SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
HEARING ON 2026 TRADE POLICY AGENDA
For questions on the note below, please contact Scott Parsons, Edmund Perry, or Ruth Lunsford.
On July 22, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing entitled “The President’s 2026 Trade Policy Agenda,” with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer as the witness.
Below are key takeaways of the hearing prepared by Delta Strategy Group, followed by summaries of opening statements and discussion.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) Review & North American Trade: Discussions framed efforts to preserve and expand market access, address trade deficits with Canada and Mexico, improve enforcement, and provide greater certainty for North American trade. Greer said he hopes to reach interim arrangements with both countries before the end of the year while continuing to work on rules of origin and other issues.
- Trade Agreements, Reciprocity, & Enforcement: Remarks referenced implementation and enforcement of recent trade agreements, expanded market access, and the use of tariffs and other trade authorities to ensure foreign compliance. Greer highlighted nineteen framework or reciprocal trade agreements, outlining progress on tariff reductions, removal of non-tariff barriers, and acceptance of U.S. standards by trading partners.
- Agricultural Market Access & Fertilizer: Senators called for maintaining market access, securing fertilizer supply chains, and stabilizing input costs. Comments cited USMCA’s support for one-third of U.S. agricultural exports, alongside references to China’s agricultural commitments for U.S. soybeans, dumping and transshipment, and fertilizer export restrictions. Greer emphasized USTR’s work on expanding agricultural market access, balancing domestic fertilizer production with competitively priced inputs, and ensuring a level playing field by addressing unfair trade practices.
- Critical Minerals & Raw Materials: Discussions focused on reducing dependence on foreign critical minerals, expanding domestic production, diversifying supply chains, and addressing market distortions through trade policy. Topics included China’s export controls on processed critical minerals and rare earths, Indonesia’s export control commitments, and Russia’s dumping of palladium.
- Tariff Authority & Impacts: Ranking Member Wyden (D-OR) announced his introduction of the Congressional Trade Powers Reform Act, which would require congressional approval of presidential tariffs and establish an advisory committee to strengthen congressional oversight. Democrats criticized the economic impacts of tariffs, accessibility of tariff refunds, and lack of transparency surrounding the administration’s tariff policies. Greer disputed that tariffs’ costs were broadly passed on to consumers.
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Trade policy remains a cornerstone of U.S. economic strength and global leadership. U.S. trade policy must reflect our strategic priorities and economic realities. The administration has maintained a firm stance in addressing non-market policies and practices that distort competition and disadvantage U.S. companies while continuing to emphasize rebuilding domestic manufacturing capacity and securing critical supply chains. Market access remains a fundamental driver of U.S. economic growth, and U.S. producers depend on the ability to compete fairly in global markets. Unfair and discriminatory barriers to U.S. exports must be removed, whether through tariff reductions, the elimination of non-tariff barriers, or the establishment of clear and transparent rules. USMCA represents a 55 percent increase in investment in the U.S. from Canada and Mexico compared to pre-USMCA levels, and has led to $60 billion in agricultural exports, nearly one-third of all U.S. agricultural exports. Market access must be paired with strong enforcement for the USMCA and other trade agreements to remain effective. Robust enforcement ensures a level playing field. Fair market access and its enforcement are constantly tested by unfair trade practices that create significant economic hardships for our agricultural community. Certainty in the trade environment is crucial for U.S. industry to take full advantage of market-opening opportunities so businesses can grow and compete effectively. A combined effort between Congress and the administration is the most effective means to identify new opportunities for market access, create durable enforcement regimes and tools, ensure the fair application of long-standing U.S. trade goals, meet emerging challenges in the global trading system, and reaffirm U.S. global leadership. More here.
Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR)
The Trump trade agenda promised to lower costs, be tough on China, and open new markets for U.S. farmers and businesses, but these promises have not panned out. President Trump has embarked on a tariff spree, with farmers getting hammered by high prices for key inputs like fuel and equipment, disrupted supply chains, and imposed higher costs that remain despite the Supreme Court overturning Trump’s global tariffs. This week, President Trump announced massive new tariffs on many products from Canada using a provision from the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 and ordered USTR to reconstruct his illegal global tariffs under the guise of addressing forced labor. If the administration wants to get serious about forced labor, the first step is to look at its own enforcement record. Last year, Ambassador Greer said nearly fifty countries had approached him clamoring for trade deals. Instead, there have only been press releases and announcements about supposed deals that have not been approved by Congress, enforced, opened markets, or reduced tariffs. I am introducing the Congressional Trade Powers Reform Act to overhaul existing trade authorities to ensure that no future presidential administration can abuse its authority on trade and thrust the country into a cost-of-living crisis. It would require congressional approval of any tariff proposed by the President and establish an advisory committee to ensure that Congress can exercise its rightful oversight over tariffs and trade. It is time to restore consistency, reliability, and success in the U.S. trade agenda. More here.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer
The President’s trade policy in 2025 was characterized by a national emergency of a $1.2 trillion trade deficit that had grown forty percent over the prior four years. That national emergency persists, so our trade strategy remains the same. Although the specific authorities used have changed, we remain committed to using tariffs and negotiating deals to support the reindustrialization of the U.S. economy, shrink our trade deficit, and address these generational problems. The combination of tariffs and deals at the core of the President’s trade policy has yielded quick results. The U.S. currently has nineteen framework or reciprocal trade deals covering 32 percent of global gross domestic product. The deal with Indonesia is substantive, with annexes and tariff schedules, and I have a dozen more deals like this. The new market access secured in these deals, and the protection they offer from unfair trade practices, has been a boon to our producers. U.S. exports reached the highest monthly levels on record in U.S. history from February through May of this year. The U.S. has not stopped trading with the world, but the composition of that trade has changed in a way that benefits Americans. We are selling more to the world than ever before because of our increased capacity to produce, and our imports are increasingly the type of goods that help us produce even more here. These dynamics have helped reduce our trade deficit. After the introduction of the President’s reciprocal trade program in April 2025, the U.S. trade deficit in goods for the twelve months ending in May 2026 decreased by 24 percent compared with the same period a year earlier. Instead of the average annual eight percent increase in the trade deficit experienced under President Biden, that rate of increase slowed substantially and is now being reversed. President Biden left office with a monthly agricultural trade deficit of $6.2 billion. Under President Trump, it is under $3 billion, and we are on the road to an agricultural trade surplus again. A large part of the positive change in the U.S. trade deficit is due to reduced dependence on China. Our trade deficit in goods with China fell to $200 billion in 2025, the lowest it has been since 2005. China’s share of total U.S. imports fell to about nine percent, the lowest it has been since China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. This administration wants an economy that is resilient to shocks, is not dependent on foreign production for critical goods. More here.
DISCUSSION
U.S.-Mexico-Canada Review & North American Trade
Chairman Crapo (R-ID): Given the bipartisan support expressed during the Committee’s February USMCA hearing for fully enforcing the agreement, what is a realistic timeline for concluding the USMCA negotiations underway and providing greater certainty? Greer: After this hearing, I am flying to Mexico City to meet with President Sheinbaum and Secretary Ebrard. We are actively negotiating and moving with all due speed. Some important issues, including rules of origin, may take more time for further discussion, including with Congress, in the following year. We want the rules of origin to be very strong to incentivize production in North America, as opposed to other regions with excess capacity or non-market practices. I am hopeful that before the end of the year, we can have options for President Trump and the leaders of Canada and/or Mexico to consider potential interim arrangements, or things that Canada and Mexico can do to strengthen enforcement, improve their commitments toward us, and make sure we are managing all of the trade issues. I would love to have, before the end of the year, at least one arrangement with Canada and one with Mexico.
Senator Cornyn: What should we make of the administration’s decision not to renew the USMCA during the July 1 joint review, given that the agreement remains in effect through the annual review process? Greer: The options are to renew the agreement without further revisions or decline to renew and see whether there are ways to improve the trading relationship. President Trump already identified problems with the USMCA, including an exploding trade deficit with Mexico. There are a number of issues we need to address with Mexico, including rules of origin, to make sure any benefits from trade between our countries benefit our countries, not a third country like Vietnam or China. We want to improve our trading relationship with Canada and Mexico while maintaining the load-bearing pillars of the USMCA, including agricultural market access. We are already addressing areas where we have seen issues to help ensure we can bring more production to the U.S.
Senator Cornyn: Given Mexico’s continued failure to meet its obligations under the 1944 Water Treaty and the resulting harm to farmers in South Texas, can the USMCA joint review process be used to reinforce Mexico’s compliance and accountability? Greer: This is largely a State Department jurisdiction issue because of the treaty, and USTR monitors it as people express interest. During the review process, if we want to have a beneficial trading relationship with Mexico and some kind of arrangement with them, they also need to be playing ball on this issue. The President is going to have a hard time agreeing to renewal, or even revisions, if Mexico is not playing ball in all areas, including the water treaty.
Senator Welch: What steps is the administration taking to provide greater transparency, consistency, and certainty in its tariff policies toward Canada? Greer: Canada has benefited from the best trade agreement and treatment. The vast majority of what Canada has been sending to us has continued to come in preferentially, including under the tailored actions taken this week. We are fighting against Canada’s bans and hard caps on specific U.S. exports, despite the fact that we have never banned Canadian products. We are trying to balance this relationship and have as much liberal trade in North America as possible while protecting U.S. producers.
Senator Barrasso (R-WY): How is the administration holding Canada and Mexico accountable for their USMCA commitments to reduce industry-specific barriers and expand U.S. market access? Greer: We approach negotiations in two ways. First, we seek the removal of tariff barriers. A few weeks ago, the EU lowered all its tariffs on industrial goods. Second, we address non-tariff barriers by providing each country with a list of specific regulatory issues or certifications and asking them to resolve and simplify them.
Trade Agreements & Reciprocity
Chairman Crapo: What is the status of implementing and bringing into force the reciprocal trade agreements, particularly the market access provisions for U.S. agricultural exports? Greer: Some countries, including Argentina, Cambodia, and North Macedonia, have already removed all of their tariffs on U.S. goods. Malaysia and Indonesia are looking to the fall to fully implement their commitments, including reducing all of their tariffs to zero and removing non-tariff barriers. We signed an agreement with Jordan yesterday, and they have already acted to further liberalize their market toward us. Israel has also passed an agreement to accept U.S. standards. A number of these countries have already implemented their commitments, while others are going through their domestic processes. Earlier this month, the EU lowered its industrial tariffs to zero and provided several tariff free quotas for U.S. farmers.
Ranking Member Wyden (D-OR): When the new tariff on Canada takes effect, will there be products in which the new fifty percent tariff on Canada is higher than the tariff on comparable products from China? Greer: China is by far subject to very high tariffs, including 45 to 50 percent tariffs on most goods and well over forty percent on all steel and aluminum, with some in the triple digits. We have stacking tariffs on China that do not apply to other countries, and we are happy to provide an analysis.
Senator Daines (R-MT): What progress has USTR made in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, recognizing concerns that the Jackson-Vanik trade restrictions have become a barrier to deeper engagement in this strategically important region? Greer: If these countries open their markets to us, that is a complementary effort that we can support. Uzbekistan wants to be much more Western-oriented, especially in economics. It has offered to open its market to us and provided a very robust market access offer to reduce tariffs on a number of things that are important to us. They are hungry for U.S. goods, so it is a real market and a real opportunity. Kazakhstan is also an interesting partner, especially because it has many of the critical minerals we seek. We do not want to shift dependency from one place to Kazakhstan, but we do want to diversify, and various parts of the administration have been working with Kazakhstan to explore critical mineral opportunities there.
Enforcement & 301 Investigations
Chairman Crapo: What steps is USTR taking to ensure these trade commitments are durable and enforced over time? Greer: Enforcement is very important to this administration. Trade enforcement means tariffs, with a tariff as the implementing sanction if countries do not comply. We expect countries to implement and maintain their commitments to the U.S. I will use whatever tools I have, including Section 301 and other authorities, to enforce these agreements. My hope is that any successor would take the same strong approach to enforcing these agreements and commitments.
Senator Whitehouse (D-RI): Given that multiple administrations have struggled to enforce the environmental requirements in U.S. trade agreements, what improvements is USTR pursuing to strengthen enforcement of those commitments? Greer: As we conclude these reciprocal trade agreements, we are including requirements that countries raise their environmental standards to at least meet the bare minimum so that we can have a level playing field. We have had complaints for years about Brazil’s deforestation practices, which give it an unfair advantage over our farmers. As a result, we have taken Section 301 action and a firm stance on deforestation in Brazil.
Agriculture
Senator Grassley (R-IA): How are you working to ensure that U.S. agricultural producers are not caught up in trade retaliation as USMCA negotiations with Mexico move forward? Greer: Mexico has not retaliated and has been very pragmatic because it is dependent on the U.S. market for its growth and employment, allowing our countries to proceed in a nondramatic way. Mexico understands that if it acts on open investigations, the consequences could be quite challenging. The issue has been raised at the highest levels of the Mexican government, and we are monitoring the situation. If there is any movement, we will work with Congress and do what is necessary to maintain the open market enjoyed over the past several years.
Senator Bennet (D-CO): Can you commit that U.S. farmers and ranchers will not lose market access in Canada or Mexico because of the administration’s approach to the USMCA negotiations? How will USTR use USMCA negotiations to improve the position of U.S. producers with Canada and Mexico? Greer: When President Trump left office after his first term, we had an agricultural trade surplus and now we must dig out of the agricultural trade deficit left by President Biden. My Canadian counterpart did not say they were going to retaliate, and the Mexicans know that we need to keep market access there. The nature of all our trade deals over the past year has been maintaining and expanding market access for our farmers.
Senator Blackburn (R-TN): How are you ensuring that China follows through on its agricultural trade commitments, particularly with respect to U.S. soybean exports, and addressing nefarious practices such as dumping and transshipment? Greer: Written response for the record.
Senator Smith (D-MN): Given concerns that subsidized global sugar production is depressing prices for domestic producers, what U.S. trade tools, including a Section 301 investigation, can be used to address these trade practices and support domestic sugar producers? Greer: We are working very closely with the domestic industry right now to assess its view of the unfair trading practices that might persist overseas and the legal basis for any Section 301 action.
Fertilizer
Senator Grassley: Given that there are only two suppliers of anhydrous ammonia in the U.S., will you commit to working with U.S. trading partners to increase the availability of fertilizer for U.S. farmers, including by removing tariffs on anhydrous ammonia to expand supply and competition? Greer: The President is very nuanced on the fertilizer supply chain and will continue to work to strike the right balance between domestic fertilizer production and making sure farmers have the inputs they need at a price that makes them competitive. We do not want to rely on China or have domestic producers be subject to devastating subsidies from other countries. We want fair competition, a level playing field, as much security as possible, and to maintain our food security.
Senator Grassley: How are you addressing China’s fertilizer export restrictions that are disrupting global fertilizer markets, and what steps are you taking to secure their removal in trade negotiations? Greer: China’s economic policies are closely tied to its political policies. It is not a free market economy, and China likes to weaponize these tools to control its own supply and secure its own supply chain, including fertilizer. We will continue to work with China and raise these issues with them. We have been able to obtain concessions from them, but we should all be realistic about the possibilities.
Critical Minerals & Raw Materials
Senator Cornyn: What is the status of negotiations with China regarding U.S. access to processed critical minerals and rare earths, given that China processes roughly ninety percent of the world’s rare earth elements, as the U.S. works to diversify alternative sources? Greer: China has had a commitment since last May to expedite export control processing and export control applications for U.S. companies, including those routed through third countries. We are getting a flow of critical minerals from China, although not as much or at the pace we would want. We have regular meetings and calls with Chinese officials and maintain substantial leverage, including a variety of trade tools, to make sure they comply. We are getting the majority of what we need while accelerating domestic production to get away from that dependency.
Senator Daines (R-MT): Given concerns that Russia is dumping palladium below U.S. prices, thereby threatening domestic sources, would you support corrective action to address Russia’s market manipulation? Greer: I am supportive of corrections anywhere there is a distorted market. We want to make sure our miners have a level playing field, especially for critical minerals like palladium.
Senator Smith (D-MN): What opportunities exist to use U.S. trade tools to protect domestic taconite producers from illegal and unfair trade practices, given continued imports of foreign iron ore and layoffs the domestic taconite industry? Greer: There are trade tools we can use because we are so import-dependent on some of these inputs. If we phase something in over a short period of time to signal to the market that domestic taconite is where it is at and where it is going to be, we can wean ourselves off that dependency over time.
Senator Cortez Masto: What is the status of discussions with Indonesia regarding U.S. access to raw critical minerals, given Indonesia’s longstanding restrictions on such exports and conflicting statements about whether restrictions would be lifted as part of recent trade negotiations? Greer: This is important to USTR, and we want to hold Indonesia’s feet to the fire. Indonesia has committed to expedite its export control regime for us. They are trying to balance geopolitically what they are doing and are working with us. When we raised concerns about some minerals not being able to be exported, the Indonesians took care of it right away. We have a good working relationship with them, but we must keep their feet to the fire to ensure they live up to these agreements.
Senator Barrasso (R-WY): Given concerns that India may restrict imports of U.S. soda ash, how are you working to ensure fair market access for U.S. producers and a level playing field in the Indian market? Greer: I have a good relationship with my counterpart in India, and we work closely with its trade ministry. We will raise this with them and advocate for soda ash producers. While India has its own internal processes on trade remedies, like we do, we want to make sure those processes are fair, that our producers are treated fairly, and that they get to the right answer.
Tariff Impacts & Refunds
Senators Whitehouse (D-RI), Warren (D-MA): Given concerns that large companies are better positioned to obtain tariff refunds and that refunded tariffs may not be passed on to consumers, what is the administration doing to make the tariff refund process more accessible to ensure refunds benefit the consumers who ultimately bore the costs? Greer: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) operates a website where an importer of record that paid a tariff can file to recover it. When the court ruled, it ordered the money returned to the foreign and domestic importers of record that paid the tariffs, as requested by the Democratic Attorneys General. Those importers can file to get the tariffs back. The Attorneys General did not ask that the money be given to consumers. I do not concede that the tariffs were passed on to consumers. A lot of the cost was absorbed by foreign companies and diluted throughout the supply chain.
Senator Warnock (D-GA): Will USTR commit to producing, within sixty days, a formal and rigorous study examining the relationship between the President’s tariffs and price increases? Greer: The CEA’s analyses show that in June, the Consumer Price Index fell 0.4 percent, below expectations of a 1.1 percent increase. Core inflation was 2.6 percent year over year, down from 3.3 percent in January 2025 and in contrast to the Biden administration’s nine percent inflation. We have substantial data that we will provide.