North Dakotans are now footing the bill for the most sweeping farm rescue the state has launched in years, and many agricultural economists say the need for that bailout can be traced directly to policies and actions taken by President Donald Trump during his second term. From aggressive tariff maneuvers to biofuel waivers and labor-policy whiplash, Trump’s current actions have triggered one of the most financially unstable years U.S. farmers have faced since … 2018 – the last trade war created during Trump’s first term in office when his original disastrous economic policies were implemented, triggering a $28 billion US farmer bailout by taxpayers. Now, North Dakota taxpayers—through their state-owned bank—are being forced to step in.

And don’t forget, it was just several weeks ago that the state put nearly $1.5 million of North Dakota Health & Human Service agency funds from the state’s taxpayers in place to offset the loss of the SNAP and WIC programs that had been stopped due to government shutdown under Trump’s directive to GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson, La., who actively worked to prevent a forced vote on releasing the files that would reveal child sex predators of President Donald Trump’s friend, convicted sex offender, and accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

When Trump rolled out his “reciprocal tariffs” program in early 2025, it was sold as a strategy to improve America’s negotiating posture. Instead, trading partners retaliated quickly, and farm exports took the hit. National reporting shows that in just the first five months of 2025, the United States recorded a $24.5 billion farm-trade deficit—a staggering number for a sector that depends heavily on overseas buyers. Independent analysts estimate more than $27 billion in export losses tied to retaliatory tariffs; soybeans, corn, pork, wheat, and dairy markets all absorbed the blow.

North Dakota farmers felt it immediately. Soy and wheat growers rely on export flows that depend on predictable trade relationships. Instead, many watched their expected revenue shrink as overseas buyers turned to Brazil, Argentina, and the EU for supply stability. Cash-flow stress started showing up at local banks by early summer. Plus, Trump’s $40 billion bailout to Argentina, who then quickly worked with China to buy their soybeans—further cutting North Dakota farmers off to world markets.

Then came another body blow—this time from the Renewable Fuel Standard. EPA decisions during Trump’s second term allowed refiners to bypass roughly 2.18 billion gallons worth of biofuel blending obligations. For corn producers, that represented the equivalent of about 779 million bushels of demand evaporating. Using 2025 corn prices, analysts described an immediate $3 billion-plus market value gap. While markets eventually rebalance, they almost never do so in time to save thin-margin farm operations already struggling to plan their fall and spring financing.

Add to that the administration’s shifting immigration enforcement posture and H-2A guest-worker policy changes. More than 22,000 U.S. farms depend on H-2A labor. The enforcement landscape produced uncertainty that growers called “costly chaos.” Fruit and vegetable growers in particular warned that even small labor disruptions could wipe out entire harvests–meaning bankruptcy for those farmers and higher prices at the grocery store for limited fruit and vegetable supplies.

All of this landed at the exact moment North Dakota producers were already struggling through rising input costs–which also can be attributed to Trump policies and actions. By November, the financial pressure was so acute that Governor Kelly Armstrong and the North Dakota Industrial Commission approved $400 million in emergency low-interest farm loans through the Bank of North Dakota (BND).

On paper, the program is a lifeline. It offers two loan tracks: one for farms suffering operating shortfalls in 2024 and 2025, and another for producers who need financing to manage grain inventories or storm damage. In practice, it is a massive public intervention—one North Dakota citizens will ultimately underwrite if losses accumulate.

BND’s most recent annual report lists about $10.8 billion in total assets. A $400 million deployment represents nearly 4% of the bank’s entire balance sheet. If farms receiving these loans fail to recover, the bank—and by extension the state (i.e., the citizens of North Dakota)—absorbs the hit. Financial analysts note that even modest stress could eat into BND’s earnings:

• A 1% net default rate would cost the state $4 million.

• A 5% default rate would cost $20 million.

• A 10% default rate—entirely possible after a year of volatile markets and weather—could burn $40 million or more.

Those losses would not just sit on a spreadsheet. The Bank of North Dakota routinely transfers excess earnings back to the state to help fund K-12 education, infrastructure, and general-fund operations. Every dollar lost in farm-loan defaults is a dollar that won’t reach classrooms, roads, or county services. In other words: a bailout for farmers today could become reduced state capacity tomorrow.

None of this means the state should not act to protect our state’s farmers. Agriculture is too central to North Dakota’s economy to leave producers without support.

But what it does mean—and what troubles many fiscal observers—is the why behind the state having to step in so dramatically: North Dakota taxpayers are covering financial damage as a direct result of Trump’s disastrous policies.

And how do North Dakota’s congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. Julie Fedorchak, U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer, and U.S. Sen. John Hoeven fit into this equation? Well, the US President is given only very limited power to tariff – and Fedorchak, Cramer, and Hoeven should be denouncing these tariffs by Trump since it is Congress who sets trade policy – not an incompetent president. But Fedorchak, Cramer, and Hoeven – just as they are afraid to face their constituents in a public forum, they are also afraid to stand up to Trump no matter how much harm or damage he causes – and have yielded all their legislative power to the wishes and whims of the 6-time bankrupted president involved in four cases of business fraud, including his most recent with 34 felony counts.