Inside the seed sector’s high-stakes fight to keep North American trade working.
It’s easy to forget how seamlessly seed flows across North America — until the flow gets pinched.
At the 2025 ASTA Leadership Summit, trade took center stage as representatives from all three countries under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) gathered with moderator and ASTA’s director of international programs and policy Sam Crowell for a frank conversation about tariffs, regulation, innovation and what’s at stake for the seed sector if collaboration falters.
The message? Seed trade may not always make headlines — but it underpins food security, economic stability and innovation pipelines across the continent. And it’s under more pressure than ever.
A Small but Mighty Sector
“Over $1.7 billion in seed exports left the U.S. in 2024,” Crowell said. “That might sound like a small sliver of ag exports, but those exports support nearly $170 billion in overall ag trade. We like to say we’re small but mighty.”
Crowell paints a picture of a highly mobile seed system: products that move across borders multiple times for breeding, testing, seed treatments, coating, priming, and final sale. The complexity means even a subtle shift in trade policy — or a misstep in regulatory alignment — can ripple through the entire supply chain.
“Just because you produce seed in one location and re-export it through another doesn’t mean you automatically qualify for a lower tariff rate,” he explains. “There are rules of origin, documentation requirements, and timelines that can trip you up. It’s not always intuitive — and we’re in a moment where all of that is about to get harder.”
The Tariff Tangle
Starting July 9, if current U.S. negotiations don’t yield agreements, many seed imports will jump from a flat 10% tariff to country-specific rates — as high as 55% in China’s case.
The panel members say that’s not just bad news for seed companies trying to protect thin margins. It’s a threat to farmers who rely on timely access to the best genetics and technologies.
“We’re looking at a 25% tariff for non-USMCA-origin seed even if it’s just transiting through Mexico or Canada,” Crowell said.
Jason Hafemeister, acting associate administrator for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service, didn’t downplay the moment:
“This isn’t the environment we were in 10 years ago,” he said. “Now, trade is being driven by a different set of priorities — fairness, strategic independence, revenue generation. Agriculture isn’t leading the conversation, but we’re definitely feeling it.”
Deep Roots, Strong Ties
For Carlos Vanderloo, Minister-Counsellor for Economic and Trade Policy at the Canadian Embassy to the United States, the resilience of U.S.-Canada seed trade comes from decades of trust and interdependence.
“We do $600 million-plus in bilateral seed trade every year — that’s not pocket change,” he said. “Canada imports most of its vegetable seed from the U.S., and we send a lot of forages and grasses. It’s complementary, it’s stable and it keeps food on our tables.”
Vanderloo noted that while seeds don’t come up in every ag conversation, their role has grown — especially with the pressure of climate change. “How do you farm when it’s pouring rain in Winnipeg but your cabin’s on fire (in a severe drought) two hours north? Seed innovation is critical.”
A Caution from the South
Carlos Vazquez Ochoa, Agricultural Minister at Mexico’s Embassy to the United States, brought a layered perspective — balancing optimism with concern.
“Our seed trade relationship is built on complementarity and fairness,” he said. “Since NAFTA, agricultural trade between the U.S. and Mexico has grown tenfold. But right now, we are in a moment of tension.”
He warned of the chilling effect current U.S. tariffs could have on trust — not just economically, but diplomatically. Then, he turned to CIMMYT, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, based in Mexico.
“The U.S. has cut its funding to CIMMYT by $80 million — nearly 40% of its budget,” he said. “That threatens global corn and wheat research. If it continues, this research hub could be reallocated outside our region, and with it, we lose vital resources, germplasm, and scientists who’ve dedicated their lives to feeding the world. I’m asking for your help — take this message to USDA, to Congress, to the State Department. Defend seeds.”
Seeds in the Shadows
Despite seed’s enormous global footprint, all three panelists agreed it rarely grabs the spotlight — especially compared to bulk grains, livestock or steel.
“Seeds don’t often make the front page, because a lot of times, it just works,” Crowell said. “But that doesn’t mean we can take it for granted.”
Hafemeister echoed that sentiment.
“When you talk to companies, especially U.S. seed exporters, the challenges aren’t just tariffs,” he said. “They’re phytosanitary headaches, regulatory delays, inconsistent IP protections. Sometimes it takes a little ‘policy sugar’ to get through the thicket of bureaucracy.”
Protecting IP, Enabling Innovation
Intellectual property may not be flashy, but it’s essential. Vanderloo, who admitted he’s not an ag guy by training, now sees its value firsthand.
“There’s so much that goes into creating a single seed variety — years of effort, resources, brainpower,” he said. “Especially in a climate like ours, where variability is the only constant, you can’t deliver yield without that upstream innovation. Canada is moving toward UPOV 91+ and we know it matters.”
Vazquez Ochoa, representing a developing country’s view, was honest about the challenges: “Our institutions are under-resourced. We don’t have the enforcement strength the U.S. has. But we believe in IP. It’s critical — and we’re trying to build that capacity.”
The Genome Editing Divide
When it comes to innovation, the panel didn’t dodge the elephant in the room: genome editing. Hafemeister stressed USDA’s role in making sure global regulatory frameworks stay science-based and interoperable.
“We’re spending a lot of time monitoring how countries are writing their gene editing policies,” he said. “We need a predictable system — not just to sell these products, but to develop them in the first place.”
Vanderloo framed it as a moral imperative. “The goal is to put food on tables — especially in a changing climate. We have to equip producers with what they need to succeed.”
Vazquez Ochoa acknowledged Mexico’s internal rift, saying there are two camps. One supports innovation. The other sees white corn as cultural identity — not just food.
“The tension isn’t going away soon,” he said.
A Call for Calm — and Action
With the 2026 USMCA review looming, the panel closed on a note of cautious hope.
“We need everything to settle down,” Vazquez Ochoa said. “We need the space to return to cooperation — to shared prosperity.”
Vanderloo urged action. “This agreement has delivered. Let’s make sure it stays fit for purpose. But we need your voices — your elected officials need to hear from you.”
Hafemeister kept it grounded.
“A lot of what’s driving trade today isn’t ag. But ag still carries the load. We’re the foundation. And we’ve got to keep showing up.”
