Now is the Time to Eat Pasta. The Evolving Tariff Landscape for Made in Italy PastaExports to the United States Market. (A follow-up to the January 14, 2025 Insight on U.S.Tariffs)
November 12, 2025
1. Introduction
On January 13, 2025, and on the verge of the installment of President Trump at the White
House, we asked whether there was a tangible risk for Italian and European companies exporting
goods and services to the U.S., starting January 20, 2025, after the inauguration of the new
Trump administration (https://www.grimaldialliance.com/en/come-affrontare-le-nuove-tariffe-
sulle-importazioni-negli-usa/ ).
The last 11 months saw the legal and political pressure on tariffs rising sharply due to, among
the many pieces of evidences, the issuance of approximately twenty White House Executive
Orders and Proclamations, engagement, failure, and re-engagement in bilateral (or multilateral)
negotiations, litigation before the Court of International Trade, the Court of Appeals for the
Federal District, and the U.S. Supreme Court, CBP tariffs’ enforcement and temporary
suspension, and countless legal analysis on this topic. Now is the time to eat pasta.
Italian pasta, long known and celebrated as one of the hallmarks of Made in Italy, is facing
one of its toughest challenges in decades in the U.S. market. Following an administrative review
under Section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for pasta imports occurred between July 2023 and
June 2024, on September 4, 2025 the U.S. Department of Commerce has proposed antidumping
duties of 91.74% on a number of Italian pasta producers, including mandatory respondents (La
Molisana S.p.A. and Pastificio Lucio Garofalo S.p.A.) and non-individually examined companies
to which the same duties were addressed (Agritalia S.r.l.; Aldino S.r.l.; Antiche Tradizioni di
Gragnano S.r.l.; Barilla G. E R. Fratelli S.p.A.; Gruppo Milo S.p.A.; Pastificio Artigiano Cocco
S.r.l.; Pastificio Chiavenna S.r.l.; Pastificio Liguori S.p.A., PAM S.p.A., PAM S.r.l., Liquori
Pastificio dal 1820 S.p.A., Pastificio della Forma S.r.l; Pastificio Sgambaro; Pastificio Tamma
S.r.l.; Rummo S.p.A.; Pasta Castiglioni S.r.l.; Molino e Pastificio (Rummo); Rummo Lenta
Lavorazione S.p.A.). Commerce selected La Molisana and Garofalo as mandatory respondents
because both accounted for the largest volume of pasta imports in the U.S.
For these manufacturers, in addition to the 91.74% AD duty and the existing 15% tariff on all
EU goods, the total financial burden the 13 Italian pasta manufacturers and importers face in
importing pasta in the U.S. will reach a 107% value (as the result of the combined tariffs and
anti-dumping duty.) The reputational damage, however, affects the entire Italian pasta industry.
Under U.S. law, the U.S. Commerce investigation originated from complaints lodged by two
American manufacturers and competitors that allegedly stated that a number of Italian
manufacturers and importers were selling pasta in the U.S. market at unfairly low prices
(”dumping” pasta in the U.S. market). The Department’s preliminary findings deemed companies
such as La Molisana and Pasta Garofalo “uncooperative.” Unless revised in the final
determination, these new rates are expected to take effect in January 2026, potentially doubling
the cost of pasta for American consumers while dramatically reshaping U.S.–EU trade in agri-
food products.
2. Market context and economic impact
The U.S. pasta market size was valued at approximately USD 6.35 billion in 2024 and is
estimated to reach about USD 6.63 billion in 2025, with a projected compound annual growth
rate (CAGR) of around 4.36% from 2025 to 2033 (Marketdataforecast). The US remains the
world's largest pasta market in terms of consumption, with approximately 2.7 million tons
consumed annually (FoodBusinessNews). Italian imports still account for over $700 million
annually, or roughly 12% of the U.S. pasta market (Time and International Business Times). For
Italy, the United States remains its second largest non-EU export destination for pasta, following
the UK.
The ramifications of these proposed tariffs extend across multiple dimensions:
For Italian pasta producers, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises with relevant
exports in the U.S. (whether directly affected by the AD or not), the 15% tariffs (and the 91.74%
duties where applicable) threaten business viability itself. A sharp increase along with the
reputational feedback may make pricing anti-competitive, forcing these manufacturers to face
important choices: suspend import in the American market or find alternative strategies.
For American consumers looking for Italian pasta, the impact translates to significantly
higher prices and reduced selection. Premium Italian pasta products risk becoming items
accessible only to a narrow segment of consumers.
For the Made in Italy pasta manufacturers (those affected by the AD and those that are not),
these barriers can be seen as obstacles but are indeed opportunities for the expansion of Italian-
made products in the U.S. and for “Italian-sounding” products names that can evoke Italian
authenticity without actually being made in Italy.
3. Legal and regulatory framework
Commerce’s latest in-time investigation represents a significant escalation compared to
historical precedent. Antidumping probes into Italian pasta makers started in the mid-1990s,
when Commerce first found that many importers were selling pasta below normal market prices
(61 FR 143, 38547). However, earlier penalties were comparatively small, and Italian pasta
makers viewed them as part of the cost of doing business in the U.S.
In the current preliminary review, Commerce determined the current AD are the result of a
lack of cooperation in providing information to Commerce, citing problems with their
documentation, including untranslated Italian words and undefined acronyms.
4. Strategic solutions: U.S.-based manufacturing
Faced with this pending challenging landscape, Italian pasta manufacturers have an
opportunity to act decisively and strategically. The shelves of American supermarkets holding
pasta are going to change soon. Among the most effective solutions is establishing or expanding
an internal branch or subsidiary to direct manufacturing operations on U.S. soil.
This approach is not theoretical. Barilla, though headquartered in Italy, is the top
manufacturer in the American market. Barilla's solution has been followed by others like Rana, Il
Pastaio, and Andriani, just to name a few.
Such a simple solution transforms the exporters into local producers, enabling tariff-free
distribution while maintaining brand identity and quality standards. From a compliance
standpoint, locally manufactured products qualify as “Made in USA” under U.S. Customs and
Border Protection regulations and are therefore outside the scope of Section 751 investigations or
other trade-remedy measures.
The proposed 107% combined tariffs and duty are an opportunity to strengthen market
penetration and presence through localized manufacturing operations.
For further information, feel free to contact Melchionna PLLC in New York. This is not legal advice.