President Donald Trump says the United States will continue buying potash from Canada—but he also wants to open the door to cheaper Belarusian fertilizer.
For U.S. farmers, that could eventually mean more competition in the potash market and potentially lower prices. But before growers count on a new source of cheap potash, major questions remain about whether Belarus has the available fertilizer—or the logistical pathway—to deliver significant volumes to the United States.
Trump first announced the potential deal Monday on his Truth Social platform, saying the United States was working on a “massive Deal” to purchase potash from Belarus at a price “substantially less” than what the U.S. currently pays Canada.
On Tuesday, Trump clarified the proposal during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy at the United Nations.
“Belarus has a lot of potash, and our farmers need good prices,” Trump told reporters.
“We’ll continue to go with Canada, but Belarus would like to sell it for a much lower price,” he said.
That distinction is important for U.S. growers.
Canada supplies the overwhelming majority of U.S. potash imports, and Trump’s latest comments indicate the administration is not proposing to replace Canadian supplies. Instead, Belarus could become an additional supplier if the two countries can work out an agreement and overcome the logistical and geopolitical barriers standing in the way.
But there is an immediate problem.
Belarus itself says it may not have the fertilizer available.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said Monday that his country cannot supply large additional volumes to Western markets because its potash production is already contracted.
“Even if we wanted to supply potash to other, Western markets, we simply do not have those volumes — everything is contracted,” Lukashenko said, according to a statement published by his office.
That creates a striking disconnect between Washington’s announcement of a potential “massive” purchase and Minsk’s assertion that available production is already committed.
And even if Belarus frees up additional tonnage, getting that potash to American farms is another challenge.
StoneX Vice President of Fertilizer Josh Linville says Belarusian potash faces a complicated transportation problem because its traditional export routes through Lithuania remain unavailable.
Before the disruptions caused by the Russia-Ukraine war, Belarus relied heavily on routes through Lithuania and the Baltic Sea. Those routes remain closed to Belarusian potash because of sanctions and geopolitical restrictions.
Alternative routes through neighboring countries are also complicated, while shipments through Russia would be more expensive and constrained by available transportation capacity.
Linville says that makes it difficult to see how a massive amount of low-cost Belarusian potash could suddenly make its way into the U.S. fertilizer market.
“Unfortunately, we really struggle with the excitement,” Linville said.
His bigger concern, however, is that potash isn’t where the U.S. fertilizer market needs the most help right now.
“We have not struggled to find potash,” Linville told Reuters. “We have more than enough to go around. It is phosphate and nitrogen that we need help with.”
Linville says potash has been relatively well priced and steady since falling from the extreme highs reached following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
He also points to current potash-to-corn price relationships, which he says are among the lowest levels of recent years.
In other words, additional Belarusian potash could potentially create more competition—but the U.S. market is not currently facing the same kind of potash supply crunch that is developing in other fertilizer segments.
Nitrogen and phosphate are where the pressure is building.
Global nitrogen supplies have been disrupted by the conflict involving Iran, while phosphate production is being squeezed by higher costs for ammonia and sulfur—two critical inputs.
Russia has restricted sulfur exports, while China continues to limit phosphate exports. At the same time, disruptions to nitrogen exports from major Middle Eastern suppliers are adding another layer of uncertainty to the global fertilizer market.
Linville says those pressures deserve far more attention from U.S. farmers heading into fall fertilizer application.
Russia, meanwhile, remains a major supplier of nitrogen products to the United States. Linville says Russia accounted for roughly 40% of U.S. urea imports and 57% of UAN imports this year.
That creates a potentially much larger vulnerability for American agriculture if geopolitical tensions continue to disrupt global fertilizer trade.
And farmers are already dealing with higher input costs.
Corn prices have improved from recent lows, but Linville cautions that stronger grain prices do not necessarily mean producers suddenly have plenty of room in their budgets.
“That is not the case — yes, it helps, but it is not a profit windfall,” Linville said. “Fall fertilizer demand expectations have risen drastically which is taking prices higher, and diesel prices are much higher.”
For growers, the potential Belarus deal is therefore worth watching—but it is far from a guaranteed source of cheap fertilizer.
Trump says the United States will continue buying Canadian potash while allowing Belarus the opportunity to compete with a lower-priced product. But Belarus says much of its production is already committed, and the logistical routes needed to move large quantities west remain heavily restricted.
For farmers heading into the 2026-27 fertilizer season, the bigger question may ultimately be less about whether Belarus can sell cheap potash—and more about whether global disruptions will continue pushing nitrogen and phosphate costs higher.
