International buyers with enterprise within the agriculture sector are contemplating bringing claims towards the U.S. authorities as some imagine tariffs have violated worldwide funding treaties that promise them truthful therapy.
Worldwide agriculture companies with investments like distribution networks and subsidiaries within the U.S. are weathering tariffs, which have brought on them to change their enterprise actions, renegotiate contracts with distributors and even threaten to cost them out of the market, specialists inform Fortune. In response to those produce tariffs, international buyers are contemplating bringing claims towards the U.S. below worldwide funding treaties, which embody a myriad of stipulations like truthful and equitable therapy and protects towards depriving buyers from benefiting from their U.S.-based investments.
Produce imports on items largely grown exterior the U.S., together with bananas, blueberries and avocados, totaled extra $33 billion final 12 months. Many massive, internationally-based agriculture corporations set up U.S. subsidiaries as an alternative of promoting on to wholesalers, investing in equipment, employees, and a distribution community to promote its product. However tariffs have squeezed margins for these commodities, which has made U.S. parts of those ag companies onerous to maintain, Tiffany Comprés, founding associate and co-chair of worldwide disputes at Pierson Ferdinand LLP, informed Fortune.
“Fresh produce has had no tariffs since around the 90s,” Comprés mentioned, including that investments in a U.S. distribution community for contemporary produce sellers have been made below the expectation that tariffs would stay at zero. “Right now you are imposing tariffs, and it’s already a low margin business, so you’re effectively destroying the ability of that business to function.”
That is the declare that some international ag companies are contemplating suing the U.S. authorities over, Comprés, who represents some international agriculture buyers, mentioned.
If international buyers resolve to observe by means of, they might start the method by bringing a declare towards the U.S. in a world arbitration tribunal, reasonably than a home courtroom, alleging that tariffs violate the requirements of therapy for investments outlined in worldwide funding treaties. Worldwide funding treaty disputes are arbitrated below a third-party establishment that employs attorneys who focus on worldwide legislation and haven’t any specific ties to both celebration. None could be residents of both nation.
Though the USMCA settlement presently excludes tariffs for items from the nation’s largest commerce companions in Mexico and Canada, imports from Latin American nations—together with bananas and low, which the U.S. depends on to satisfy client demand—are going through steep tariffs, David Ortega, a meals economist and professor at Michigan State College’s School of Agriculture & Pure Sources informed Fortune.
“Brazil is the largest producer of coffee. They’re a major source of our coffee imports, and they’re currently facing 50% tariffs,” Ortega mentioned. “So that’s raising the cost of product, the cost of importing the coffee into the US, and having very significant impacts on roasters here, but also on producers in Brazil who no longer have tariff-or-duty-free access to the US market.”
Although Brazil doesn’t have a world funding treaty with the U.S., nations protected below the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Commerce Settlement (CAFTA-DR) funding treaty like Guatemala and Honduras, which collectively export billions in produce to the U.S., could have a declare. Argentina and different nations below Bilateral Funding Treaties (BITs) even have protections that could be violated by tariffs, Comprés mentioned.
Comprés mentioned her purchasers are ready for the Supreme Court docket’s ruling on the legality of tariffs earlier than bringing any claims, and even then they might want to decide if their case is powerful sufficient to carry earlier than a tribunal.
“Investors want to assess their damages,” Comprés mentioned. “They need to determine if it really makes sense for them.”
Comprés identified that, on common, there’s a five-year window to carry a declare on treaties with closing dates, and that international buyers will need to be certain that they’ve their “ducks lined up.” Some treaties don’t have a time restrict in any respect.
“I would be shocked if we didn’t start to see (the claims) within the next five years,” Comprés mentioned.
However, any potential claims below worldwide funding treaties have an uphill battle.
“The United States has never lost any investor-state dispute claims,” Robert Howse, professor of worldwide legislation on the NYU College of Legislation, informed Fortune.
Howse added that international buyers bringing a declare must match a really particular standards, and wouldn’t be eligible for a declare in the event that they solely offered produce to American wholesalers.
“You actually have an investment, a distribution network, a warehouse… those all are things that would count as investments in the United States,” Howse mentioned. Then, the corporate must show that its investments have been made largely nugatory due to tariffs. However even then, Howse mentioned the U.S. might argue tariffs don’t violate truthful and equal therapy, as they replicate the nation’s sovereignty over industrial issues—and industrial coverage, together with tariff coverage, is a part of the final regulatory atmosphere that buyers know can change.
“This is a fundamental aspect of President Trump’s agenda, even from when he was running for office the first time,” Howse mentioned.
Fortune World Discussion board returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and world leaders will collect for a dynamic, invitation-only occasion shaping the way forward for enterprise. Apply for an invite.
