President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on Canadian goods make exceptions for energy, potash, critical minerals and certain other products. Fresh produce and most foodstuffs have not been granted similar protection.

A reciprocal food carve-out must be Ottawa’s first objective in negotiations with the White House. Before bargaining over individual industrial sectors, Ottawa should seek a bilateral exemption covering food and agricultural products, preserving the uninterrupted movement of perishable goods regardless of the broader trade dispute.

The objective is to prevent a trade dispute from becoming a farm crisis and, ultimately, a grocery-price crisis on both sides of the border.

The administration’s announced exemptions do not include a general carve-out for food or agriculture, even though Canada and the United States operate one of the world’s most integrated food markets.

Fresh produce is particularly vulnerable.

Tomatoes, cucumbers and peppers cannot be warehoused while governments negotiate. Greenhouse production continues throughout the year, crops must be harvested when ready, and shipments must reach retailers quickly. An exporter confronted with a 50 per cent border charge cannot simply store the crop or find another continent capable of absorbing it.

Canada has already seen what even a brief disruption can do.

The Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada’s 2025 report, Extraordinary Measures for Unprecedented Times, examined the three days in March during which the United States imposed 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian greenhouse products before reversing course and exempting CUSMA-compliant goods.

Even that short-lived disruption inflicted immediate damage. Ontario greenhouse growers reported approximately $6 million in lost sales – roughly $2.2 million a day – as some 200 truckloads of fresh vegetables entered an uncertain market. Tomato exports, among the sector’s largest, were affected immediately as growers scrambled to honour retail commitments while absorbing losses they had no ability to recover.

If three days of uncertainty produced those consequences, the prospect of a sustained 50 per cent tariff should leave no doubt about what is at stake.

The greenhouse sector’s exposure is exceptional. In 2023, it exported $1.68 billion in vegetables to the United States, which absorbed 99.5 per cent of Canadian greenhouse vegetable exports. Across horticulture, more than 91 per cent of export value went to the American market.

A sustained 50 per cent tariff could make Canadian products commercially uncompetitive overnight. Cancelled orders would create domestic oversupply, depress farm-gate prices and force growers to discard food they had spent months – and considerable capital – producing.

Prolonged disruption would threaten highly leveraged greenhouse operations and permanently reduce Canada’s production capacity. And consumers would eventually pay the price.

Canadian grocery prices were already 4.3 per cent higher in May than a year earlier. Fresh vegetables rose nine per cent and tomato prices increased 45.2 per cent. In the United States, food-at-home prices rose 2.7 per cent over the same period, while fruit and vegetable prices increased 5.3 per cent.

Tariffs would reduce dependable supply for American retailers, while retaliation against U.S. food imports would raise costs in Canada. A measure intended as leverage would therefore compound food inflation in both countries.

Ottawa will understandably seek relief for automobiles, aluminum and other strategic industries. But food cannot simply take its place in line behind them.

Canada’s first negotiating objective should be a reciprocal exemption that removes food and agricultural products from the tariff dispute altogether. Such an agreement would protect consumers in both countries while preserving the integrated supply chains on which North American food security depends.

If Carney and Trump want food on every kitchen table, they must first take it off the negotiating table.