Chile's representatives at the headquarters of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).
Photo: SalmonChile.
This week, SalmonChile went to Washington D.C. to defend before the United States Trade Representative (USTR) the competitiveness of the Chilean salmon industry and its strategic role in the US food security, and to request, therefore, its exclusion from the 12.5% tariff the USTR was recommending for Chilean exports to the U.S.
In early June, the USTR concluded that 60 economies do not prohibit or fail to prohibit the importation of products produced wholly or partly under forced labor, and, on this basis, recommended the imposition of a new 12.5% general tariff that would affect countries such as Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, China, India, Peru, South Korea and Japan.
From that moment on, SalmonChile's priority was to go to Washington to explain technically why farmed salmon—like the rest of Chilean exports—should be included in Annex A, the exemptions reserved for those goods that do not have a sufficient domestic substitute in US territory, and not in Annex B, exposed to the aforementioned 12.5% tariff.
Thus, the Chilean salmon farming industry travelled to the U.S. capital as part of a public-private commission in which it participated alongside other export sectors of the country—the Chilean Industrial Development Association (Sofofa); Chilean Fruits; Chilean Wines; the Chilean Food Companies Association (Chilealimentos); and the Chilean Wood Corporation (Corma). All received support from the Undersecretariat of International Economic Relations (Subrei).
Except for Sofofa and Chilealimentos, the other export associations—including SalmonChile—as well as the salmon farming company AquaChile and the Chilean Embassy in Washington, had requested to participate in the USTR hearings in Washington, scheduled for Tuesday, July 7.
At that hearing, and with regard to Chilean salmon exports, the President of SalmonChile, Patricio Melero, formally raised the need to include them in 'Annex A' and explained how the imposition of new tariffs would not translate into protection for the North American industry, but into a direct cost for consumers.
As mentioned above, seeking to ensure that Chilean farmed salmon is classified under the tariff exemption annex, SalmonChile had already indicated that its focus during the presentation would be strictly technical. Thus, the association planned to emphasize that the United States represents its most important market, receiving more than 40% of its shipments.
In 2025 alone, exports of Chilean farmed salmon to the U.S. country reached an FOB value—this is 'Free On Board', which represents the cost of the goods at the point of shipment or loading, excluding insurance and freight costs—of USD 2,598 million.
Given this scenario, SalmonChile argued that the application of a tariff—which could escalate from the current 10% to 12.5%—would not translate into protection for the US industry or protection for local producers, but rather into a direct cost for consumers that would act as a direct tax on US families and healthy eating.
As the trade association explained, this is because the local US supply comes mainly from wild-caught salmon in Alaska, a niche seasonal product that does not compete with Chilean farmed salmon, which guarantees a massive, stable and affordable supply throughout the year.
The Chilean argument before the United States Trade Representative also highlighted the value of economic complementarity between the two countries, emphasizing the bidirectional nature of the trade relationship between Chile and the United States.
While it is true that salmon is the main driver of Chile's non-mining exports, registering, as mentioned above, shipments to the U.S. of USD 2.598 billion last year alone, it is also true that Chilean salmon supports a processing network in several U.S. states.
According to SalmonChile, the distribution and processing of salmon produced in Chile generates more than 1,200 direct jobs in key US states such as Florida, Texas, New York or California, generating more than 1,200 direct jobs on US territory.
Likewise, aquaculture development in southern Chile, in the regions of La Araucanía, Los Lagos, Aysén and Magallanes, represents an important demand hub for US suppliers of biotechnology, pharmaceutical services and specialized inputs.
As the trade association noted in the days leading up to the meeting with the USTR in Washington, Chile currently supplies half of the salmon consumed in the United States, making it a strategic ally for the food security of its population.
As SalmonChile highlighted, from a public health perspective, being a nutrient-dense protein rich in omega-3, salmon is a key element in the 'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) agenda, which promotes a diet based on fresh, natural and minimally processed foods.
The food pyramid inspired by the MAHA movement inverts the traditional model, placing quality proteins, healthy fats, and vegetables at its base, which puts salmon at the top or main section. As a "real food" item, it stands out as one of the best sources of high-quality protein and healthy fats.
Therefore, in its presentation, SalmonChile finally ratified the critical role that this food plays in the public health goals of the US population, being one of the most accessible sources of omega-3 and nutrient-dense proteins on the market.
After the presentation of these arguments, SalmonChile said that it is confident that the technical background presented will allow maintaining the competitiveness conditions that favor both employment in the south of Chile and the tables of millions of households in the United States.
After his speech in the US capital, the President of the Chilean salmon trade association, Patricio Melero, gave a positive assessment of the day.
"We are making progress in being able to better demonstrate, in person, here in Washington, before the highest authorities of the USTR, why Chilean salmon is so important to the United States, why it should not have a tariff increase, given that it does not compete with US production, which does not have one, and because it also contributes very significantly to US programs and nutritional guidelines for a healthy food," he said.
"I believe that today the USTR authorities have a better understanding of our reality and also better understand the benefits it has for the American consumer," Melero concluded.