By Sid Salter
Columnist
In a move his administration says is aimed at impeding the flow of illegal immigration
and fentanyl, President Donald Trump on Feb. 1 announced the imposition of tariffs on
Canada, China and Mexico – some of the nation’s top trading partners.
Those countries are also some of Mississippi’s leading trading partners. The new tariffs
are to take effect on Feb. 4. Trump set a 25% tariff on the import of products from
neighboring Canada and Mexico while putting a 10% tariff on the import of products
from China. Energy resources from Canada will have a lower 10% tariff.
The announcement of the U.S. tariffs set off swift threats of reprisals from both Canada
and Mexico. The White House reported clauses in the U.S. tariffs that allow U.S. tariff
increases if there are reprisals from the impacted nations that are almost certain to
happen.
Mexico, the nation’s largest trading partner, accounts for 16% of U.S. trade while
Canada represents 14% and China 11%, according to U.S. government sources. Those
imports represent over $1 trillion in goods.
So how does President Trump’s new tariffs impact Mississippi’s trade?
The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) reports that Mississippi exported $1.1
billion in goods while importing $1.86 billion. Mississippi exports refined petroleum,
medical instruments, telephones, other coloring materials, and chemical wood pulp. The
state’s primary imports are crude petroleum, petroleum bitumen, parts, pig iron (non-
alloy), and medical & surgical instruments.
Mississippi’s $9 billion agriculture production is led by poultry, forestry, soybeans,
livestock, cotton, corn, and catfish, according to the Mississippi State University
Extension Service.
OEC reports Mississippi’s top export partners in 2024 as Panama ($152 million), Mexico
($142 million), Canada ($141 million), Netherlands ($70 million) and Honduras ($53
million) and the state’s top import partners as Mexico ($269 million), China ($267
million), Venezuela ($166 million), Canada ($120 million) and Vietnam ($116 million).

In rural states, the immediate reaction seems fear of short-term price increases for
consumers and concern that promised benefits – like the return of jobs from Mexico –
may well take an extraordinarily long time to come to fruition.
CORRECTION – In last week’s column about the death of Pete Johnson, I misreported
Jim Eastland’s path to the U.S. Senate. As several longtime readers reminded me, “Big
Jim” never lost an election. Here’s the correct sequence:
In 1941, Gov. Paul Johnson appointed Eastland, Sr., to fill the U.S. Senate vacancy
caused by the death of incumbent Democrat Pat Harrison. Eastland served the interim
term but was not a candidate in the special election to fill the vacancy won by Democrat
Wall Doxey – but in 1942, Eastland successfully challenged Doxey for a full Senate term
and held the seat until his retirement in 1978.
Sid Salter is a syndicated columnist. Contact him at sidsalter@sidsalter.com.