Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) has quickly become the centerpiece of aviation’s journey toward decarbonization. Touted for its potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 80% compared to traditional jet fuel, SAF is poised to transform air travel into a greener industry. Yet, its trajectory hasn’t been smooth—especially in the U.S., where economic policy during the Trump administration reshaped the outlook of the SAF market in unforeseen ways.

During his presidency, Donald Trump’s hardline approach to trade led to a sweeping tariff regime targeting China, the European Union, and other key trading partners. The goal was to revitalize U.S. manufacturing and reduce trade imbalances, but the ripple effects across various industries—particularly renewable energy and sustainable fuels—were significant.

The Sustainable Aviation Fuel market, still in its developmental stages, faced heightened uncertainty, higher input costs, and disrupted global partnerships. In this article, we explore the multifaceted impact of Trump-era tariffs on the SAF landscape and how the market is working to regain its momentum in a post-tariff economy.

Rewriting the Rules: How Trump Tariffs Restructured the SAF Ecosystem

SAF production relies on a complex web of global supply chains. Equipment, feedstocks, and conversion technologies often span continents. When tariffs on raw materials like aluminum, steel, and refining machinery were imposed, SAF infrastructure projects in the U.S. saw cost overruns that derailed timelines and reduced investor confidence.

At the same time, tariffs on agricultural products like soybeans and corn—critical feedstocks for many SAF technologies—added volatility to input pricing. These policies created a domino effect: fewer investments, reduced R&D budgets, and a reluctance from airlines to commit to large-scale SAF procurement amid fluctuating prices.

Trade Wars Leave Deep Scars on SAF Development

Although the trade war officially cooled off near the end of Trump’s term, its economic aftershocks continue to shape SAF development today. In the early years of SAF commercialization, stability was crucial—yet the trade war fostered an environment of unpredictability.

Joint ventures with foreign companies suffered. U.S.-based SAF firms that relied on European biofuel tech found themselves blocked by tariffs and supply delays. Airlines that had announced pilot SAF programs postponed their rollouts due to rising costs and regulatory confusion.

As a result, the U.S. fell behind global peers. Europe, despite also being targeted by tariffs, surged ahead with strong regulatory support and an aggressive SAF adoption roadmap. The U.S., by contrast, entered a holding pattern.

Post-Tariff Adaptation: A Smarter, Stronger SAF Market?

With the Biden administration rolling back some of the most disruptive trade policies, the SAF industry is slowly finding its footing. One major pivot has been toward domestic resilience.

Companies have begun seeking U.S.-based alternatives for SAF feedstocks and processing equipment. There’s now a strong emphasis on innovation within national borders. This has led to the acceleration of new technologies that rely on waste oils, municipal waste, and non-food biomass—inputs less dependent on international trade.

This period of recalibration has also encouraged vertical integration. SAF producers increasingly want to control every stage of the value chain, from sourcing raw material to refining to distribution. It’s not just about green fuel anymore—it’s about ensuring security of supply.

The New Energy Independence: Can America Sustain Itself?

Trump’s vision of American self-sufficiency inadvertently sparked a shift in thinking within the SAF sector. While energy independence was historically associated with oil, it’s now equally relevant to sustainable fuel.

The U.S. has the resources—vast farmlands, innovation hubs, and engineering prowess—to become a leader in SAF. Success depends on sustained government incentives, cross-sector collaboration, and a clear national SAF strategy.

Federal programs like the SAF Grand Challenge aim to produce 3 billion gallons of SAF annually by 2030. But achieving this goal without international cooperation—particularly on technology and certification frameworks—remains a formidable task. Going it alone might yield limited progress.

Agricultural Turbulence: How Tariffs on Crops Shook the SAF Supply Chain

The trade war’s impact on agriculture cannot be overstated. China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. soybeans caused exports to plummet. This led to gluts in domestic markets, causing soybean prices to crash temporarily—appearing to benefit SAF producers using soy-based fuels.

The instability proved harmful in the long run. Farmers scaled back production or shifted to other crops, making feedstock sourcing less predictable. Contracts for long-term SAF supply, which depend on feedstock price certainty, became harder to negotiate.

Beyond soy, corn, canola, and even used cooking oil faced similar challenges. The result was a fractured feedstock landscape that disrupted many SAF pilot projects and commercial scale-ups.

Book Your “Trump Tariff Threat Assessment” https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/forms/ctaTariffImpact.asp?id=70301163

Financial Fallout: What the Trade War Cost the SAF Industry

SAF has always carried a green premium—it costs more to produce than fossil-based jet fuel. But the Trump administration’s tariffs amplified that gap. Construction of SAF plants became significantly more expensive due to tariffs on steel and advanced machinery.

In turn, this increased the price of the final product, making it harder to secure long-term contracts with airlines. Airlines, pressured by shareholders and passengers to go green, found themselves unable to meet their SAF goals without incurring unsustainable costs.

The government did step in with grants and subsidies, but the inconsistency of support—coupled with market instability—slowed down investor enthusiasm. Many early-stage SAF ventures went dormant, and those that survived had to scale back their ambitions.

Green Goals vs. Trade Walls: A Conflict of Priorities

While the trade war was rooted in economic nationalism, climate change is a global problem. In that sense, the Trump-era policies worked against international collaboration—an essential ingredient for accelerating SAF adoption.

The result? U.S. participation in international SAF efforts was weakened. The European Union doubled down on its Green Deal and continued developing SAF capacity. Asia-Pacific nations, like Japan and Singapore, increased investments in SAF refining capabilities.

This shift allowed other regions to pull ahead in the race for SAF dominance. The U.S., once a front-runner in clean tech, became a cautionary tale of how protectionism can backfire on sustainability goals.

Rebuilding Confidence: Evolving SAF Investment and Policy Post-Tariffs

Since the Trump administration ended, U.S. policy has taken a more pragmatic turn. The Biden administration has restored diplomatic ties and promoted SAF through legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act, which offers tax incentives to biofuel producers.

Private capital is also returning. SAF companies are now securing funding rounds again, and new public-private partnerships are being announced. Airlines have renewed their commitments, some even investing directly into SAF startups to lock in future supply.

Investors are now smarter—many build geopolitical risk into their financial models and prioritize projects with strong domestic foundations. The goal is no longer just profitability, but resilience in a shifting global landscape.

A Global Shake-Up: Who Benefited and Who Lost?

The U.S. retreat created opportunities for other nations. The EU strengthened its position as a global SAF leader. Countries like Finland and the Netherlands rapidly built refining capacity and developed export pipelines.

U.S. SAF producers, particularly small and medium enterprises, bore the brunt of uncertainty. Some merged, others downsized, and many shut down. But the ones that endured—often those with unique feedstock access or patented conversion processes—are now stronger for it.

The playing field has changed. Global SAF markets are less centralized, with multiple power centers emerging. For the U.S., the opportunity to lead is still alive, but it requires bridging past mistakes with forward-thinking strategy.

Protectionism’s Double-Edged Sword: A Legacy for SAF

While the Trump tariffs imposed hardships on SAF development, they also sparked new conversations around economic resilience, domestic innovation, and the fragility of global interdependence. The industry’s response—a shift toward diversified supply chains, domestic investment, and innovation—may ultimately prove beneficial.

The future of SAF in America now hinges on building partnerships that balance national interest with global cooperation. That includes streamlining federal policy, supporting scalable SAF technologies, and participating in global certification standards.

If the U.S. can balance trade policy with climate ambition, it still has the chance to lead a more sustainable future in aviation. The Trump-era tariffs were a shock—but one that forced the industry to grow, innovate, and adapt.