Corn War 2.0: As US, Brazil Dominate, Where Does Mexico Stand?

While Brazil and the United States compete for global leadership in corn, Mexico faces its own internal battle: a selling price that doesn’t cover costs, a countryside in protest, and a biotechnology ban that leaves it competing with one hand tied. The new corn war is not being fought in laboratories or treaties, but on Mexican highways.

During 2025, Brazil consolidated its position as the world’s leading corn exporter, surpassing the United States with a record harvest of more than 125 million tons, driven by biotechnology, railway logistics, and agreements with China and the Middle East. The United States, although still a giant, now defends its market share with subsidies, more resistant GMO varieties, and a commercial network that spans the entire hemisphere.

And Mexico watches from the sidelines. Although it is the cradle of corn, today it imports more than 17 million tons of yellow corn each year, 90% of which comes from genetically modified crops (United States and Brazil). In this global grain war, the giants sell stability, Mexico buys dependency.

From Treaty to Trench: The Price of Corn in Mexico Is Not Enough to Live On

While international prices fall due to global oversupply, Mexican producers sell at a loss. In Mexico, the average production cost of corn is around MX$6,500–MX$7,000 (US$353-US$380) per ton, but the current warehouse selling price barely reaches MX$4,800–MX$5,200 . The difference not only erodes margins, it bankrupts entire rural families.

Without effective price coverage, without energy subsidies, and with fertilizers that have increased by more than 30% since 2023, thousands of farmers took to the streets in Sinaloa, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Hidalgo, and Sonora, blocking highways and access to industrial plants.

The real corn war is not fought in Chicago or Shanghai. It is fought on Mexican highways, where farmers demand that their work be worth what it costs to produce.

The SEGALMEX guaranteed price, designed to protect them, fell short against rural inflation exceeding 6% annually. Meanwhile, cheap corn imports continue to enter through Gulf ports, driving the local price down even further. The result: the national producer competes against his own market.

The Forbidden Weapon: Biotechnology and Productivity

Mexico is the only country on the continent that prohibits the commercial planting of genetically modified corn, under the valid and symbolic argument of protecting its genetic diversity and cultural identity, but that position has deep technical and economic costs.

While other countries use GMOs and precision gene editing (CRISPR) to increase yields, reduce pesticide use, and resist drought, Mexico maintains average yields of 4–5 tons per hectare, compared to 8–12 t/ha among transgenic competitors. That productivity gap represents up to twice as much grain harvested on the same surface area.

And the paradox is brutal: We forbid planting what we import.

Ninety percent of the corn that Mexico buys abroad is genetically modified. We don’t produce it, but we consume it indirectly every day, mainly through animal feed and industry. In this way, the country protects its genetic identity but gives up its competitiveness.

The problem is not protecting native corn, because in Mexico it is vital to do so, but rather the failure to invest in national public biotechnology, advanced traditional breeding, and controlled innovation. We do not use foreign technology, but we do not develop our own either, and the result is double dependency.

Mexico: Between Ideology and Inaction

The discussion about GMOs has become an ideological trench, not a national strategy. The debate has left out applied science, modern biosecurity, and the possibility of a Mexican biotechnology model that combines identity and productivity.

Meanwhile, competing countries no longer debate whether to use GMOs or not: they debate which version of GMO or CRISPR will make them more profitable and resilient. Mexico, trapped in its own indecision, produces less, imports more, and protests more.

Corn is more than a crop: it is a symbol, a food, and an economy, but the discourse of food sovereignty loses strength when the national producer cannot cover his season and the country depends on subsidized imports.

You cannot talk about food sovereignty with foreign grain and indebted farmers.

If Brazil and the United States are fighting to dominate the global market, Mexico should fight to innovate its own production model. It is not about copying transgenics, but about investing in science, infrastructure, and real public policy, not in media subsidies or programs without technical grounding. Self-sufficiency is not decreed, it is built with knowledge, investment, and coherence.

The Future Is Not Debated, It Is Planted

The Corn War 2.0 is not between governments, but between those who innovate and those who remain in discourse. Mexico is still the cradle of corn, but without strategy, without scientific policy, and without fair markets, it risks becoming its own museum.

The battle is not won in USMCA tribunals or USDA charts, it is won when producers can sell at fair prices, produce with their own technology, and feed their country without mortgaging their future. In the end, Mexican corn does not need nostalgia, it needs a future.