If you produce South African wine for export, the question is no longer simply which country offers the best price for your next shipment. It is also which markets you can rely on when trade policy changes, diplomatic relations deteriorate or the cost of reaching a customer suddenly shifts.

That question became more urgent on Monday, 19 October, after President Cyril Ramaphosa said South Africa must prepare for the possibility of losing access to the United States’ African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), the trade programme that has provided eligible African countries with duty-free access to the American market. Ramaphosa said discussions with US counterparts were continuing, but the potential consequences for jobs could be devastating.

For South Africa’s drinks industry, the warning is a reminder that export strategy cannot depend on diplomatic goodwill alone. Wine producers, in particular, need to assess their exposure to individual markets while looking for opportunities elsewhere.

The challenge is that finding a replacement for an established export market is considerably harder than announcing a new trade partnership.

A market can disappear before a business has time to adjust

The United States remains an important destination for South African wine, but recent export figures suggest that the market has already been under pressure.

South Africa earned approximately $669 million from wine exports in 2025, according to figures reported by Engineering News. The value of exports to the US had fallen to around $31 million, roughly half the $63.2 million recorded in 2021.

These figures do not mean that a loss of AGOA would automatically eliminate all American demand for South African wine. The consequences would depend on the applicable tariffs, the treatment of individual products, commercial agreements and whether importers absorb some of the additional costs.

But even the possibility of less favourable access creates uncertainty.

An importer considering a long-term listing may hesitate if the landed price could change. A distributor might favour a competing wine from a country with more predictable market access. A producer negotiating next year’s contracts could be forced to account for costs that are difficult to forecast.

For smaller wineries, the risks can be particularly uncomfortable. They may have limited negotiating power with importers, less flexibility to redirect stock and fewer resources to establish relationships in unfamiliar markets.

Wine is not a product that can always be redirected at short notice without consequences for pricing, packaging, distribution and cash flow.

China offers an opening, not a guaranteed solution

China has emerged as one of the most immediate alternatives in South Africa’s market-diversification strategy.

A zero-tariff scheme for qualifying South African exports entered into effect on 1 May 2026. The arrangement is scheduled to run until 30 April 2028, subject to the relevant product requirements and rules of origin. South African exporters must also comply with the documentation requirements needed to claim the benefit.

For wine producers, removing customs duties can improve price competitiveness against imported wines from countries that do not receive the same preference. It may also create an opportunity for importers to reconsider South African labels that previously struggled to compete on price.

However, a tariff advantage does not create consumer demand by itself.

South Africa’s wine exports to China were worth about $10.6 million in 2025, down from $30.9 million in 2021, according to Engineering News.

That decline is a warning against treating China as an instant substitute for the American market. The new tariff arrangement may improve the economics of exporting, but producers still need distributors, market knowledge, brand recognition and products suited to local customers.

The window is also temporary. The scheme’s current terms extend to April 2028, creating a clear deadline for producers to test the opportunity and for policymakers to work towards longer-term trade arrangements.

The practical question for wineries is not whether China is a large market. It is whether they can find a profitable route into it.

Stop approaching Asia as one market

China and India are often discussed together as alternatives to Western export destinations, but their consumers, distribution systems and commercial conditions are different.

President Ramaphosa has pointed to expanding trade with China and India as part of South Africa’s response to deteriorating relations with Washington. Reporting by the Financial Times on 19 October noted that talks with India on a preferential trade agreement had resumed.

For the wine industry, India represents a potential longer-term opportunity, but trade discussions should not be confused with an immediate commercial breakthrough. Producers would need to understand the applicable duties, state-level alcohol regulations, distribution arrangements and price points before committing significant resources.

A winery should not enter either market simply because national trade policy identifies it as a strategic partner.

Diversification needs to happen before the crisis

There is a temptation to treat market diversification as an emergency response to political risk. By then, however, the cost of entering a new market may be higher, and competitors may already have established relationships.

A more resilient approach would involve several practical steps.

First, each exporter should calculate its exposure by destination, including the proportion of sales, profit and inventory tied to each market. A market that generates substantial revenue but delivers thin margins may represent a different risk from one that contributes less volume but provides reliable returns.

Second, producers should identify two or three realistic alternative markets rather than pursuing every possible destination. They should assess distributor quality, tariffs, logistics, payment risk, product registration and the likely cost of building demand.

Third, exporters should work collectively where possible. Industry bodies and trade-promotion organisations can help coordinate market research, importer introductions, tastings and participation in international trade fairs. Shared initiatives can reduce the cost of exploring a market, particularly for smaller producers.

Finally, contracts and financial planning need to account for uncertainty. Producers should understand how changes in tariffs, freight costs or exchange rates affect their margins and avoid making long-term commitments based on a single favourable trade assumption.

These steps cannot eliminate political risk. They can, however, make a business less vulnerable to a sudden change in circumstances.

The value of a market is measured in profitable sales

South Africa’s wine industry has spent years building international recognition. Maintaining that reputation requires more than winning medals or securing access to a new country. It requires converting access into sustained demand at prices that support producers, growers, logistics businesses and the wider supply chain.

The latest warning over AGOA makes the need for that discipline more immediate. China offers a potentially useful tariff advantage, while India and other markets may provide opportunities over time. But neither trade diplomacy nor a list of target countries can guarantee that South African wine will find buyers.

Exporters need to treat market diversification as a continuous commercial exercise, supported by real customer relationships and careful financial planning.

The wineries best prepared for the next trade shock will be those that have already built a second market before their first one becomes a problem.