A key topic has dominated recent discussions in the global fertilizer industry: whether exports of MAP (Monoammonium Phosphate) and DAP (Diammonium Phosphate) will resume in September following the expiration of temporary controls on agricultural phosphate fertilizers—implemented on March 14—on August 31. Many overseas traders and buyers have adopted a "wait-and-see" approach; some market reports even predicted that Chinese phosphate fertilizer supplies would return to the international market in September, prompting buyers to delay purchases in hopes of locking in prices once Chinese goods become available.
However, based on current industry surveys, feedback from manufacturers, and actual customs operations, the market needs to adjust its expectations realistically. To date, there have been no official signals indicating the resumption of exports for agricultural MAP, DAP, or phosphorus-containing compound fertilizers. Talk of "lifting export restrictions in September" remains mere speculation, with no actual cases of customs declaration, statutory inspection, or shipment taking place.
The primary objective of these temporary controls was to prioritize stable domestic supplies of agricultural fertilizer. The period from March to August covers critical cycles for spring plowing and summer sowing; as phosphate fertilizer is a core input for grain production, policy priorities focused on securing domestic supply and preventing significant price volatility. While the market generally expected export channels to automatically reopen upon the policy's expiration on August 31, expiration does not equate to automatic liberalization. Fertilizer export policies operate under a long-term framework of prioritizing domestic supply and dynamic regulation, rather than simply unlocking exports upon a fixed date.
Assessing whether export policies have truly been implemented requires looking beyond rumors to the practical steps across the entire supply chain: acceptance of export license applications, customs declarations, statutory inspection sampling, port clearance, and cargo loading. Currently, major domestic phosphate fertilizer plants and foreign trade enterprises report that new export declarations for agricultural MAP and DAP are not being accepted, and there have been no instances of successful customs clearance for export.
China’s fertilizer policy framework is a comprehensive regulatory mechanism, not one focused solely on phosphate fertilizer exports. Urea exports have long been subject to annual quota management, with quota issuance tightened during peak seasons to prioritize domestic fertilizer stockpiling; meanwhile, as of July 16, ammonium sulfate is subject to mandatory export inspections—replacing the previous exemption—which extends the customs clearance timeline for foreign trade. Domestically, policies regarding commercial fertilizer reserves and "reduction and efficiency enhancement" continue to be implemented; efforts are underway to encourage the development of novel fertilizers and the resource utilization of phosphogypsum, while curbing the disorderly expansion of phosphate fertilizer production capacity.
For participants in foreign trade, the potential lifting of phosphate fertilizer export restrictions should not serve as the fundamental premise for procurement and pricing decisions; commercial orders cannot be built upon mere expectations. At this stage, overseas buyers should replenish stocks based on actual needs and simultaneously seek alternative sources of phosphate fertilizer, rather than waiting indefinitely for supplies from China.
Ultimately, the market values tangible goods; the ability to successfully file customs declarations, clear customs, and complete loading onto vessels is the true indicator that export policies are being effectively implemented. Until there are sustained and verifiable instances of shipments, expectations regarding the resumption of phosphate fertilizer exports should be viewed with caution.
