
In all three of his campaigns, President Donald Trump won overwhelming support from farmers — including a whopping 78% support from the United States' most farm-dependent counties. But now, farmers are being hit hard in the wallet as a result of his sweeping tariffs.
Axios reported Thursday that farming equipment manufacturer John Deere released its latest quarterly earnings numbers. According to the outlet, the company had seen a 9 percent decline in quarterly revenue to $12 billion, and a staggering 26 percent decline in net income to $1.29 billion.
John Deere has also projected an additional $600 million in costs this year due to Trump's tariffs (it previously projected $500 million), which the company has not shouldered alone. The Wall Street Journal reported that while the company hasn't yet added a tariff surcharge, it has increased the prices of sprayers and planters from 2% to 4%. The manufacturer also adjusted its year-end profit projection downward by $250 million.
READ MORE: 'Ride this rocket into the ground': Conservative admits why he 'didn't see Trump coming'
According to CFRA Research equity analyst Jonathan Sakrada, the perception of instability in the agriculture sector has made American farmers "increasingly cautious in spending decisions and more hesitant to accept higher machinery prices."
John Deere's performance is seen as a microcosm of the performance of the entire U.S. agricultural industry, given its ubiquitous presence in rural American life. The company stated its customers were "waiting and seeing" how the tariff picture would look before making major purchases.
In response to John Deere's disappointing quarterly earnings report, its stock price fell by 8.4%. Bloomberg reported this was the largest intra-day drop the company had experienced in more than three years. The outlet also reported that steel and aluminum tariffs were chiefly to blame for its decline in profits.
Click here to read Axios' article in its entirety.
READ MORE: Top Trump official suggests signature policy may be in 'serious legal trouble': analysis