HURON, S.D. — Farmers are broadly relieved by the $12 billion assistance package President Trump announced this week, but many say his trade policies are a key reason they remain unprofitable.
On a South Dakota farm, soybean grower Kevin Deinert opens the hatch of a silver grain bin and shows it full of this year’s harvest. In prior years, those beans would have been sold to China, which has purchased roughly 25 million metric tons annually from the U.S. since 2019. This spring, however, Chinese buyers shifted to Brazil and other suppliers after President Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese exports to the United States.
The loss of that market, along with rising costs for fertilizer and other inputs — driven higher by inflation and tariffs on suppliers such as Canada — has pushed many farmers into the red. Deinert says the $12 billion package is helpful but won’t solve all problems. “It’s meaningful,” he says. “Is the quantity going to alleviate all the farmers’ concerns? I don’t think so.”
Even typically conservative groups that welcomed the aid, like the American Farm Bureau Federation, cautioned it won’t fully restore farm finances. Missouri Farm Bureau President Garrett Hawkins called the bridge payments an important first step and urged the federal government to recalibrate trade strategies, open markets, boost domestic demand and strengthen long-term viability.
State chapters of the National Farmers Union have been more critical, arguing the administration’s trade actions have caused lasting harm. Doug Sombke, president of the South Dakota Farmers Union, said the administration is effectively bailing out farmers for damage rooted in the president’s own trade policies: “He’s back at the fire and he’s trying to put it out with a garden hose. And it’s an inferno.”
Agricultural lobbyists note farmers have lost long-standing trade relationships while paying four to five times more for some supplies and still contending with pandemic-era supply chain problems. Deinert, who also leads the South Dakota Soybean Growers Association, expresses a common sentiment among producers: “As farmers we want trade, not aid.”
The Trump administration did strike a new trade deal with China in November, pledging 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of February and 25 million metric tons over the next three years. If fulfilled, that would roughly restore pre-war volumes. Deinert says some grain is moving to Asia again, but much remains unsold. “We haven’t seen anything on paper,” he says. “Right now we’re just trading on headlines.”
The White House says payments from the $12 billion package should hit farmers’ bank accounts in late February. Producers must apply by Dec. 19 and should learn exact payment amounts in January. Officials also point to provisions in the “Big Beautiful Budget Act” that would raise price supports for commodity crops like soybeans and corn beginning late next year.
Timing matters as farmers decide how much to invest or borrow for spring planting; a federal payment guarantee could help secure financing. Still, some are pessimistic. John Kippley, a farmer near Aberdeen who also runs a tax preparation business, worries the aid may be too little and too late. “Banks are really nervous right now because they don’t know what’s going to happen,” the 80-year-old says. “Is he [Trump] going to put more tariffs on? Or is he going to lessen up on the tariffs? It just feels like the foreign countries don’t like us anymore.”
The health of the farm economy carries political weight ahead of next year’s midterm elections in deeply agricultural states such as South Dakota, a longtime Republican stronghold and home to Senate Majority Leader John Thune.