Germany

What Farm Equipment Manufacturers Are Saying About 50% Steel and Aluminum Tariffs

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 17:15:53 GMT

Farm equipment manufacturers have spent the past nine months dealing with tariff fallout and implications. It’s an effort borne out of sheer necessity — that’s because the various tariff levels and targets have changed faster than a Kansas prairie headwind during spring planting.

It’s why we talked with executives from a handful of farm equipment manufacturers to learn more about how they are managing the situation. John Deere, for example, recently went as far as attaching a hard number to the tariff pain: a projected $600 million in balance sheet impact for 2025 is the figure shared by John Beal, director of investor relations, during Deere’s 2025 Q3 earnings call.

On Aug. 18, a 50% tariff on all foreign steel and aluminum imports into the U.S. went into effect. That alone has had a huge impact on the companies building farm machines here in the U.S. and abroad, and it’s even restricting the movement of used farm equipment across the border.

Almost All American Made

Case IH’s Kurt Coffey, who serves as the companies’ vice president of its North America division, says the executive team he is on meets daily to unpack global trade developments. Case IH is in a good position overall, he says, with 80% to 90% of its machines produced in one of four U.S. production facilities, and 95% of its machinery base material (i.e. steel) sourced domestically.

Related - From the Factory to Your Fields: Where Farm Equipment Is Made

(Case IH)

“What we’re trying to do is scale across our business to where there are impacts in the short term, in the transitory period, and make sure that we continue to flow product so we’re a reliable partner for our customers,” Coffey says. “But it is anybody’s guess where this is going. So, we’re maintaining focus on the customer and our supply flows.”

That supply flow is worth the extra effort in Racine, according to Coffey, due to this fact: Anywhere from 60% to 90% of Case IH machinery is presold, so a new tariff today means a big, unexpected extra cost tacked on the back end.

“We’re executing on product that was sold three, five or even eight months ago,” he adds. “So, no comment on [financial] impacts, but we’ve continued to focus on how we make sure our customers have what they need as they’re going to harvest.”

Coffey doesn’t come right out and say it, but reading between the lines, it seems clear that Case IH has had to flex its creative muscles and figure out how to manage, for example, a new 50% tariff bill on a brand-new AF-11 combine that was sold six months ago. That extra 50% wasn’t part of the equation when the deal was signed, so who pays for it?

More EU Than U.S.

While Case IH has a large manufacturing base in the U.S., German-based manufacturer Claas is a different story. While the company builds its Lexion combines and self-propelled corn detassler machine at a 250,000-sq.-ft. facility in Omaha, Neb., four-fifths (80%) of its row crop machinery portfolio is built over in Europe and shipped to dealer lots in the U.S.

In a Trump Tariff world, that means significantly higher production costs for Claas, and potentially, the farmers that buy their tractors and combines. That’s because tariffs are taxes, and most companies will pass that extra cost down the line to consumers in the form of higher retail prices.

Eric Raby, senior vice president of the Americas region, Claas, says his outfit is actually taking on some of those extra costs.

(Claas)

“From an EU [European Union] perspective, and in Canada and some other major countries, we’re pretty even keel right now on where the tariffs are, and I think the industry as a whole has pretty much absorbed [a lot of] those,” he says. “We’ve absorbed a lot, as well. We’re not passing all of it to the customer.”

The new-ish 50% tariff on steel and aluminum is a different story, however.

“We’re still working [on that] right now and trying to figure out the implications, because that really is going to affect our industry much more broadly than just the tariffs on a country of origin for a specific machine,” Raby says. “We’re always looking for local [material] suppliers as well, because our time to market gets shortened considerably. So, it’s much more efficient for us as well.”

One way to manage those costs is to onshore more of its material sourcing network here into the U.S. We visited Claas’ Omaha factory this summer, and efforts were already underway to find more suppliers in Nebraska and the Midwest.

“We’re always looking at broadening our supplier base,” Raby says. “If we go back to COVID, I think the whole industry suffered from a lack of versatility within the supply chain. So we’re always looking for different suppliers. And then obviously, with the tariffs now, we’re looking even more intently on sourcing locally.”

Nearly 50/50

New Holland is largely viewed as a Euro-brand in farm equipment circles, but it’s closer to an even split. The company manufactures about 50% of it’s row-crop machinery in the EU and 40% in North America, with the remaining 10% built in the Asia-Pacific region.

JEAN-MARC GIUBOUX PHOTOGRAPHY

(New Holland)

New Holland’s vice president of North America, Ryan Schaefer, has been in the leadership role for the brand’s domestic operations for about a year now. He says CNH Industrial has eight manufacturing plants in the U.S. as well as a significant presence in western Canada, but managing the tariff situation has been anything but easy, he says.

“We produce tractors and combines all over the world, as well, so we truly have a global footprint,” he says. “So really, I wouldn’t go so far as to call the situation difficult, but the challenges are something that many in our industry have never had to deal with firsthand. It’s been a learning experience for all manufacturers, I would say, throughout North America and the globe.”

Your Next Read: Fendt’s New Autonomy Ready Vario Tractors, Split Fold Optimum Planter

Bayer's Shares Sink to 20-Year Low on 2025 Earnings Fall Forecast

Wed, 13 Nov 2024 21:39:23 GMT

By Ludwig Burger and Patricia Weiss

Bayer said on Tuesday that weak agricultural markets mean its earnings are likely to fall further next year, sparking a sharp fall in the German company’s shares and piling pressure on its CEO to deliver on his turnaround efforts.

Chief executive Bill Anderson has started cutting jobs, speeding up decision-making and slashing red tape in a bid to turn around the embattled industrial group, while putting plans to break up its diversified businesses on hold.

Shares in Bayer were down 11.6% to 21.57 euros at 1004 GMT, their lowest level in 20 years following its update.

“We’re in the midst of a big agriculture downturn. And that’s very frustrating for people ... We understand the investor sentiment, but we remain very optimistic that we’ve got a strong future,” Anderson said in the statement.

He also pointed to strong launches for Bayer’s new drugs Nubeqa for prostate cancer and Kerendia for kidney disease.

However, Markus Manns, a portfolio manager at Bayer shareholder Union Investment in Germany, criticized the CEO for not having publishing medium-term financial targets, which need to be addressed to win back trust.

“Bayer’s transformation needs to be urgently accelerated and management needs to finally communicate a sustainable growth strategy with specific mid-term targets for sales, earnings and debt reduction,” said Manns.

Chief financial officer Wolfgang Nickl said in Bayer’s quarterly earnings statement it expected “a muted outlook on top and bottom line next year with likely declining earnings”.

Based on earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA), and adjusted for special items, the 2025 forecast would mean a third consecutive annual decline, after the group on Tuesday also lowered its projection for 2024.

Bayer said that the earnings measure, when adjusted for currency impacts, would likely be between 10.4 billion euros ($11.1 billion) and 10.7 billion euros, down from a previous 10.7-11.3 billion euro forecast and last year’s 11.7 billion.

Its July-to-September EBITDA, adjusted for one-offs, fell almost 26% to 1.25 billion euros, missing the average analyst estimate of 1.31 billion euros posted on Bayer’s website, with Bayer citing weak Latin American agricultural markets.

Regulation
Bayer’s $63 billion purchase in 2018 of seeds and pesticides maker Monsanto under Anderson’s predecessor was a long-term bet on robust growth in farming supplies which has so far misfired.

Debt and costly U.S. product liability litigation over disputed claims that Monsanto weedkiller Roundup causes cancer are further burdens which Anderson is struggling to shake off.

Bayer shares have lost close to 80% since the Monsanto deal was closed in 2018 and about 70% since it was agreed in 2016.

U.S. agrichemicals competitor Corteva and the agriculture unit of Germany’s BASF have also been hit by lower prices as weak produce prices weighed on demand.

Bayer’s shares trade at 4.6 times forward earnings over the next 12 months, well below BASF at 12 and 18.8 for Corteva. The ratio is widely used to gauge the relative value of stocks.

Bayer said its business is set to suffer more because U.S. approval for new soy seeds to be used with weedkiller dicamba will not be in time for the 2025 sowing season and EU regulators will pull insecticide Movento from the market under the bloc’s environmental agenda known as the Green Deal.

In addition, cost-conscious U.S. farmers are turning to cheap generic copies of Bayer’s pesticides, it said.

Bayer said that special charges of 4.1 billion euros, mainly from write-downs on intangible assets in its Crop Science division, resulted in a quarterly net loss of 4.18 billion euros, compared with a 4.57 billion euro loss a year earlier.

It confirmed its previous currency-adjusted guidance for 2024 sales and earnings per share before certain items.

(Reporting by Ludwig Burger, Editing by Rachel More, Kirsten Donovan and Alexander Smith)

Will Europe's Farmer Protests Make Their Way To The U.S.?

Thu, 26 Sep 2024 20:11:08 GMT

In case you haven’t heard, farmers across Europe are fed up with their politicians and bureaucrats telling them how to farm. Such sentiment is nothing new. What is new is that the level of frustration has grown to the point where thousands of farmers are taking to the streets with their 15-ton tractors and marching to the capitals and major cities of European countries to give government officials a message: enough already.

For those of us old enough to remember, this moment has a bit of historical déjà vu to it. Flash back to the late 1970s when on this side of the pond, Washington, D.C. was stormed by thousands of farmers driving their tractors to protest critically low commodities prices, higher input costs, falling land values and rising interest rates. This was the warning shot signaling even more dire times to come as the farm crisis of the 1980s followed.

Now, nearly 45 years later, the flame still burns. But this time the fire is taking off in Europe. The ingredients for the discontent are much the same—low prices, costly inputs, high interest rates and so forth. However, the recipe has added an ingredient that has quickly become the biggest fly in the soup as far as European farmers are concerned.

Policy Pushback
The European Green Deal, approved in 2020, is a set of policy initiatives established by the European Commission. Its overarching aim is to make the European Union (EU) climate-neutral by 2050. For European farmers, one of the most controversial components of the deal was the goal to reduce chemical fertilizer and pesticide use by 50% by 2030. That, combined with plans to idle more farmland to increase land biodiversity and forests, along with very little funding directed to farmers to facilitate and harbor such a transition, set the stage for a revolt.

From Berlin and Paris to Brussels and Bucharest, European farmers have driven their tractors to the streets in protest in recent weeks. In Germany, an estimated 30,000 protestors and thousands of tractors brought Berlin’s city centre “to a standstill” in mid-January due to dissatisfaction with the government over the cutting of agricultural fuel subsidies. The protests in France erupted over plans to reduce agricultural fuel subsidies and the government’s push to halve pesticide use by the end of this decade.

The situation escalated to a point where farmers sprayed manure on a local government building in the city of Dijon. In Paris, hundreds of tractors blocked off major roads into the country’s capital in what was called the “siege of Paris” by many media outlets—one of which being BBC News.

By mid-February, protests had spread to other European countries including Italy, Greece, Belgium, Poland, Spain and even Romania and Lithuania. There seems to be no sign of this fire going out any time soon. All the politicians can hope for is that springtime and Mother Nature will draw the farmers and their tractors back to their fields to sow their spring crops and allow the political firestorm to cool off.

But hope is not a strategy, and European farmers know it. Now the question may be how much of the “green gains” are EU’s leaders willing to concede in order to save their political hide. The European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, now intends to scrap the plan to halve pesticide use. It also decided to exclude the agricultural sector from the strict timeline for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 90% before 2040. In Germany, farmers gained some concessions from the government on the issue of fuel subsidies but continue their demand for full reinstatement. On Feb. 1 in France, the main farmer unions called for an end to the protests after “securing promises of governmental assistance” on finance and regulatory issues. And in the EU’s home base, farmers “won their first concession from Brussels” after the commission proposed to delay rules for setting aside land for biodiversity.

Whether it is luck, strategy or irony on the part of the farmers, Europe’s reassessment of its climate policies comes as the bloc approaches EU parliamentary elections in June. The elections are expected to bring more far-right and fringe lawmakers into Parliament. Already, the continent’s political pundits are saying the next political cycle (2024-29) “will undoubtedly be less green to the point of putting into question the implementation of the green new deal.” Plus, the recent protests “are just a prelude of the further clashes to come.”

Too Many Sticks, Too Few Carrots
Will this fire jump the pond, and could we once again see tractors showing up on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.? Need I remind you, it is an election year here, too.

It is unfair and unwise to think farmers—no matter the continent where they live—are going to carry the costs of going green on their backs alone. At some point, all this needs to stop being an academic exercise and become an economic one. Start paying more to the farmer for carbon credits. Provide the tax incentives to finance the transition to “greener” farms. And stop with the rhetoric that burping cows are going to cause the next apocalypse.

Down on the farm in the U.S., the green agenda is at a crossroads. The question will be whether we will make the same mistakes Europe did and try to drive a green agenda too fast with a stick-heavy approach. The first litmus test may come sooner rather than later as Congress still has a new farm bill to pass. It is expected to be the “greenest” farm bill on record. This election year, given what’s happening in Europe, will our politicians pile on the carrots instead of giving us more sticks? Come November election time, we will see which road we are headed down.

Why Farmers Are Protesting In Europe

Tue, 20 Feb 2024 21:08:22 GMT

Farmers are protesting across the European Union, saying they are facing rising costs and taxes, red tape, excessive environmental rules and competition from cheap food imports. Demonstrations have been taking place for weeks in countries including France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Italy and Greece.

While many issues are country-specific, others are Europe-wide. Here is a detailed look at the problems that have prompted the protest movement across the bloc and in individual countries.

IMPORTS

Demonstrations in eastern Europe have focused on what farmers say is unfair competition from large amounts of imports from Ukraine, for which the EU has waived quotas and duties since Russia’s invasion. Polish farmers have been blocking traffic at the border with Ukraine, which Kyiv says is affecting its defense capability and helping Russia’s aims. Meanwhile, Czech farmers have driven their tractors into downtown Prague, disrupting traffic outside the farm ministry.

The farmers resent the imports because they say they put pressure on European prices while not meeting environmental standards imposed on EU farmers. Renewed negotiations to conclude a trade deal between the EU and South American bloc Mercosur have also fanned discontent about unfair competition in sugar, grain and meat.

RULES AND BUREAUCRACY

Farmers take issue with excessive regulation, mainly at EU level. Centre stage are new EU subsidy rules, such as a requirement to leave 4% of farmland fallow, which means not using it for a period of time.

They also denounce bureaucracy, which French farmers say their government compounds by over-complicating implementation.

In Spain, farmers have complained of “suffocating bureaucracy” drawn up in Brussels that erodes the profitability of crops.

In Greece, farmers demand higher subsidies and faster compensation for crop damage and livestock lost in 2023 floods.

RISING DIESEL FUEL COSTS

In Germany and France, the EU’s biggest agricultural producers, farmers have railed against plans to end subsidies or tax breaks on agricultural diesel. Greek farmers want a tax on diesel to be reduced.

In Romania, protests in mid-January were mainly against the high cost of diesel.

In France, many producers say a government drive to bring down food inflation has left them unable to cover high costs for energy, fertilizer and transport.

WHAT ARE GOVERNMENTS DOING?

The European Commission late last month proposed to limit agricultural imports from Ukraine by introducing an “emergency brake” for the most sensitive products - poultry, eggs and sugar - but producers say the volume would still be too high. The Commission has also exempted EU farmers for 2024 from the requirement to keep some of their land fallow while still receiving EU farm support payments, but they would need to instead grow crops without applying pesticides.

French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal announced measures including controls to insure imported foods do not have traces of pesticides banned in France or the EU, and talks to get farmers higher prices and loosen bureaucracy and regulation.

Paris and Berlin have both relented to the pressure and rowed back on plans to end subsidies or tax breaks on agricultural diesel. In Romania, the government has acted to increase diesel subsidies, address insurance rates and expedite subsidy payments.

In Portugal, the caretaker government has announced an emergency aid package worth 500 million euros, including 200 million euros to mitigate the impact of a long-running drought.

WHY FARMERS ARE PROTESTING, BY COUNTRY:

FRANCE

- EU red tape

- Diesel prices

- Need more support to shore up incomes

- Access to irrigation

- Criticism over animal welfare and use of pesticides

POLAND

- Cheap imports from Ukraine

- EU regulation

CZECH REPUBLIC

- Bureaucracy

- Cheap imports

- EU farm policy

SPAIN

- “Suffocating bureaucracy” drawn up in Brussels that they say erodes the profitability of crops

- Trade deals that they say open the door to cheap imports

PORTUGAL

- Insufficient state aid, subsidy cuts

- Red tape

ROMANIA

- Cost of diesel

- Insurance rates

- EU environmental regulations

- Cheap imports from Ukraine

BELGIUM

- EU requirement to leave 4% of land fallow

- Cheap imports

- Subsidies favoring larger farms

GREECE

- Demands for higher subsidies and faster compensation for crop damage and livestock lost in 2023 floods

- Diesel tax and surging electricity bills

- Falling state and EU subsidies

(Reporting by Sybille de La Hamaide and Gus Trompiz; Editing by Crystal Chesters)

Which Foreign Country Owns the Most Farmland in the U.S.? Hint: It's Not China

Thu, 11 Jan 2024 17:24:37 GMT

Controversy continues to grow across the U.S., and China is the primary target of the new rules. However, China doesn’t own the most farmland in the U.S., according to a new USDA report. It’s actually Canada, which accounts for 32%, or 14.2 million acres.

Rounding out the top five are the Netherlands at 12%, Italy at 6%, the United Kingdom at 6% and Germany at 5%. Together, citizens in those countries hold 13 million acres, or 29%, of the foreign-held acres in the U.S. China owns less than 1%, or 349,442 acres.

All told, 43.4 million acres of forest and farmland in the U.S., or 3.4% of all ag land, is foreign owned as of Dec. 31, 2022. Roughly 30 million of those acres are reported as foreign-owned, with the remainder primarily under a 10-year-or-longer lease. Of the 30 million, 66% is owner-operated, 14% has a tenant or sharecropper as the producer and 12% report a manager other than the owner or a tenant/sharecropper as producer. The remaining 7% are “NA.”

USDA says the two biggest Chinese-owned companies with land holdings in the U.S. are Brazos Highland and Murphy Brown LLC, which owns Smithfield Foods. Brazos Highland reported owning 102,345 acres, and Smithfield owns 97,975 acres.

The top five states with the largest Chinese holdings are:

Texas at 162,167 acres
North Carolina at 44,776 acres
Missouri at 43,071 acres
Utah at 32,447 acres
Virginia at 14,382 acres

USDA reports those five states combined account for 85% of China’s farmland ownership. In Texas, USDA reports China has long-term leases associated with wind energy, and in North Carolina and Missouri, ownership is tied to Smithfield and producers who contract for pork production.

More States to Take Up Possible Bans in 2024

Foreign-held farmland has become a hot button topic on Capitol Hill. Farm Journal Washington correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer thinks it will continue to gain momentum in 2024 as a political ploy used by candidates.

“It’s an emotional issue, and it’s not a simple issue either,” Wiesemeyer says. “I was recently in Missouri, and some commodity leaders worry about the negative consequences of going too far. No one’s saying China should not be watched relative to buying farmland near airports, national security is involved in that case, but more than a few farmers are looking at the potential downsides for pork producers who contract with Smithfield and the number of acres they own.”

One of those unintended consequences is playing out in Arkansas.

“I’m announcing Syngenta, a Chinese state-owned agrichemical company, must give up its landing holdings in Arkansas,” says Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, referencing a 160-acre research site owned by Northrup King Seed, a Syngenta subsidiary.

Eric Boeck, president of Syngenta Seeds North America, told Farm Journal editor Clinton Griffiths: “EPA and USDA many times require us to do work and permitting right in the same state as we’re going to sell products. One of the first things we have to make sure we figure out is how we work with the local community to make sure we’re still getting products tested in their backyard, so we have the ability to sell those products.”

Syngenta argues if they sell that particular farm, Arkansas farmers will be at a disadvantage because research can’t be done in the same weather and soil conditions.

“We’re heavy in the soybean market in Arkansas, some of those maturity zones, we have a very significant market share and savings,” Boeck says. “We want to make sure we’re protecting those farmers’ abilities to be able to use our products.”

Wiesemeyer says the bigger issue for U.S. farmland might be solar panels, with farmers in states like Missouri reporting companies have offered to pay more than $1,000 per acre cash rent to put solar panels on their farm. At such a high price, he says it’s eating up acres of farmland, with the potential to grow even more in 2024.

Agritechnica 2023: New Trends Shape Equipment Industry

Tue, 28 Nov 2023 14:04:47 GMT

More than 400,000 visitors poured onto the grounds of Agritechnica in Hanover, Germany, in November as the event resumed following a pandemic-induced pause. The latest innovations in farm equipment and machinery were on display by 2,800 exhibitors from more than 50 countries as the industry works to recover from the supply chain induced nightmare of the past few years.

“Obviously, many of our equipment manufacturers, some based in the United States, are multinational companies selling around the world,” says Curt Blades, senior vice president of agriculture services and forestry at the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM). “The dynamic of each country ultimately affects our ability to sell grain around the world, and obviously that has a tremendous impact on the equipment we sell in the United States.”

AEM is part of a coalition of 13 trade associations called Agrievolution. It just released a report on the latest ag equipment trends shaping the future of the industry and sales.

A key finding is the evolution of agricultural commodities trade flow over the past two decades has grown from $405 billion to $1.2 trillion. Agrievolution says that’s changing the demand for mechanization worldwide.

Mechanization is the Answer

According to data from OECD-FAO and it’s Agricultural Outlook for 2023 to 2032, one of the key drivers in crop production won’t be increasing land use or crop intensity. Instead, it says 87% of crop production growth will come from yield increases.

How will farmers achieve those gains globally? Mechanization continues to be the answer.

“We’ve been talking about sustainability and efficiency for the past few years,” Blades says. “We’re now recognizing the convergence of that is technology as it lines up with the economics of doing more with less.”

In its report, Agrievolution lays out global trends for different machinery by region. In recent years, sales of large farm tractors have increased with the largest purchases coming from Latin America. New seeder demand is seeing strong sales in North and South America along with Africa and the Middle East. Meanwhile, combine purchases are also up.

Based on a survey of manufacturers, in the next six to 12 months, the sales curve might come down a little bit in terms of equipment sold, says Charlie O’Brien, Agrievolution secretary general. “Longer term, the outlook remains very solid,” he adds.

Lessons Learned

The biggest trend uncovered in the survey is the impact to supply chains post-pandemic.

“There’s an evolution that’s taking place and that’s to keep a little inventory on hand, especially the critical components,” O’Brien says.

Today, there’s going to be more parts and inventory on the shelves.

“The supply chain is truing up, but we had to change our business a little bit to make sure we have the inventory, parts and components to run our factories,” says Todd Stucke, president of Kubota Tractor Corp. “For the most part, we‘re back to normal.”

According to the Agrievolution survey, the new normal might mean more manufacturing at home and in house. Some two-thirds of manufacturers are considering more reshoring, or doing business with in-country suppliers.

“We learned something during the pandemic, and that was our supply chain is wildly efficient and pretty fragile,” Blades says.

Walk the aisles at Agritechnica with Clinton Griffiths for a glimpse of the new products and innovations.