Where the U.S. Gets Its Potash From, by Country
Published
Save to Inbox
So, Where Does America Get Its Potash?
Key Takeaways
- Potash supplies potassium, an essential nutrient for growing crops.
- Nearly three-quarters (73%) of U.S. potash consumption comes from Canada.
- Domestic supply, primarily from New Mexico, covers just 8% of U.S. consumption.
The United States is one of the world’s largest agricultural economies. Growing those crops requires large amounts of fertilizer, including potassium-rich potash.
This visualization shows the largest sources of U.S. potash consumption using data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Commodities Summaries 2026.
Volumes are expressed in tonnes of potassium oxide equivalent (K₂O), a standard measure that allows different potash products to be compared by their potassium content.
Canada’s Natural Advantage
Canada accounts for 73% of U.S. potash consumption, supported by abundant mineral deposits and its proximity to American farms.
Canada is the world’s largest potash-producing country, with much of its mining industry concentrated in Saskatchewan. Beneath the province lie extensive salt deposits that support a major fertilizer export industry.
The table below shows the estimated breakdown of sources for U.S. potash consumption.
| Source | U.S. potash by source (K₂O equivalent, 2025) | Share |
|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇦 Canada | 4.31 Mt | 72.9% |
| 🇷🇺 Russia | 0.65 Mt | 11.0% |
| 🇺🇸 U.S. (domestic) | 0.47 Mt | 8.0% |
| 🇮🇱 Israel | 0.18 Mt | 3.0% |
| Other (foreign) | 0.30 Mt | 5.1% |
| Total | 5.91 Mt | 100.0% |
Established rail connections help move Canadian production south into the United States. Nutrien, a major Saskatchewan-based producer, ships potash across the U.S. through its North American transportation network.
That overland connection gives Canadian supply a logistical advantage over alternatives that require ocean transport.
Washington Looks to Belarus
In September 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump said Washington was working on a major agreement to purchase potash from Belarus at prices below those paid for Canadian supply. The following day, he said the U.S. would continue buying Canadian potash while also pursuing the possibility of lower-priced Belarusian supply.
Potash has been excluded from the additional Section 338 tariffs imposed on certain Canadian goods, underscoring its importance to U.S. agriculture.
However, adding Belarusian supply would involve more than finding another producer. Landlocked Belarus faces restrictions on European export routes and relies heavily on Russian transportation infrastructure. It also has existing customers, including China, Brazil, and India, limiting how much production could readily be redirected.
Transportation costs are another consideration. Unlike Canadian potash, which can move overland into the U.S., Belarusian supply would face a longer and more complex journey. That means a lower purchase price would not necessarily translate into lower delivered costs for American buyers.
What It Means for American Farmers
For farmers, the practical question is whether alternative suppliers can deliver affordable fertilizer when it is needed. Potassium helps plants regulate water use, develop roots, and withstand drought. When available potassium is insufficient, plant growth and yields can suffer.
Farmers can use soil testing to determine how much potash to apply. Nitrogen and phosphorus cannot replace potassium’s role in crop development, so cheaper supplies of other fertilizers do not remove the need for it.
Other suppliers, including Russia at 11% and Israel at 3%, already provide some diversification. Whether additional Belarusian supply ultimately lowers costs will depend on the final terms, available volumes, and transportation expenses.
Learn More on the Voronoi App
See which countries have the most arable land in this visualization on Voronoi.
You may also like
Mapped: Does Your State Trade More With China or the EU?
The European Union has emerged as an unexpected beneficiary of rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
Published
September 30, 2026 9:52 am
Does Your State Trade More With China or the EU?
Key Takeaways
- All but five U.S. states traded more with the European Union than China in 2025.
- China accounted for 13% of California’s goods trade, the highest share among the five China-oriented states.
- Alaska, Illinois, Oregon, and Wyoming shifted to trading more with the EU than China in 2025.
China and the European Union are two of America’s biggest trading partners, but their influence looks very different from state to state.
This U.S. map highlights which states trade more with China versus the European Union, using 2025 data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Only goods trade is included; trade in services is excluded.
A Trade War on Two Fronts
Within months of the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, the U.S. announced sweeping tariffs on dozens of economies, including major trading partners such as China and the EU.
The U.S. initially announced a 34% reciprocal tariff on Chinese goods in April 2025, which was later raised above 100% amid retaliatory measures before being reduced. Against that backdrop, U.S.-China trade fell 29% from the previous year.
The table below lists U.S. states based on whether they traded more with China or the EU in 2025.
| State | Trades More With (2025) | EU-to-China Ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.6 |
| Alaska | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.6 |
| Arizona | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.0 |
| Arkansas | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.1 |
| California | 🇨🇳 China | 0.8 |
| Colorado | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.5 |
| Connecticut | 🇪🇺 EU | 6.0 |
| Delaware | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.2 |
| D.C. | 🇪🇺 EU | 27.2 |
| Florida | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.6 |
| Georgia | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.6 |
| Hawaii | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.5 |
| Idaho | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.1 |
| Illinois | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.6 |
| Indiana | 🇪🇺 EU | 8.6 |
| Iowa | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.4 |
| Kansas | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.8 |
| Kentucky | 🇪🇺 EU | 4.3 |
| Louisiana | 🇪🇺 EU | 7.7 |
| Maine | 🇪🇺 EU | 5.1 |
| Maryland | 🇪🇺 EU | 7.0 |
| Massachusetts | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.9 |
| Michigan | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.9 |
| Minnesota | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.2 |
| Mississippi | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.0 |
| Missouri | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.6 |
| Montana | 🇪🇺 EU | 4.0 |
| Nebraska | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.7 |
| Nevada | 🇨🇳 China | 0.7 |
| New Hampshire | 🇪🇺 EU | 8.2 |
| New Jersey | 🇪🇺 EU | 4.1 |
| New Mexico | 🇨🇳 China | 0.3 |
| New York | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.3 |
| North Carolina | 🇪🇺 EU | 5.0 |
| North Dakota | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.3 |
| Ohio | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.4 |
| Oklahoma | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.2 |
| Oregon | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.1 |
| Pennsylvania | 🇪🇺 EU | 4.4 |
| Rhode Island | 🇪🇺 EU | 10.2 |
| South Carolina | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.9 |
| South Dakota | 🇨🇳 China | 0.9 |
| Tennessee | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.2 |
| Texas | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.7 |
| Utah | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.4 |
| Vermont | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.0 |
| Virginia | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.7 |
| Washington | 🇨🇳 China | 0.7 |
| West Virginia | 🇪🇺 EU | 3.4 |
| Wisconsin | 🇪🇺 EU | 2.2 |
| Wyoming | 🇪🇺 EU | 1.8 |
Four states shifted to trading more with the EU than China in 2025: Alaska, Illinois, Oregon, and Wyoming. They joined 41 other states and Washington, D.C., in the EU-oriented group.
With Illinois switching sides, every state east of the Mississippi River now trades more with the EU than with China.
How EU Trade Gained Ground
The EU was also subject to the so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs, initially facing a 20% reciprocal tariff. Following negotiations between the U.S. and European Commission, the two sides announced a trade deal in July 2025 that capped most U.S. tariffs on EU goods at 15%.
Over the full year, U.S.-China goods trade declined by more than a quarter, while total EU-U.S. trade increased from 2024.
The states trading the most with the EU were Texas ($114 billion), Indiana ($110 billion), and California ($67 billion). Indiana stands out in particular, with the EU accounting for about half of its goods trade, supported by the state’s large pharmaceutical industry and companies such as Eli Lilly.
The Five States Still Oriented Toward China
Only California, Nevada, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Washington traded more with China than with the European Union in 2025.
California led by a wide margin, recording more than $86 billion in two-way goods trade with China.
The five states have distinct industries that help explain their trade ties with China. These include California’s port-driven electronics imports, aerospace exports from Washington, and semiconductor production in New Mexico.
Learn More on the Voronoi App
To see how transatlantic trade ties are expanding, check out Revitalized U.S. Role in EU Trade since the Mid-2010s on Voronoi.
Mapped: How U.S.-China Trade Changed by U.S. State
Trade with China fell in 49 of 50 U.S. states in 2025. Only New Mexico grew, lifted by a surge in electronics exports.
Published
September 30, 2026 6:49 am
How U.S.-China Trade Shifted Across the States
Key Takeaways
- New Mexico was the only state whose trade with China grew in 2025, rising 27% on a surge in electronics exports that include computer chips.
- Every other state traded less with China, led by Louisiana (down 64%) and Wyoming (down 58%).
- California lost the most in dollar terms, $52.2 billion, as its imports from China fell by 38%.
U.S. goods trade with China fell 29% in 2025, from $583.6 billion to $414.6 billion, amid a year of sharply higher tariffs and shifting trade flows.
This map shows the change in each state’s goods trade with China from 2024 to 2025, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
Trade is the sum of a state’s exports to and imports from mainland China, in current U.S. dollars. Exports are credited to the state where a shipment begins its journey to the port, which is not always where the goods were produced.
Trade With China Fell in 49 of 50 States
The size of the decline varied widely, from 7.6% in North Carolina to 64.3% in Louisiana. Overall, 22 states lost at least a quarter of their goods trade value with China.
The table below ranks all 50 states by the percentage change in their goods trade with China from 2024 to 2025, along with each year’s trade value:
| State | 2024 (Goods traded, $B) | 2025 (Goods traded, $B) | Change (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Mexico | 3.9 | 4.9 | 27.2 |
| North Carolina | 13.0 | 12.0 | -7.6 |
| Indiana | 14.3 | 12.7 | -11.2 |
| Rhode Island | 0.7 | 0.6 | -12.1 |
| Utah | 3.8 | 3.3 | -13.0 |
| Oklahoma | 2.8 | 2.5 | -13.0 |
| South Dakota | 0.4 | 0.3 | -13.3 |
| New Hampshire | 0.9 | 0.8 | -14.7 |
| Minnesota | 8.7 | 7.4 | -14.7 |
| Idaho | 0.5 | 0.4 | -15.2 |
| Kentucky | 11.0 | 9.3 | -15.6 |
| Iowa | 2.2 | 1.9 | -15.9 |
| Ohio | 13.2 | 11.1 | -16.1 |
| Michigan | 11.0 | 9.1 | -17.1 |
| Missouri | 4.9 | 4.0 | -18.5 |
| Oregon | 8.5 | 6.9 | -19.0 |
| Arkansas | 1.3 | 1.0 | -19.3 |
| North Dakota | 0.2 | 0.2 | -19.4 |
| Mississippi | 3.6 | 2.8 | -20.4 |
| Delaware | 1.2 | 1.0 | -21.1 |
| Wisconsin | 7.9 | 6.2 | -21.2 |
| Maine | 0.3 | 0.2 | -22.0 |
| West Virginia | 0.6 | 0.5 | -22.3 |
| Florida | 14.3 | 11.0 | -22.7 |
| Colorado | 2.6 | 2.0 | -23.4 |
| Nevada | 5.8 | 4.4 | -23.6 |
| Vermont | 0.3 | 0.2 | -23.9 |
| Georgia | 21.0 | 15.9 | -24.2 |
| New Jersey | 16.4 | 12.3 | -25.3 |
| Massachusetts | 7.3 | 5.4 | -25.4 |
| South Carolina | 12.6 | 9.4 | -25.5 |
| Virginia | 7.1 | 5.2 | -26.3 |
| Connecticut | 2.8 | 2.1 | -26.5 |
| Texas | 58.7 | 42.5 | -27.6 |
| New York | 21.6 | 15.6 | -27.6 |
| Kansas | 2.3 | 1.7 | -28.0 |
| Washington | 23.1 | 16.5 | -28.6 |
| Nebraska | 1.4 | 1.0 | -29.0 |
| Hawaii | 0.3 | 0.2 | -29.1 |
| Maryland | 3.8 | 2.7 | -29.5 |
| Tennessee | 24.4 | 15.6 | -36.1 |
| Montana | 0.2 | 0.1 | -36.5 |
| Pennsylvania | 20.0 | 12.6 | -36.8 |
| California | 138.5 | 86.3 | -37.7 |
| Arizona | 7.1 | 4.4 | -37.9 |
| Alabama | 8.2 | 4.9 | -41.1 |
| Illinois | 46.7 | 26.3 | -43.7 |
| Alaska | 1.6 | 0.9 | -46.4 |
| Wyoming | 0.3 | 0.1 | -57.5 |
| Louisiana | 11.2 | 4.0 | -64.3 |
| 🇺🇸 U.S. Total | 583.6 | 414.6 | -29.0 |
Figures may not sum due to rounding.
Most of the lost dollars came from imports. Nationally, imports from China fell by $132 billion, compared with a $37 billion decline in exports, meaning nearly four-fifths of the decrease in trade value came from lower imports. California and Illinois alone accounted for about half of that import decline.
The steepest percentage drops tell a different story. In Louisiana, Wyoming, and Alaska, the three biggest decliners, trade fell mainly because exports to China dropped.
New Mexico was the lone exception, driven by a surge in electronics exports.
Why New Mexico Went the Other Way
New Mexico’s trade with China rose 27% to $4.9 billion, and a single category explains the gain: exports of electrical machinery and electronics, which include computer chips, climbed 69% to $3.0 billion.
That trade barely existed a few years ago. New Mexico shipped only about $20 million of these goods to China annually in 2022 and 2023, before exports jumped to $1.8 billion in 2024. That same year, Intel opened Fab 9, an advanced chip-packaging plant in Rio Rancho.
The growth also held up through the tariff war. China reportedly exempted some U.S.-made chips from its 125% tariff in April 2025, although it did not publicly confirm the move.
China accounted for 18% of New Mexico’s goods trade in 2025, making it the most China-reliant state.
Louisiana’s Soybean and Fuel Exports to China Collapsed
At the other end of the map, Louisiana lost $7.2 billion in trade with China, and almost all of it came from exports, which fell 71%. Soybean shipments dropped from $5.9 billion to $2.1 billion, while fuel exports fell from $3.2 billion to $0.3 billion.
Both were among the first targets of China’s retaliation. Beijing added tariffs on U.S. coal, LNG, and crude oil in February 2025 and on soybeans in March, before raising its tariff on all U.S. goods to 125% in April. The U.S. shipped virtually no soybeans to China from June through August, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.
Much of that loss belongs to farmers upriver. Grain from across the Midwest moves down the Mississippi River to export terminals near New Orleans, and Census credits it to Louisiana, where the shipments are consolidated. Louisiana itself harvested 55 million bushels of soybeans in 2024, a fraction of the 474 million bushels it was credited with shipping to China.
As the Census Bureau notes, this methodology can overstate exports from port states and understate them from the states where the goods were produced, meaning the map may understate how hard the trade downturn hit parts of the Farm Belt.
Learn More on the Voronoi App
To learn more about how tariffs affected the U.S.-China trade relationship, check out this graphic on Voronoi.
Popular
-
China2 weeks agoRanked: The World’s Best Countries at Math in 2026
-
population4 weeks agoRanked: The Best and Worst Countries to Live In 2026
-
Debt1 week agoRanked: Countries With the Most Government Debt Per Person
-
Maps4 days agoMapped: The Best Employer in Every U.S. State
-
Personal Finance3 weeks agoRanked: 100 Global Cities by Quality of Life and Cost
-
Brands3 weeks agoRanked: Cars That Hold and Lose Their Value the Most
-
Money3 weeks agoRanked: Countries With the Highest Debt-to-GDP Ratios
-
Economy1 week agoRanked: The World’s Strongest City Economies by 2050