmers cannot predict the future,” Kieffer said. “But we know that U.S. tariffs on Russian and Moroccan phosphates cost wheat farmers $1 billion in additional and unnecessary fertilizer expenses over the last five years.”
Kieffer said additional tariffs on glyphosate would likely produce similar results.
“Farmers need reliable access to affordable crop protection products and a competitive marketplace — not new trade barriers that could drive up costs,” he said. “NAWG opposes tariffs and urges the ITC to fully consider the impacts on American farmers, rural economies and the U.S. food system.”
Although each organization represents different crop sectors, their statements present a unified message: growers fear additional tariffs on a key herbicide will further strain farm profitability during an already challenging economic period.
Collectively, the organizations argue that federal trade officials should weigh the broader consequences for U.S. agriculture as they evaluate Bayer’s petition. They contend that preserving competition in agricultural input markets and ensuring farmers have access to affordable crop protection products is essential to maintaining the competitiveness of American agriculture.
Subscribe Today For
