WO Trading challenges EU fertilizer tariffs over risks to Latvian farm costs
Latvian fertilizer supplier WO Trading has challenged higher EU duties on Russian and Belarusian goods before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The company argues that the tariffs could restrict mineral fertilizer supply, raise farm costs and weaken Latvian agricultural competitiveness.
Supplier challenges the EU tariff mechanism
WO Trading, a company that supplies mineral fertilizers to farmers across Latvia, has challenged changes to European Union customs duties on goods originating in or exported from Russia and Belarus. The case was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union, with the company questioning whether the chosen tariff mechanism is proportionate and how it could affect Latvia’s fertilizer market and agricultural sector.
The relevant EU regulation was adopted on 17 June 2025 and provides for a gradual increase in tariffs through 2028. Egle, speaking for WO Trading, said the phased increases create a risk that the supply of mineral fertilizers needed by agriculture will contract. A tighter market would raise fertilizer prices and add directly to production costs for Latvian farmers.
Concentrated supply limits alternatives
WO Trading’s argument rests partly on the structure of the global fertilizer industry. Although mineral fertilizers are traded internationally, production is concentrated among a relatively small group of countries. Russia, Belarus and Canada are among the largest producers of potash fertilizers, while Russia is also a leading global producer of nitrogen and phosphate fertilizers.
The company says alternative suppliers may charge EU buyers more after the duties take effect. Prices for fertilizer from other origins could move toward the higher, tariff-inflated cost of Russian and Belarusian material. Under that scenario, replacing sanctioned supply would not necessarily shield European farmers from price increases, even where sufficient physical volumes remain available on the global market.
Farm output and enforcement risks
WO Trading says its objective is to prevent Latvian agricultural producers from being forced to reduce fertilizer application. Lower use could negatively affect crop yields, while higher fertilizer expenditure would increase the cost of agricultural production. Egle said those additional costs could ultimately be reflected in higher consumer prices. The immediate burden, however, would fall on farmers that must decide whether to absorb more expensive inputs or cut application rates.
The company also warns that higher duties may increase incentives to route Russian and Belarusian fertilizers through third countries. Repacking products or otherwise concealing their actual origin could make customs control more difficult and reduce the effectiveness of the restrictions. The legal challenge therefore raises two linked questions for the EU: whether the duties can reduce targeted supplies without producing disproportionate costs for farmers, and whether enforcement can prevent trade diversion. WO Trading reported turnover of €3.12 million and profit of €435,800 last year.
