The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) began a mandatory five-year review on February 27 of countervailing duties imposed on phosphate fertilizer imports from Morocco and Russia, reopening debate over whether the tariffs continue to protect domestic producers or are instead raising input costs for U.S. farmers. The review matters because fertilizer is a critical input for crop yields, and elevated prices are squeezing farm margins across corn, soybean and wheat operations at a time of volatile commodity prices and uncertainty surrounding the next farm bill.

The review process includes a formal request for information from industry stakeholders to determine whether removing the duties would likely cause material injury to U.S.-based phosphate producers. The countervailing duties were first imposed in 2021, after the Commerce Department concluded that state-backed support in Morocco and Russia unfairly benefited exporters and harmed the U.S. fertilizer industry.

Since 2024, Morocco's OCP has faced duties exceeding 16%, while Russian producer Apatit is subject to an 18% rate, with other Russian exporters facing duties ranging from 17.2% to 47.1%. After implementation, major Moroccan and Russian suppliers effectively exited the U.S. market, tightening domestic supply and contributing to higher fertilizer prices nationwide.

A Texas A&M University study estimates that the tariffs alone increased fertilizer costs for U.S. producers by approximately $6.9 billion between 2021 and 2025. For operations already managing elevated fuel, labor, machinery and crop insurance expenses, fertilizer represents one of the largest line items in row-crop budgets, directly impacting net farm income.

Phosphate fertilizers such as diammonium phosphate (DAP) and monoammonium phosphate (MAP) are essential for maintaining soil fertility, supporting root development, and maximizing per-acre yields, particularly in the Corn Belt. According to market analyst Josh Linville of StoneX, DAP began 2026 with the highest-ever price-to-corn value ratio on record, highlighting the widening gap between input costs and grain prices. As of late February, the ratio remained tied for the third-highest level historically, underscoring persistent pressure on producer profitability.

Industry concentration is another key factor in the debate. Although six companies produce phosphate-based fertilizers domestically, more than 70% of U.S. production comes from just two firms: Nutrien and Mosaic, according to a 2023 analysis by Argus Media. Lawmakers and analysts have raised concerns that limited competition in the domestic fertilizer sector may amplify price volatility and constrain supply chain flexibility.

To meet demand, the United States depends on imports from countries including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Mexico, Senegal and Tunisia. Yet global fertilizer supply chains remain fragile. China, the world's largest phosphate producer, has restricted exports in recent years to prioritize domestic supply, further tightening global availability and supporting elevated prices.

Until November, additional reciprocal U.S. tariffs compounded market stress. The United States applied a 10% duty on Saudi Arabia and a 15% duty on Jordan before phosphate fertilizers were excluded from those measures and from a subsequent 10% global tariff. Even so, researchers at North Dakota State University estimate that U.S. importers paid more than $31 million in duties before exemptions took effect, adding to upstream cost pressures.

Geopolitical risks remain a significant wildcard. Analysts warn that escalating tensions involving Iran could disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway that transports a substantial share of the world's oil and significant volumes of phosphate fertilizers. Any disruption could further elevate global fertilizer benchmarks, complicating spring planting decisions and long-term input procurement strategies.

The ITC's five-year review arrives at a pivotal moment for U.S. agriculture. As producers navigate compressed margins, shifting trade policy, and debates over the next farm bill, the outcome could influence fertilizer affordability, planting intentions, crop yields, and rural economic stability.

If the duties remain in place, domestic manufacturers may retain protection against subsidized imports. If they are lifted, increased import competition could ease supply constraints and moderate prices-but potentially reshape the competitive landscape for the U.S. fertilizer sector.

For farmers, agronomists, co-ops, input suppliers, policymakers and investors, the review is more than a regulatory requirement. It represents a critical decision point at the intersection of trade enforcement, supply chain resilience, input cost management and the long-term competitiveness of American agriculture.