Fact check: Le prix du soja s'est effondré, et les exportations états uniennes aussi

1. Summary of the results

The analyses reveal mixed evidence regarding the claim about soy price collapse and US export decline. Multiple French sources strongly support both aspects of the statement:

• Soy price collapse confirmed: Sources indicate a 15% decline in soy prices in 2025 due to US-China trade tensions ^{[1] [2] [3]}. One source specifically mentions a 15% year-over-year decline in average soy prices ^[2].
• US export decline confirmed: The data shows US soy exports to China dropped by 75% in 2018 as a direct result of trade tensions ^{[1] [2]}. American producers have lost significant market share to Brazilian competitors who have benefited from the trade dispute ^{[2] [3]}.

However, contradictory evidence emerges from FAO sources regarding vegetable oil prices (which include soy oil):

• Some FAO data shows vegetable oil prices were up 3.7% in March and 24% higher year-over-year ^{[4] [5]}
• Other FAO data indicates a 5.8-point decline in May for the vegetable oil price index ^[6]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original statement omits several crucial contextual factors:

• Record US soy production: Despite price declines, the US achieved record soy production in April 2025, which could offset some export losses ^[7]
• Strong Chinese demand persists: China maintains strong demand for soy, suggesting the export decline may be more about trade route diversification than overall demand collapse ^[7]
• Brazilian market capture: Brazilian exporters have significantly increased their market share at the expense of US producers, benefiting financially from the trade tensions ^{[2] [3]}
• Biofuel demand impact: Subdued demand for biofuel feedstock in the United States has contributed to price pressures, indicating domestic factors beyond trade tensions ^[6]
• Broader trade diversification: The situation reflects a broader pattern of trade flows diverting away from the US across multiple sectors, not just agriculture ^[8]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The statement presents a simplified narrative that may serve specific interests:

• US agricultural lobby benefits: American soy producers and agricultural organizations benefit from emphasizing the negative impact of trade tensions to pressure for policy changes and potential subsidies
• Incomplete price picture: The focus on "collapse" may be misleading given that some vegetable oil indices show increases ^{[4] [5]}, and the statement doesn't distinguish between different soy product categories
• Temporal context missing: The statement doesn't specify timeframes, mixing 2018 export data with 2025 price projections, which could create confusion about current versus historical impacts
• Omission of production success: Failing to mention record US production levels ^[7] presents an incomplete picture that may exaggerate the sector's difficulties

The statement, while containing factual elements, appears to emphasize negative aspects while omitting positive developments and contextual factors that would provide a more balanced assessment of the US soy market situation.