Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier Becomes a Link in Misinformation Chain
In a recent guest editorial “End the Biden farm tax before it buries Iowa’s family farms” published by the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier, readers were told that President Biden “slapped” a tax on fertilizer in 2021 that doubled prices and put Iowa farmers on the brink. It’s an alarming claim – and it is also false.
The writer’s argument collapses under the weight of the editorial’s omissions. Global fertilizer prices did not previously spike because of any presidential action.
They rose everywhere in the world, including in countries with no fertilizer duties, no new trade policies, and no parallel to the U.S. situation. Fertilizer prices climbed in Canada, Brazil, Europe, and Australia by nearly the same magnitude as in the U.S.
When the price rises globally, the cause is global. That is the fundamental truth missing from the editorial.
Legal Reality, Not Political Spin
Let’s start with the writer’s central claim that Biden personally imposed a “fertilizer tax” on American farmers. He didn’t. He legally couldn’t have.
Here is what happened. In 2020, Mosaic, a U.S. fertilizer corporation, filed a petition accusing Moroccan and Russian producers of receiving government subsidies and undercutting U.S. fertilizer prices.
Under U.S. law, such a petition triggers a mandatory investigation and the International Trade Commission – a bipartisan, independent body – is required to rule on whether injury occurred. If injury is found, countervailing duties must be imposed. Not by presidential order. Not by executive preference. By statute.
The 2021 duties were not Biden’s idea, not Biden’s initiative, and not Biden’s discretionary policy. They were the legal outcome of Mosaic’s petition and the ITC’s ruling.
If one disagrees with the existence of countervailing duties, the target is not the White House – it is the trade-remedy law Congress wrote decades ago.
Global Forces, Not Domestic Politics
So, what caused fertilizer prices to spike?
A perfect storm that hit every continent. Natural gas price shocks (the primary input for nitrogen fertilizer), commodity volatility following COVID-19, shipping constraints and supply chain disruption, China’s fertilizer export restrictions, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
None of those factors were addressed in the Courier editorial, even though they accounted for the vast majority of the price increases seen worldwide.
Blaming a narrow, legally required duty on two countries for a global market shock is not analysis – it is misdirection.
What the Editorial Did Not Mention: Trump’s 2025 Fertilizer Tariffs
While the Courier’s guest editorial devotes paragraphs to a mischaracterized 2021 event, it ignores a much more significant reality: the reciprocal tariffs imposed by the Trump administration in 2025.
Those tariffs hit fertilizer from multiple countries. They raised costs for farmers across the Midwest. And they were so economically painful that the administration quietly rolled them back just weeks ago.
You cannot understand fertilizer prices today without acknowledging the damage done by those tariffs. Yet the guest commentary never mentions them. Facts omitted are just as important as facts misstated.
The Danger of Political Narratives Masquerading as Policy Analysis
Iowa farmers deserve better than oversimplified political talking points. They deserve full context – the truth about markets, trade law, and global supply chains.
And they deserve an honest conversation about the consolidation of the fertilizer industry, which has reduced competition and increased pricing power far more than any temporary duty on Morocco or Russia ever could.
To blame one politician for an international supply shock is to insult the intelligence of the very farmers the editorial claims to defend.
Iowa Farmers Need Solutions, Not Scapegoats
If the goal is truly to support agriculture, then we should discuss strengthening competition in input markets; transparency in corporate pricing; diversified supply chains; better protection for farmers against global volatility, and fair-trade enforcement that prevents foreign commodity dumping from undermining U.S. producers.
Those are serious conversations. They do not begin with a myth about a nonexistent Biden tax.
Conclusion
The fertilizer crisis was real. The pain to Iowa farmers was real. But the explanation in the Courier’s guest editorial was not.
We can – and must – debate policy honestly, but we cannot build good policy on bad information.
If we want to support Iowa agriculture, we should start by telling the truth.
Editor’s Note: We contacted the Courier’s editorial staff for comment about our analysis. They did not respond.
