Imports and Exports

The New Ag Economy: Why This Downturn is a Structural Shift, Not Just a Cycle

Mon, 13 Apr 2026 21:22:19 GMT

What You Need to Know:

Structural Evolution: This downturn is a permanent market shift, not just a temporary cycle.
Friend-Shoring: Trade is moving toward geopolitical allies to ensure supply chain resilience.
Aggressive Cost-Cutting: Farmers are doubling generic input use and delaying machinery purchases to protect margins.
Financial Resilience: Better management and working capital make today far more stable than the 1980s.
Premium Protein Demand: GLP-1 medications are driving consumers toward smaller, higher-quality meat portions

As the industry enters the third year of this downturn, farmers and agribusinesses are questioning if a recovery is on the two-year horizon. While cyclical behavior is normal, two economists suggest the structural evolution within crop protection, machinery, technology, livestock and other individual sectors is creating a different kind of staying power for those who survive the recovery.

The Evolution of the Cycle

When characterizing the current economic cycle in agriculture, historical patterns provide a necessary baseline, yet the present landscape is defined by unique pressures. Typical agricultural cycles consist of roughly six years of expansion followed by four years of decline. Currently, the market is navigating a “corrective period,” returning to long-run averages.

The drivers of growth are typically demand shocks — export surges, fuel demand or policy shifts such as the Renewable Fuel Standard. However, Wes Davis, ag economist at Meridian Ag Advisors, notes the current environment is an intersection of traditional contraction and sector-specific evolution.

“What I think we’re experiencing right now is that typical cycle behavior where we see growth in some business firms, and then some contraction and pullback to adjust to the cycle going back to more of the long-run average,” Davis explains. “I think we’re also seeing evolution of individual sectors within the market where there’s adjustments happening because of the industry itself.”

In other words, this isn’t just a cycle — it’s also a structural shift.

Change Fatigue and Modern Volatility

Farmers aren’t strangers to volatility, but global trade disruptions, policy shifts and rising competition, especially from Brazil, are layering uncertainty onto already volatile markets.
Farmers are grappling with “change fatigue,” a byproduct of the high velocity of information and extreme price swings that dwarf the relative stability of the early 2000s.

“When I go talk to any industry group right now, the phrase that I hear is ‘change fatigue’, and I feel that. Every couple minutes, something shifts,” says Trey Malone, Purdue University ag econ professor. “But to be clear, it’s not that the farm economy isn’t used to volatility, it’s just the uncertainty and the volatility now is, like, ‘hold my beer relative’ to the old volatility.”

Malone attributes this to layers of uncertainty created by global trade and policy. The rise of Brazilian production, coinciding with the disruption of U.S.-China trade relations, has created a permanent state of flux. This sentiment is reflected in the Purdue Ag Economy Barometer, which shares a higher correlation with the Small Business Index (.5) than with actual commodity prices. This suggests farmers view themselves primarily as small business owners facing broad economic pressures rather than just price-takers.

“We don’t see very strong correlations even with lagged soybean prices and corn prices,” Malone notes. “The world is more complicated than just looking at what happened in the market yesterday and gauging how farmers feel.”

Global Competitiveness and the Trade Reallocation

A primary concern for U.S. producers is their position as low-cost providers. While the U.S. maintains an infrastructure advantage that lowers the cost of getting products to export ports, Brazil continues to close the gap.

“It’s a fair question farmers ask a lot: Are we actually the ones who are the low-cost producers, and do we still have a place in the global market if Brazil continues to lower the cost of production and transport their grain to export terminals?” Davis asks.

However, Davis points out that global trade hasn’t shut off; it has reallocated. Only three global regions — North America, Latin America and parts of Southeastern Europe/Central Asia — are net exporters. The rest of the world remains net importers.

“While our trade has kind of shifted around ... that shift has really reallocated stuff in different places. Those calories and products end up going somewhere. It’s just a question of where,” he says.

The Shift to “Friend-Shoring” and Resilient Supply Chains

The industry is moving from “just-in-time” (hyper-lean) procurement to “just-in-case” (inventory-heavy) strategies, a lesson reinforced by the pandemic. This shift is accompanied by “friend-shoring,” where the U.S. prioritizes trade with geopolitical allies.

“We’ve gone from offshoring to onshoring to nearshoring to friendshoring,” Malone explains. “We’ve got a paper that’ll be coming out ... where we document friend-shoring in ag and food supply chains. Over the last 10 years, there’s been a shift where we mostly in the U.S. trade with other people who vote like us in the WTO. That’s kind of one way to measure friends.”

This resilience is also visible in crop protection. In 2019, 80% of active ingredients were sourced from China. Today, that is closer to 60%, with manufacturing shifting to India and domestic sites. Davis calls these “geopolitically resilient” supply chains.

The Rise of Generics and Decision Paralysis

The economic downturn is fundamentally changing the business model for input providers. Farmers are aggressively cutting costs, leading to a massive surge in generic usage.

“The latest survey I saw shows about 60% of farmers use generics today. That was about 30% to 40% just 5 years ago,” Davis says. This forces companies to pivot from differentiation to operational volume.

In the machinery sector, high costs and economic uncertainty have led to “decision paralysis.” Farmers are extending the life of their equipment, treating machinery replacement as the most controllable variable in managing annual ROI. Davis notes the U.S. ag equipment cycle is currently 15 to 20 percentage points lower than typical low points, driven by this hesitation. Furthermore, there is significant skepticism toward subscription-based technology models.

“Farmers don’t terribly love this idea, and I think the other interesting thought here is I’m not sure that retailers like selling them either,” Malone adds.

AI: The “Undergraduate Intern”

While artificial intelligence (AI) is a major talking point, its current role in agriculture is more supportive than transformative. Malone views AI as a “highly capable undergraduate intern” — useful for processing information but incapable of replacing the trust and risk management provided by human advisors.

“I don’t think you need to be replacing your agronomist. I think your mediocre agronomist just got OK,” Malone says, noting while LLMs can pass CCA exams, they cannot manage the risk of a wrong decision. “The risk management value proposition of an in-person Claude, or whoever, is probably going to win out because there’s still a risk.”

Currently, the adoption gap is wide: While 75% of agribusiness managers see potential in AI, only 4% have implemented it, according to a Purdue University survey in 2025.

Livestock and the GLP-1 Impact

The livestock sector is facing a unique demand shift driven by weight-loss medications (GLP-1s). This is leading to “premiumization.” As consumers eat smaller portions, they are opting for higher-quality cuts.

“The explosion in demand for protein is just shocking,” Malone says. “What GLP-1s do to that calorie count is they are all shifting toward premium cuts. You don’t care how much it costs because you’re only going to have seven bites of it. But you’re going to have a steak. That premiumization is going to really, really take off in the next 10 years.”

Conversely, the hype surrounding “fake meat” has largely faded, proving to be more of an investor-led phenomenon than a market-driven one.

Financial Stability: Not the 1980s

Despite the downturn, the financial health of the American farmer remains more stable than during the crisis of the 1980s. Currently, 10% to 12% of farmers are in a “tight” financial position , compared to 20% to 30% in the 80s.

“We do have a completely different, more professional ag workforce than we did back then,” Malone says. “The farm policy we have right now does not necessarily match what we need for the future, but all of these things make me think we’re in a much more stable position.”

Farmers have built-in “shock absorbers,” Davis adds, including off-farm income and working capital built up during the expansion years. However, in his research Davis has seen how alternative financing is becoming a major tool for the 50% of farmers who use it — either to manage stress or, for larger operations, to leverage relationships with retailers.

Strategic Reassessment: Winning at the Bottom

The experts agree the “bottom of the cycle” is the time for professionalization and upskilling. Surviving — and thriving — will require sharper management. It is an opportunity to reassess farm transitions and management disciplines, such as financial management, accounting and planning, which become critical in tight margins.

“Farmers are going to have to get smarter and get more creative with how they manage,” Malone says. “This is a good opportunity to take a step back and think about what the strategy needs to be moving forward.”

Davis emphasizes relationships are solidified during these periods: “Farmers are going to remember the folks who were around when they were in the bottom of the cycle, and who were there to support them. The best farmers will continue to get better ... I get excited about what we can look like as we come out of this cycle.”

So Is This Ag Cycle Different?

These experts say yes as every cycle presents its own unique reshaping of future opportunities.

To download the full report on why this ag cycle is different and what it means for your operation, click here .

Here's How Much Fertilizer Tariffs Cost Farmers in 2025

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 18:27:43 GMT

The full cost of fertilizer tariffs – and then some – may have been passed through to farmers in 2025, according to data released Tuesday by North Dakota State University (NDSU).

In its monthly Agricultural Trade Monitor, NDSU found that tariffs imposed by the Trump administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) collected an estimated $958 million in revenue from selected imports of agricultural inputs between February and October of last year. Of that, about:

$273 million came from agricultural chemicals
$530 million from farm machinery
$110 million from fertilizers
$44 million from seeds.

The report observes that when fertilizer tariffs were imposed in April, U.S. fertilizer prices significantly rose relative to Canadian prices, which weren’t subject to the tariff. The premium for DAP, measured by the difference between prices in the U.S. Northern Plains versus Canadian prices, climbed to $343 per metric ton at its peak during the tariff period, marking an increase of $172 per metric ton from pre-tariff baseline levels. MAP and urea each saw a similar divergence.

So who pays the cost of tariffs? The burden can either be distributed between exporters, who eat the cost by reducing export prices, or importer and end users, who pay higher prices. The analysis of the U.S.-Canada spread “indicates that domestic importers and farmers bore the tariff burden substantially,” says the report, noting price movements during the tariff period seemed to exceed the direct cost of the tariff itself.

(NDSU Agricultural Trade Monitor)

The report notes the effective tariff rate on DAP imports was approximately 8% of the import value, while year-over-year spot price analysis showes the differential between U.S. and Canadian spot prices rose by $187 per metric ton in August 2025 compared with August 2024. That’s equivalent to a 342% pass-through rate when measured against the 8% tariff. At the retail level, the pass-through rate was lower at 156%, but still exceeded 100%.

Context is important, says Shawn Arita, associate director and associate research professor at NDSU’s Agricultural Risk Policy Center. He notes the $110 million in IEEPA tariff revenues for fertilizers is less than 1% of the estimated $33 billion in total production costs.

“The high pass-through rate may reflect the uncertainty around tariff levels that prevailed around President Donald Trump’s April “liberation day” announcement of reciprocal tariffs,” Arita says. “It was unclear whether some exporters would be subject to levies above 10% as importers moved to stockpile inventory.”

The report notes retailers engaged in “precautionary” inventory building, while exporters may have been worried about sustained access to the U.S. market. Those uncertainties may have combined to widen price premiums beyond what would be expected from the direct impact of the tariffs.

NDSU’s monthly analysis found year-over-year premiums hit major peaks in August and September, with DAP spot premiums hitting $187 per metric ton before gradually normalizing through November. Retail markets saw lower volatility, with DAP retail premiums peaking at $123 per metric ton in September.

Premiums eased from September to November, reflecting the easing of “extreme” supply constraints as the policy environment became more clear, the report says.

Following tariff exemptions granted in November, U.S. price differentials with Canada caused by the tariffs converged back to normal, the report found. DAP spot prices have retraced most of their tariff-driven increases, and MAP prices have fully reversed their increases, trading slightly below pre-tariff levels.

While wholesale prices fell sharply after the November rollback, retail prices are adjusting more slowly.

“As of early January 2026, farmers buying fertilizer from local retailers continue to face price stickiness, paying tariff-induced premiums above pre-tariff baseline levels,” the report says.

Join a dynamic conversation connecting the dots between global market forces and on-farm fertilizer costs at Top Producer Summit, Feb. 9-11 in Nashville. From geopolitics to natural gas prices to shipping constraints, Shawn Arita from North Dakota State University, and other experts will unpack what’s really driving fertilizer volatility — and how you can better time, plan and budget your nutrient strategies for 2026 and beyond. Click here to view the agenda and register.

Caleb Ragland Named Pro Farmer's 2025 Person of the Year

Mon, 29 Dec 2025 21:32:20 GMT

Caleb Ragland , president of the American Soybean Association (ASA), was thrust into the national media spotlight in 2025, where his steady demeanor and devotion to fact-based arguments made him an effective advocate for all farmers as they fought their way through the trade fire storm. That’s why Pro Farmer selected Ragland as its 2025 Ag Person of the Year.

“If you could pick a word to describe the year, uncertainty would be it,” says the Kentucky-based farmer. Following the trade ructions of President Trump’s first term, Ragland told Pro Farmer he knew another trade disruption was possible. Like most farmers, though, he was caught off guard at the sheer scale of the trade war and the lack of a firm deal with China before harvest began.

With commodity prices suffering as harvest began, ASA knew action had to be taken. Their approach was to “respectfully, but firmly” communicate the plight of soybean farmers to the general public and lawmakers in Washington.

“We’re not presenting ourselves as victims, we simply want to make a living and let the markets work like everyone else,” Ragland says.

The lack of soybean demand made waves far beyond the reach of traditional agricultural news outlets, with nearly 45,000 pieces of online media mentioning “soybeans” since September of this year. Ragland shares he sees those efforts paying off in smaller ways. Just last week, while traveling, he had an interaction at an airport when two fellow travelers noticed his ASA hat and struck up a conversation about soybeans after hearing about them in the news.

During today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, ASA President Caleb Ragland (KY) urged Congress & the administration to take immediate action to reduce #farm production costs & prevent additional family farm closures. https://t.co/wPUdObCxyC #AgEcon #AgPolicy #Soybeans pic.twitter.com/hkBqgUghWs
— American Soybean Association (@ASA_Soybeans) October 28, 2025

Over the course of 2025, Ragland had direct contact with legislators, administration officials and other policymakers. He spoke at Congressional hearings to push for lower tariffs on farm inputs, policy changes to bolster demand for soy and direct assistance to farmers impacted by ongoing policy decisions. Progress has been made with some tariffs on fertilizer dropped in December, and a $12 billion bridge payment to support crop producers was announced earlier this month. Despite movement in the right direction, Ragland knows more work remains.

“We really don’t want to leave anything out there on the table, and the rules around biofuels and renewable fuel standards is one practical area we could still see improvement,” he says.

Ragland finishes up his term as president this month, and will move into the role of chairman for his final year on the board in 2026. He remains optimistic the trade deal with China will be honored going forward, but reserves some uneasiness due to the complex political situation between the two countries. His key takeaway from his time in the spotlight is the importance of farmers banding together to influence policy.

“If we’re not unified we have very little influence, but there’s a lot of strength in numbers when we come together to point to common goals,” Ragland says.

In addition to a Person of the Year, Pro Farmer also selects an Event of the Year and a Story of the Year . In 2025, there was a distinct theme. The trade war and its disruptions to both exports and inputs made it a shoo-in for Story of the Year. Trump’s announcement of sweeping tariffs on April 2 , and the volatility that shook global financial markets in its wake, made it a clear choice for Event of the Year.

—Bill Watts and Hillari Mason contributed to this article.

Dollars And Dirt: Navigating The Financial Reality Of Conservation Farming

Fri, 19 Dec 2025 20:48:35 GMT

Farmers like Ted Hamer and April Hemmes aren’t opposed to conservation practices or regenerative agriculture—both Iowa row crop growers already use some. What they are opposed to is taking on unmanageable risk in an environment of tight margins, volatile markets and rising input costs without clear, reliable benefits.

During their recent, wide-ranging conversation on AgriTalk, a central theme emerged: if policymakers and companies seek broader adoption of conservation and regenerative practices, they must pair expectations with practical, well-designed incentives.

Here are some of the key points the two farmers made during their discussion with Host Davis Michaelson.

‘Regenerative’ is Just Good Farming
When new programs are announced with big dollar figures and bold language, they often imply that farmers need to be “fixed.” That doesn’t sit well with farmers, many of whom have been stewarding the same land for generations.

As Hemmes, based in Franklin County, Iowa, puts it, many practices highlighted under the umbrella of “regenerative agriculture” are simply standards for good farming.

“What you’re saying is regenerative ag, I just call farming. That’s just what we do. Taking care of our ground and having healthy soils is what we farmers do because it’s our legacy to our family,” says Hemmes, who uses no-till, cover crops and water management practices.

In her and Hamer’s perspective, farmers are not resistant to regenerative practices. Instead, they dislike being told they are “farming wrong” by groups and individuals outside of agriculture who may not fully grasp the on-the-ground economic and agronomic realities.

Tight Margins Make Experimenting A High-Stakes Decision
Hamer, based in Tama County, Iowa, explains that adopting new practices—such as cover crops, reduced tillage, or diversified rotations—often means incurring upfront costs, significant management changes, and a lot of uncertainty.

“It’s terribly risky with the margins we have right now… I’ve got to make a buck… I can’t have it be so risky that I don’t see a return on my investment,” Hamer says.

This is the crux of the matter: even when farmers are supportive and willing to adopt new practices and technologies, the math has to work, and some profit must be realized.

Their collective perspective is clear: without robust ROI data, strong cost-share or incentive payments, and integrated risk-management tools (like multi-year contracts or crop insurance integration), shifting current practices is often unjustifiable.

“The margins are too tight to stick your neck out very far at this time,” Hamer says.

Incentives Must Include Technical Support
National agricultural announcements often tout the dollar amounts available, such as the recently announced $700 million Regenerative Pilot Program . While funding is crucial, Hemmes points to an equally pressing need: technical support in the field to help implement the programs effectively.

“They need more dollars for people in the field…. I’ve been a soil and water commissioner for over 30 years, and we are in desperate need for technicians out here. So, throwing money at this is one thing, but getting the people in place to carry out the programs is another,” she says.

When USDA service centers, Extension offices, and others at the local level are understaffed and technical assistance is stretched thin, good programs can stall at the farm gate. Hemmes outlines the requirements for effective incentives:

Adequate Technical Assistance: To help farmers correctly design and implement complex practices.
Reasonable Timelines: Recognizing that some benefits, like improved soil structure and organic matter, take time to develop and build.
Simple, Predictable Processes: Application and compliance should be straightforward.

Without the necessary technical support and manpower, Hemmes notes that even the best programs often just turn into frustrating paperwork exercises.

Aid Payments Don’t Fix Structural Issues
Short-term “bridge” or aid payments can help keep farms afloat during difficult years, but Hemmes and Hamer say they don’t structurally support the long-term decisions that can improve grower practices and profitability.

The main issue, they contend, is that much of the money from these aid programs never truly stays on the farm.

“This payment (the $12 billion Farmer Bridge Assistance program) isn’t for us. It’s all going to input costs, fertilizer, equipment. None of that money stays in our hands,” Hamer says.

Hemmes agrees, noting that people outside of agriculture often “don’t see what the problem is” because farmers are seemingly getting “free” money.

“It’s not like we go to Amazon and order a bunch more crap off there because we got some money,” she says. “No. It goes to everything we have to do to put the next crop in the ground.”

Ultimately, she believes, major policy change requires facing difficult truths.

“We’d love free and fair trade, but we know that’s not a possibility,” she contends. “It’s going to hurt to make a change, and I think that’s what politicians don’t like. They want to get reelected, so [their attitude is] ‘let’s just keep doing it this way.’ That’s the tough part of it all, because anything that revolves around changing policy is messy.”

Hear the complete conversation between Hamer, Hemmes and Michaelson on AgriTalk:

No More Idle Fields: How A Small Fish Could Solve Rice Farmers' Winter Revenue Gap

Wed, 17 Dec 2025 16:59:24 GMT

Researchers are pioneering a system in Arkansas to turn winter-idle rice fields there into productive fish farms, potentially offering environmental benefits and a new revenue stream for growers.

Currently, rice is planted in the spring and harvested in the fall, leaving the fields empty in winter. But what if this non-productive period could be utilized to add a second, lucrative crop?

The ‘Fish In The Fields’ Project
University of Arkansas researcher Ben Runkle is exploring that question with his multiyear research project called, “Fish in the Fields.”

Runkle says the research is being conducted on a commercial rice farm in eastern Arkansas in Lonoke County, about 45 minutes east of Little Rock.

“The concept was introduced to us by partners from California, at the Resource Renewal Institute, who are interested in exploring different types of regenerative production that are environmentally-friendly and farmer-friendly,” Runkle says.

Scientists at the Institute reached out to Runkle and his group, knowing their expertise in agriculture and farm practices and the interactions between the carbon and water cycle.

“We started designing this experiment to explore the potential for growing fish as a crop, concurrent, or in the off season, with rice,” Runkle says.
The researchers are evaluating two key potential benefits:

environmental/agronomic: The fish can help consume and degrade some of the leftover residues of the rice plant. They are also theorized to reduce methane emissions from the field in the winter period, Runkle notes. Additionally, they process and cycle nutrients, which could potentially reduce fertilizer needs for the subsequent rice crop.
economic: The fish provide an alternate source of income for the farmers if they are harvested and sold on the market.

Runkle says there are a couple of similar projects he’s aware of that are underway in the U.S. One is in Louisiana, where rice farmers are doing some rotation with crawfish in their fields. There are also some similar projects underway in California, with researchers and farmers there exploring the use of fish in the wintertime to help break down residues.

Small Fish, Big Impact
Runkle says the Arkansas project is currently focused on growing fish commonly referred to as darters.

“They’re very small fish, basically like minnows. They are most commonly used as feed for other fish,” he explains.

The 2024 winter marked the third time Runkle and his research team have raised the fish in the field. In the process, they developed a prototype system to turn the fish into a marketable product.

“They are being flash freeze-dried, packaged, and will be sold as fish food,” Runkle says.

Along with developing a marketable product, Runkle says his team’s work has demonstrated some regenerative agriculture benefits.

“My graduate student’s research has found very low methane emissions in these fields, which is an environmental benefit,” Runkle says. “We also have some evidence of the fish consuming the leftover residue in the field, which provides an agronomic benefit.”

Along with those efforts, Runkle and hist team are taking water samples to assess zooplankton and phytoplankton, and flying a drone over the field to measure chlorophyll content. “It’s a highly integrated, real-world measurement system,” he says.

De-Risking The System For Farmers
Future phases of the research will continue to look at how farmers could benefit financially from including fish as a second crop in their fields during winter while incurring a low level of risk. Being able to produce an additional “crop” on fields could provide a financial boost to rice growers in Arkansas, the No. 1 rice-producing state in the country, and potentially, for rice growers in other states.

Runkle says his group is evaluating how to “de-risk the system” by making sure it demonstrates a clear profit, does not impact farmers’ main crop of rice and offers a reliable market for the uniquely grown fish.

“We would like to study more about the methane dynamics, the fish productivity, and critical harvest methods. A major factor is improving the harvest, which currently involves draining the fields just right to congregate the fish in a ditch, and then using a special pump system to collect them. It requires year-by-year iteration to improve,” Runkle notes.

Runkle says financial support by the Southern SARE Grant (Sustainable Agricultural Research and Education) and an NRCS Conservation Innovation Grant is funding the research.

To learn more about the fish-in-fields project, listen to the recent podcast, Short Talks From The Hill , where host Hardin Young and Runkle discuss the research and the potential opportunities for farmers.

Hope on the Horizon: Farmers Anticipate 'Bridge Payment' Announcement

Tue, 02 Dec 2025 21:31:03 GMT

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said on Tuesday that the Trump administration will announce a “bridge payment” for farmers next week that will provide short-term relief while longer trade and aid packages are finalized. The dollar amount has not been disclosed, though some groups have estimated the total amount will be in the neighborhood of $12 billion.

While many growers acknowledge the necessity of such ad-hoc payments amid mounting financial challenges, other farmers question whether the stopgap measures offer real solutions. Northeast Iowa farmer Tim Burrack says he is in both camps regarding the payments.

“Yeah, there’s people that can really use them. Everyone can use them,” says Burrack. “Our cost structure is terrible – our costs versus our returns. But in the big picture, I think these ad-hoc payments just kind of pacify us. We’re not getting real solutions.”

Farmers Want Market Opportunities
Burrack ticks off a short list of actions he believes the Trump administration needs to take that can help corn and soybean farmers. Chief among them, more export market opportunities and reduced trade barriers.

“We’re not getting our biofuel solutions,” Burrack adds. “We’re not getting E15, and now it looks like we still may allow imported feedstocks from China.”

Despite time to do so, Congress has not voted on legislation that would allow consumers across the country to access E15 year-round, according to Jed Bower, Ohio farmer and National Corn Growers Association president.

Northeast Kansas farmer Ken McCauley shares Bower’s sentiment. “President Trump has to come through on this. E15 is a no-lose deal,” says McCauley.

Like Burrack, McCauley favors the use of ad hoc payments to farmers in the short-term. “These payments do help, but I think they give a poor signal to input suppliers that we can keep this up, that everything’s going to work out. But it might not work out,” he says. “We’re talking some high numbers [of farmers at risk]. It’s not like the ‘80s, but it could get there pretty quick.”

Burrack says he is more concerned about the long-term future for American farmers and consumers, as well.

“My bigger concern is the federal government and the debt,” he says. “The issue is the American people are not prepared for the pain that’s coming because of the deficits. Either we’re going to be paying a lot more taxes, or people are going to have a lot less services, and no one wants to do either one. I don’t know how that’s going to turn out, but that’s the big concern I have.”

For more insights from Burrack and McCauley, listen to their discussion on AgriTalk with Host Chip Flory:

From Harvest to Hardship: Farmers Struggle With Cash-Flow Crunch

Tue, 25 Nov 2025 22:14:34 GMT

Across America’s heartland, most corn and soybean crops are harvested, combines have been put away, and farmers will gather with their families to enjoy the holidays ahead. But as farmers gather around dinner tables and give thanks for what they have, many are concerned about what they don’t have this fall – adequate cash flow.

That lack is the No. 1 issue facing farmers now, according to southeast Illinois farmer Sherman Newlin, who’s based in Crawford County.

“I think these low prices are starting to take a toll on guys trying to meet their cash-flow needs,” he says.

For many farmers, Newlin believes the issue isn’t just about surviving until next spring — it’s about paying land rents, covering input bills coming due, and staying afloat right now.

“Unless you’re in a good area that had really good yields, cash flow is probably going to be tight,” Newlin says.

Northeast Iowa Brent Judisch doesn’t sugarcoat the numbers he penciled out last Wednesday. “Our cash corn today is at $4.10 — that’s not going to cut it with an average yield. Our cash beans today are $10.60. With a good bean crop, that probably cash flows, but it doesn’t make any money,” he says.

Farmers Took Grain To Town At Harvest
Selling grain is about the only option many row-crop growers have had this fall to meet expenses, even if the market timing isn’t ideal, Newlin says.

“Prices for corn and soybeans have come up some. At harvest, things were quite a bit lower than where they are right now,” Newlin says. “But it’s kind of hard to take advantage of a rally if you sold across the scale and didn’t come back in and reown [the crop] on paper.”

Judisch says there are some “better bids out there” for farmers who can wait to market corn in late winter, February and March.

“But for the short term, [buyers] are not having to bid up that much to get it because guys are just having to turn some stuff into cash to pay the December rents,” he says.

(Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor)

The November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey reflects farmers’ current cash-flow pressure as well as their mindset in how they are approaching marketing decisions now. The survey, administered by Farm Journal, shows:

53% of ag economists say farmers are marketing defensively, prioritizing liquidity and risk reduction.
41% of ag economists say farmers are reactive, delaying decisions due to uncertainty.

Where Is The Financial Stress Most Severe?
Jackson Takach, chief economist for Farmer Mac, tells Farm Journal his reports indicate farmers’ top concern is liquidity (working capital) and their second-highest concern is farm income.

“We know cash flows are top of mind,” he says. “As prices have come down, people are talking about it more and digging into working capital, and that’s causing a little bit of distress, particularly in the grain side of the ag economy.”

Takach says the economic stress is highest in parts of the country where soybeans are farmers’ No. 1 crop.

“You look at the Delta, that’s where we’re seeing a lot of stress popping up in bankruptcies as well as late payments, because of some of that additional stress coming through with lower commodity prices specific to soybeans.”

That sentiment is similar to what was shared in the November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey, though the Monitor paints a broader picture. When asked in which region farmers face the most severe financial pressure, economists reported that “cotton and rice country is suffering from especially poor profitability and weak sentiment.”

Without action, long-term farmer viability is at risk, according to John Newton, American Farm Bureau Federation economist. “Additional financial support is critical to offset trade losses and provide a bridge until farm bill enhancements from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act go into effect,” he says in a release. “This will stabilize the farm economy, sustain rural economies and maintain affordable food prices.”

Will China Come Through On Soybean Purchases?
The fate of soybean exports is on nearly everyone’s radar, especially as China’s purchases for 2025 still hang in the balance.

Reuters’ Karl Plume reports that China is starting to make good on its promises, noting that “two cargo vessels were headed for grain port terminals near New Orleans on Monday to load with the first U.S. soybean shipments to China since May, according to a shipping schedule seen by Reuters.”

But Judisch warns the window for 2025 U.S. soybean sales to China is closing fast.

“We’re going to have to see some immediate results from this agreement [with China], because if this drags into January and February and Brazil comes online, I’m not very optimistic that we’re going to make the goals that were set between the U.S. and China.”

Farmers Press On And Start Planning For Next Season
With 2026 around the corner, cautious optimism about the new year mingles with the current hard reality of farmers’ cash-flow drought.

Judisch notes that successful negotiations by the Trump administration to drop tariffs on some items, such as fertilizer, aren’t helping financially strapped farmers. He says that was a scenario of a little help that arrived too late.

“Stopping the tariffs on fertilizer this late in the game does no good for the 2026 crop because you’ve either got it on fields already or your buildings are already full of high-priced fertilizer,” Judisch contends.

“It’s kind of a bugaboo for us,” he adds. “Our costs are staying high even with the tariffs being dropped on fertilizer, but our income is just not going to be there until probably next summer.”

Cash rents for 2026 is one important aspect of the financial equation for the year ahead that 100% of ag economists surveyed this month recommend farmers dig into now. Notes one ag economist: “Cash rent could use more attention as a majority of land is rented… it would be nice if landlords knew that they may need to lower cash rent.”

(Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor)

Newlin says he and other farmers he knows in his area are sorting through crop rotations for next season – whether to plant more corn and
fewer soybeans or less corn and more soybeans.

“We’ll probably be heavier corn next year just because of our rotation, but a lot of guys are going to be heavier in corn in our area,” Newlin says.

Judisch is sticking with his 60-40 ratio of corn to beans next season. Like Newlin, he believes other farmers could lean toward more corn in the year ahead, given the financial opportunity many believe corn offers.

“We’ve seen some very good export sales on corn, so there are some good things happening,” Judisch says. “We need to keep them going in the future. That’s the biggest thing.”

Your next read: USDA Signals Possible Trade Aid Soon, Economists Warn It Could Keep Input Prices High

Grain Movement Into New Orleans Shifts From Usual Routes This Fall

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 19:47:04 GMT

Year-over-year, Susan Olson says there are few interesting updates comparing how the Mississippi River is being used for grain transport.

Most surprising to her is according to USDA data there was a 3.4 million metric ton increase in grain exports from NOLA in mid-year 2025, however from her firm’s proprietary data, barge movements decreased. This could mean a shift toward rail being used to bring grain to the port for export.

(Action Intel)

Olson founded Action Intel, which uses proprietary data combining AIS signals that come from tow boats, imagery, computer vision tools and more to analyze barge movement and logistics volumes. Since 2023, the company has assembled barges per tow and reported its data.

Trade Flow and Logistics

While September and October usually usher in higher barge volumes due to grain harvest in the Corn Belt, this year did not see as high of a peak for traffic into New Orleans.

“Patterns changed this year. The numbers are lower and aren’t the peak of October last year. It is a little less than 1 million metric tons lower this fall into NOLA,” Olson. “Outbound north from NOLA volume is up 1 million metric tons. Also, notable, we are very slowly increasing trends in liquid tows moving in and out of NOLA.”

(Action Intel)

Increased backhauls is being attributed to another trend emerging this year – longer turn times for dry bulk tows. In 2024, turn times for dry bulks tows averaged 4.8 day but it’s up to 5.6 days in 2025. Olson points out backhauls usually carry fertilizer, metals, minerals, salt, etc.

“We could be seeing a change in the historic trends and a flattening of supply and demand of barges instead of peaks,” she says. “It could be a trend this year and may not persist. But we’ll have to watch the logistical patterns and flows changing.”

To-date in 2025, grain barge freight rates have remained high, averaging 500% to 600% of tariff compared to 400% tariff in 2024. Converted to dollars per ton, the first quarter of 2024 averaged $18.71/ton, and the first quarter of 2025 averaged $25.20/ton.

Delays and wait times also rose with higher barge wait times in 2025 due to lock delays and high water levels. In Cairo, Ill., this year saw an average of 1,000 barges waiting compared to 800 in 2024. The first half of 2025 had high water levels and lock delays, which contributed to the waits, whereas the second has been plagued with lower water levels and the slower turn times.

In September, the Coast Guard issued low water restrictions on barge drafts and configurations, which are still in place on the lower Mississippi River. Earlier this week, the Coast Guard issues an update to deep water tows to leave the St. Louis area, and all vessels to travel at slow speed because of narrow channel width.

For marketing year 2024, corn was 32% of the exports out of New Orleans (5.5 MMT), and in 2025, corn is 48% (7.6 MMT).

“The reduction in exports of soybeans to China has changed what exports overall look like,” Olson says.

Looking at the top 15 destinations for corn exports out of New Orleans, there’s been a dramatic shift.

(Action Intel/USDA)

Soybean Stalemate? U.S. Farmers Want China To Take Concrete Action On Its Commitments

Thu, 06 Nov 2025 21:09:37 GMT

Dust continues to hang over the agreement President Donald Trump made with China President Xi Jinping, clouding the details of how a reduction in retaliatory tariffs will play out for U.S. farmers who are anxious to move soybeans into the export market.

Despite some initial positive steps, a 13% tariff on U.S. soybeans remains, making them less competitive than Brazilian alternatives, according to a Reuters article published Thursday.

Kevin Paap, a farmer in Blue Earth County, Minn., remains cautiously optimistic. While he welcomes the trade agreement, he emphasizes the critical need for implementation.

“Trade agreements aren’t over once they’re signed. They’re really just getting started, and we need to make sure they’re enforced, they’re used, and hopefully they’re improved,” Paap says.

Western Iowa farmer Kelly Garrett shares a similar sentiment, albeit with a slightly more positive outlook.

“It’s nice to see we’re moving in the right direction, but I would sure like to see some deliveries made because China’s canceled so many orders in the past. Once the boats start heading in that direction, I’ll feel more confident and positive about the whole thing,” says Garrett, who produces grain and beef cattle near Arion.

The White House announced last week that China will purchase at least 12 million metric tons (mmt) of U.S. soybeans in the last two months of 2025 and at least 25 mmt in each of the subsequent three years. However, Beijing has yet to officially confirm these figures.

How China will meet its soybean commitments remains unknown. Past patterns show Chinese purchases closely track U.S.–Brazil price spreads, with strong buying when U.S. prices are competitive and sales falling when premiums widen.

“It is unclear whether China will prioritize the 25 MMT target despite unfavorable pricing, overlook the retaliatory ... tariff, or keep purchases contingent on competitive cost fundamentals,” reports Sandro Steinbach, associate professor and director of the Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies at North Dakota State University, in the monthly NDSU Ag Trade Monitor .

Farmer Sentiment Sees Slight Improvement
Despite the ongoing tariff challenges, there has been a modest uptick in U.S. farmer sentiment over the past month.

The Purdue University-CME Group Ag Economy Barometer index rose to 129 in October, a 3-point increase from September. The improvement is largely attributed to positives in the livestock sector, according to James Mintert, Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture, and one of the administrators of the barometer.

“That’s clearly part of it,” Mintert told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Wednesday. “The second thing is, I think it was a recognition that yields were really good this year. I know there’s been some exceptions to that, and there’s some variability out there, but overall yields have been pretty positive.”

Both Paap and Garrett report harvesting above average or better corn and soybean yields for the 2025 season.

Paap says yields were “above APH for both corn and soybeans, and more importantly, we were over 30% above last year’s corn yields.”

Garrett, while slightly below his initial corn yield expectations due to disease pressure, still achieved 225 bushels per acre. That is “10 bushels better than last year, and we’re going to be 5 bushels over APH,” he told Flory.

Basis Shows Signs Of Strengthening
Soybean basis improved 40¢ to 50¢ from September lows following the U.S.-China deal on anticipated demand, though recent softening and YoY weakness persist, reports Steinbach.

Paap, while acknowledging the improvement in basis, notes it’s moving up from one of the lowest he has ever seen. “Yes, it’s an improvement, but it’s not back to what you would expect a harvest basis to be,” he says.

Therein is a key rub for both Paap and Garrett. They see some improvement in basis and marketing opportunities, but they still aren’t at the level either farmer wants or needs.

Steinbach notes that new trade arrangements with Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, and Vietnam broaden export access and could support U.S. feed grains, meats, oilseeds and other products.

Despite the continued uncertainty in the marketplace, Mintert reports that over 70% of U.S. producers responding to the latest Purdue Ag Barometer say the U.S. is headed in the “right direction.”

Paap says he can agree with that perspective if “legislators will set politics aside and concentrate on policy and getting things done.” He especially wants to see a new farm bill and year-round nationwide availability of fuels with a 15% ethanol blend (E15).

“But if we’re going to take this opportunity and continue to make it a challenge and be all political and not work together, that’s not the right direction in my mind,” Paap notes.

Garrett says he is hopeful the farming economy is finally moving in a positive direction.

“We hit rock bottom with the basis on soybeans and with the corn market being down there around $4,” he says. “Now, with some of the news we have, I think we are headed up.”

Garrett and Paap detail more of their hopes for trade in the discussion they had Wednesday with Chip Flory on AgriTalk:

No Trade Agreement Can Boast the Success of USMCA, The Meat Institute Says

Tue, 04 Nov 2025 14:48:28 GMT

The Meat Institute is calling on the Trump administration to renew the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) for its benefits to American meat and poultry companies and the entire U.S. animal protein value chain.

“USMCA has been a boon for the American meat, livestock and poultry sector, along with the broader American food and agriculture economy and ancillary industries,” said Julie Anna Potts, The Meat Institute president and CEO, in a news release. “It has provided steady income to American farmers, ranchers, and meat and poultry exporters; it has created jobs for American truck drivers, ports, and transportation companies; it has strengthened American food retail and food service establishments; and it has accomplished all of this through transparent rules that allow American businesses to proactively plan supply chains and develop durable customer relationships.”

USMCA entered into force on July 1, 2020, substituting the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to create more balanced, reciprocal trade supporting high-paying jobs for Americans and grow the North American economy, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) .

“The domestic U.S. meat and poultry industry’s long-term economic viability, though, depends on robust international trade, particularly as domestic per capita consumption of meat and poultry remains stable, and 95% of consumers live outside the U.S,” The Meat Institute wrote in comments submitted to the USTR on Nov. 3. “International trade is, therefore, vital to the long-term strength of the U.S. meat and poultry industry, the American workers it supports, and the rural and farm communities it sustains.”

In 2024, U.S. meat and poultry exports exceeded $24.6 billion. Meat and poultry product exports to Canada and Mexico accounted for $7.5 billion of that total. Annually, approximately 14% of U.S. beef production, 15% of U.S. poultry production and 25% of U.S. pork production are exported, the organization noted. As well, exports add value to every animal produced, and in turn, increase demand for U.S. corn and soybeans.

“The Trump Administration’s America First Trade Policy Agenda has reinvigorated American trade policy and has reasserted American leadership to advance U.S. meat, poultry, food, and agriculture trade in a manner that revitalizes our farm communities and supports broad-based economic growth. President Trump’s negotiation of the USMCA during his first term resulted in the world’s gold-standard trade agreement,” the letter said. “Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, USMCA has bolstered U.S. meat, poultry, and livestock trade, has led to increased market integration in North America, and must be preserved without significant changes that would disrupt the U.S. meat and poultry industry’s substantial access to the Canadian and Mexican markets.”

The Meat Institute says it’s clear USMCA’s access terms – zero tariffs on most meat, poultry and livestock trade – have underpinned American economic and job growth, particularly in rural and farm communities across the U.S.

“No other trade agreement can boast the same success,” Potts said. “President Trump deserves enormous credit for this extraordinary achievement.”

See The Meat Institute’s full comments in response to the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) “Request for Comments on the Operation of the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.”

China Soybean Trade Deal 'A Net Positive' For U.S. Farmers

Thu, 30 Oct 2025 20:04:39 GMT

The White House’s announcement that China is committed to buying 12 million metric tons (mmt) of soybeans in the current year and 25 mmt in each of the next three years was met with varying degrees of relief and reservation on Thursday.

“We have a deal that will provide at least some stability, as long as China lives up to it, says Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist for StoneX Group.

He believes the deal will be particularly helpful to the U.S. soybean industry in the near-term.

“For one thing, because we’ve been building up our domestic infrastructure for biofuel production, our domestic demand base is much stronger now. So even stabilizing the business with China is a real positive,” Suderman told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Thursday morning.

Soybean markets were slightly higher on Thursday but well off highs after the announcement of the trade deal with China overnight.

Final Details Are Not Yet Fully Defined
The purchase of U.S. soybeans by China raises questions that aren’t yet fully answered.

For one, is the 12 mmt purchase entirely new business for 2025, or does the purchase take into consideration the 5.9 mmt China had already purchased earlier this year?

Suderman describes the distinction as carrying significant market implications.

If it’s 12 mmt of new business for this calendar year, that would help hit USDA’s target and help finish the year with ending stocks near 300 million bushels. “That isn’t burdensome by any means. It isn’t tight, but it does help support prices in the recent trading range,” Suderman notes.

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden told Flory that the 12 mmt represents all new business for the 2025-26 marketing year. Vaden emphasizes that the numbers agreed to between the two trade partners for 2025 and the next three years represent minimum purchase amounts.

“This is a floor, not a ceiling,” Vaden says. “We see, particularly looking toward next year, the 25 mmt number as a number to build on. But at a minimum, the Chinese have agreed to purchase 25 mmt of our soybeans, and that is more than they purchased in 2024. It is more than they purchased in 2023 and represents a solid baseline of demand for our farmers to sell to China.”

Flory shared some additional details he learned about what farmers could expect yet this year.

“Sources tell me Chinese buyers are asking for Gulf bids on soybeans to ship in December of this year,” Flory says. “That’s a good thing. What we still don’t know is how much of the ’12 million tons this year’ still need to be purchased. The cash market will tell us that — watch bids on the Mississippi River and rails to the PNW. Bean basis should firm and barge rates are already starting to show more activity.”

As for the 25 mmt purchase China has signed on for each of the next three years, Suderman believes delivery will primarily take place during the September to January time frame.

“But if any of that gets pulled forward into the current marketing year that would start tightening things up, maybe give us some more rally opportunities, particularly if there are some weather scares mixed in either in Brazil or the United States,” he says.

Suderman digs into the U.S.-China trade deal in detail on AgriTalk, here:

A Glass Half Full or Half Empty?
Without all the details of the trade deal, Suderman offers what insights he does have from a “glass half empty or half full” perspective.

From a glass half empty perspective, he says the current figure of 12 mmt in calendar year 2025 is a disappointment compared with historical sales to China of 30 mmt to 35 mmt annually. The 25 mmt purchase for each of the next three years only brings sales to China back to levels seen two years ago, not the peak.

However, a glass half full view of the situation sheds a positive light on the U.S.'s increased domestic demand.

“We built up our domestic demand so much that we don’t need as much from China in order to consume what we produce and give us that demand base,” Suderman explains.

Either way, the deal is a net positive, Suderman says. He calculates the deal would total 87 mmt over four years, representing approximately 75 mmt more than what would have been achieved without it, especially considering China’s long-term strategy to reduce reliance on U.S. food commodity imports.

“The Trump administration probably sped that process up a bit, but that’s the direction we were moving in,” Suderman says. “I believe once Trump is out of office, their intention is fully to cut off the United States. But that does give us time now to build up that domestic demand base and be able to handle that.”

Market Implications and Political Undercurrents
The deal is expected to bring some supply uncertainty back into the equation due to increased demand, potentially stopping the shrink in the U.S. to China bean market, Flory says.

Suderman believes the trade deal could justify a shift of several million acres from corn to soybeans in the coming year, which would help farmers with their rotation plans and possibly help them address high input costs.

Regarding China’s adherence to the trade deal, Suderman offered a unique perspective on China’s motivation. He suggests President Xi Jinping’s decision to make a deal might stem from a perceived weakness in his power base during China’s recent Fourth Plenum meeting. The event, involving 270 top Communist Party officials, is a time when leadership changes and positions are assessed.

“People get demoted from positions or removed from office, new people put into positions, etc., and if President Xi thought that his support base was strong, I think he would have held up strong against Trump,” Suderman says.

His perspective is that Xi felt some weakness in his power base and was quick to make a deal with the Trump administration to calm the international waters in order to focus on his support base at home. That could mean good news for the U.S. and offer a potential layer of confidence that the latest trade agreement with the China might be honored.

Your next read: China to Buy 12 Million Metric Tons of Soybeans This Season, Bessent Says

'The System Is Failing Us:' Why Real Change is Needed in U.S. Agriculture

Wed, 29 Oct 2025 13:57:31 GMT

Joe Maxwell doesn’t pull punches — especially on the topic of the future of American agriculture.

“The system is failing us,” says Maxwell, co-founder of Farm Action , during a recent episode of “Unscripted.” “It’s failing the people. It’s failing family farmers and ranchers. And it’s failing consumers. We can’t keep pretending everything’s fine.”

The Missouri farmer and former lieutenant governor shares an uncomfortable truth: The economic model that has shaped U.S. agriculture no longer works for those producing America’s food.

Commodity prices remain under pressure, input costs stay stubbornly high and government payments — while keeping some farms afloat — often mask deeper structural problems.

“We’re on this hamster wheel,” Maxwell says. “Government sends out a bailout, input companies raise prices and the money flows right back up to them. We think we’re being helped, but really, we’re just passing the money through.”

From Missouri Roots to National Reform

Maxwell grew up on a family farm in Missouri and lived through the 1980s farm crisis. That experience shapes his conviction that policy, not luck, determines who survives in agriculture.

That belief lead him and Ohio farmer Angela Huffman to co-found Farm Action, a nonprofit working to “connect the dots” between policy decisions, corporate consolidation and on-farm economics.

“We see a need for a farm organization that looks up and down the entire food chain,” Maxwell explains. “Everyone’s focused on one part of the system — fertilizer here, seed prices there, meatpacking somewhere else — but no one connects them. Farm Action connects those dots and pushes for policy that works for independent producers again.”

“We Don’t Feed the World Anymore”

Maxwell challenges one of agriculture’s most familiar slogans.

“Let’s be honest — we don’t feed the world anymore,” he says. “We import 60% of our fruit, over a third of our vegetables and record amounts of beef. We have a $47 billion agricultural trade deficit. The world is starting to feed us.”

He argues that U.S. farm policy has become overly dependent on exports of feed and fuel crops, while overlooking food crops and livestock production that directly feed Americans. Maxwell calls for farm programs that reward food production rather than commodity production.

“Every year we lose up to 1.8 million acres of pasture to row crops,” he notes. “That’s a failure of policy. We make it easier and more profitable to grow corn for fuel than to raise beef or vegetables for food. That’s not national security — that’s national vulnerability.”

“Let’s quit lying to ourselves. We don’t feed the world anymore — the world is beginning to feed us.”— Joe Maxwell, Farm Action

The Growing Grip of Consolidation

Maxwell points to consolidation as the most dangerous — and least understood — threat facing independent producers. From fertilizer and seed to meatpacking and grocery shelves, he says control has concentrated into the hands of just a few corporations.

“The power dynamic in agriculture has flipped,” Maxwell explains. “Farmers used to have leverage. Now, a handful of companies control nearly every input we need to farm — and they set the prices we pay. Then they control the markets we sell into, and they set those prices, too. That’s not a free market — that’s corporate feudalism.”

He points to Farm Action’s Concentration Tracker, a public data hub that compiles market share information across the food system. It shows that:

Four companies control over 80% of beef processing.
Two companies dominate more than 75% of corn seed genetics.
Three firms hold the majority of fertilizer production capacity.
The top five grocery chains now capture nearly 65% of all food retail sales.

“When just a few players hold that kind of power, they don’t compete — they coordinate,” Maxwell says. “They can raise input costs and suppress farmgate prices, and farmers have no real alternative. That’s why our concentration tracker matters — it exposes what’s really happening behind the curtain.”

The problem, he says, isn’t just economic — it’s political.

“These corporations have so much money and influence they shape farm policy to fit their own balance sheets,” Maxwell adds. “When we go to Washington asking for help, they’re already there, writing the rules. Until we restore fair competition and transparency, every bailout, every policy tweak is just feeding the beast.”

Farm Action’s data shows concentration doesn’t just hurt farmers — it hurts consumers, too. From fertilizer to feed to food, fewer companies mean higher costs for everyone.

“You see it every time you go to the grocery store,” Maxwell says. “Beef prices are high, but cattlemen aren’t seeing that profit. Fertilizer prices spike, but farmers don’t control the market. Consumers pay more, farmers earn less, and the middle consolidates the wealth. That’s not sustainable for anybody.”

It’s a concept gaining national traction. Just this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the soaring costs of inputs.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) also introduced legislation to address the rising costs of inputs, called the Fertilizer Research Act . But the hearing brought together the larger issue of rising costs across the board for farmers.

“This hearing is focused on competition issues. However, there is something that the Trump administration can do right now to help ease the burden for farmers: lowering the countervailing duties on phosphate from Morocco. In 2024, the Biden administration increased duties on Moroccan phosphate to 18%,” said Grassley in his opening statement. “The Biden phosphate duties have only hurt farmers by boxing out access to this important market on an essential input with no substitute. I’m calling on the Trump administration to help American farmers and get rid of the Biden phosphate duties.”

The Beef Debate: “We’re Blindsided”

For ranchers, the issue of consolidation has long been a point of contention. But recent comments by President Trump sparked a renewed push for change and a probe into who and what really controls the prices consumers are paying.

When the White House signaled it will allow more beef imports from Argentina , Maxwell says many ranchers feel blindsided.

“Our cattle herd is at a 70-year low,” he says. “Ranchers finally see light at the end of the tunnel — and then Washington steps in to import more beef. That’s not just a policy mistake, it’s a psychological one.”

He argues that the frustration isn’t only about imports; it’s about the perception that the administration doesn’t understand the complexity of the cattle market.

“Cattle producers don’t set the price they’re paid — packers do,” Maxwell explains. “So when the president talks about lowering prices for consumers without addressing packer control, he’s aiming at the wrong target.”

“We’re finally seeing the light of day. Then government puts its hand back on our backs.”— Joe Maxwell on the U.S. cattle market

“It’s Time for DOJ to Step In”: Why the Beef Industry Needs an Investigation

He says instead of the Trump administration focusing on cattle prices, Farm Action thinks what happened in the egg industry during past price spikes is exactly what needs to happen now in beef: a full federal investigation.

“Two companies control 90% of hatcheries in the U.S. egg industry,” Maxwell explains. “When egg prices exploded, Farm Action presented evidence to the Department of Justice showing that those companies were profiting at historic levels while blaming avian flu. And you know what happened? DOJ opened an investigation. That’s what accountability looks like.”

Now, he says, the same pattern is playing out in beef.

“We’ve already seen price-fixing cases in the cattle sector,” he says. “Two of the major packers admitted it back in 2019. We shouldn’t have to spend years in court to prove what every rancher already knows — that a handful of companies are manipulating the market.”

The so-called “Big Four” — Tyson Foods, JBS, Cargill, and National Beef (controlled by Brazil-based Marfrig) — control roughly 85% of U.S. beef processing capacity. That concentration, Maxwell argues, allows them to influence both the price paid to producers and the price charged to consumers.

“It’s an abusive system,” Maxwell says. “They squeeze ranchers on one end and shoppers on the other, and everyone in between gets caught in the middle. The packers are the only ones guaranteed to make money, no matter what happens to the market.”

He calls for the Department of Justice to launch a new, comprehensive investigation into price manipulation and anti-competitive behavior within the beef industry — similar to what Farm Action pushed for with eggs.

“We need DOJ to do in beef what it finally did in eggs,” he says. “Follow the money, follow the profits, and hold these corporations accountable. Because right now, the people who produce our beef — the ranchers who’ve weathered drought, inflation, and decades of consolidation — are getting crushed while multinational packers report record margins.”

Maxwell says the Biden administration has taken small steps, but much more needs to be done.

“It’s not enough to tinker at the edges,” he warns. “We need enforcement — real enforcement — of the Packers and Stockyards Act, the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act. The laws are already on the books. What’s missing is the will to use them.”

Country-of-Origin Labeling: A “No-Brainer”

Maxwell says Farm Action is pushing hard for mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (M-COOL) as part of the upcoming USMCA review in 2026.

“Consumers deserve to know where their beef comes from,” he insists. “The president could fix this tomorrow by negotiating M-COOL into the trade deal. That one move would give American ranchers a fair shot.”

He dismisses claims that M-COOL violates WTO rules.

“WTO is dead in the water,” Maxwell argues. “There’s no functioning tribunal to even hear a case. The only people fighting this are the packers — JBS, Tyson, Cargill, Marfrig — because they profit when foreign beef gets a U.S. label.”

Structural Change, Not Another Bailout
When asked whether Farm Action supports another round of USDA bailouts for struggling producers, Maxwell doesn’t hesitate.

“We recognize farmers are in crisis,” he says. “We don’t want to see our neighbors driven off the farm. But we can’t just keep sending out checks without fixing the system. One day those bailouts won’t come, and then it’ll look just like the 1980s. We have to demand structural change.”

Those changes, he says, should include:

Capping farm subsidies to slow consolidation.
Rebalancing insurance and incentive programs toward food production.
Rebuilding local and regional processing capacity to compete with the “Big Four” packers who control 80–85% of the cattle market.
Stronger enforcement of antitrust laws like the Packers and Stockyards Act and the Sherman Act.

Rebuilding from the Ground Up

Despite his criticism, Maxwell frames his message as one of hope — if farmers and ranchers take the lead.

“We can’t sit back and wait for Washington to fix this,” he says. “We have to step up, be part of the conversation, and demand policies that keep family farms in business.”

He supports Rep. Thomas Massie’s Prime Act, which would expand small-scale meat processing and let states regulate local slaughterhouses directly.

“We’ve got the infrastructure,” Maxwell adds. “We just need to give it life again. Let’s rebuild local processing so farmers can sell directly to consumers and keep value in their communities.”

Why It Matters Now

Fresh data from the Farm Journal Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor shows that 76% of agricultural economists expect conditions to persist or worsen over the next year. Many see echoes of the 1980s — though they warn today’s crisis is more complex.

“It’s not the 1980s all over again,” says Unscripted host Tyne Morgan. “But the pain is real. Economists say the situation could worsen in 2026 if structural issues aren’t addressed. That’s what makes conversations like this so important.”

A Call to Action

As the conversation wraps up, Maxwell’s tone shifts from urgency to determination. His message to rural America is both a warning and an invitation.

“We have to lead,” he says, pausing before adding, “because no one else is going to do it for us.”

He says the future of U.S. agriculture depends on whether farmers choose to engage in these hard conversations — the ones about fairness, policy, and the future of independent family farms.

“Look, we can’t afford to sit on the sidelines and hope someone in Washington suddenly understands our way of life,” Maxwell says. “Every farmer, every rancher, every person who believes in feeding people instead of feeding systems has a role to play. It starts at the local level — showing up, speaking up, refusing to accept that the current model is the only way forward.”He continues:

“This isn’t about right or left, or about politics at all. It’s about survival — for the people who feed this country. We can’t keep patching the same broken system and expecting it to serve us. If we want a food system that’s fair, resilient, and rooted in our rural communities, we’ve got to build it ourselves, together. That’s the hard truth — and the hopeful one.”

Maxwell’s words linger long after the conversation ends — a challenge, but also a call for courage. Change, he insists, isn’t something that happens to farmers. It’s something that must happen through them.

Listen to the Full Conversation

Listen to the full interview: “Unscripted” with Tyne Morgan and Clinton Griffiths featuring Joe Maxwell, a vailable on Farm Journal’s YouTube channel and anywhere you stream podcasts.

Potential China Deal, New Trade Pacts Brighten U.S. Soybean Outlook

Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:35:08 GMT

Comments by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Sunday indicate China will come to the meeting with President Trump on Thursday ready to strike a deal and make “substantial purchases” of U.S. soybeans.

“Soybean farmers are going to be extremely happy with this deal for this year and for the coming years,” Bessent said yesterday on the CBS public affairs show, Face The Nation.

American Soybean Association (ASA) President Caleb Ragland responded to Bessent’s comments in a statement that, “signals of purchase commitments are a positive step” and soybean producers are “hopeful they result in a trade deal that delivers results.”

SOYBEANS! Big news this morning by our incredible @SecScottBessent and our entire team.

China’s commitment to make substantial purchases of US soybeans brings the market BACK into balance and secures years of prosperity for American producers. More good news coming shortly. https://t.co/eIjOMa0sBD
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) October 26, 2025

Purdue Ag Economist Michael Langemeier says he believes a trade agreement with China can be reached.

“It makes sense to me, because we are such a big player, that we still have a place at the table in terms of selling soybeans to China, because [the Chinese] don’t want to completely rely on one country,” Langemeier says.

Jerry Gulke tells Farm Journal he thinks China needs U.S. soybeans to bridge a gap that will occur between the time the U.S. harvest ends and Brazil’s harvest starts.

“There’s some talk that they need about 10 million metric tons (MMT). That’s about 300 million bushels. And that’s about the deficit that would really help us,” says Gulke, president of the Gulke Group.

While Langemeier believes a trade deal can be reached, he doesn’t think the scope of the trade agreements U.S. has had with China will go back to previous levels. He anticipates Brazil will continue to capture a large percentage of China’s soybean business.

USDA reports Brazil produced a record soybean crop in 2025 of 169 MMT.

The increasing scope of the South American crop is one reason why Langemeier emphasizes the need to continue increasing domestic demand for U.S. soybeans.

“It’s a slow process, and it can’t absorb billions of bushels, but it can help long-term support a large acreage of soybeans in the U.S.,” he says.

Additional Trade Agreements In The Works
On Sunday, ASA announced the U.S. signed two trade deals with Malaysia and Cambodia as well as a framework for reciprocal trade with Vietnam and Thailand.

As part of these announcements, the White House has noted multiple provisions favorable to U.S. soybean exports, including:

The elimination or reduction of tariff barriers for U.S. agricultural products into all four countries
A commitment from Thailand to purchase U.S. soybean meal, among other U.S. feed commodities, on a per annum basis totaling $2.6 billion
The elimination or reduction of major non-tariff barriers in each country, including favorable language on biotechnology regulations, sanitary and phytosanitary provisions (SPS), and other non-tariff barriers.

Farmers Face Major Storage, Selling Decisions
While U.S. farmers are finishing up the 2025 harvest, most are trying to decide how much and where to store the crop until prices show some improvement.

Langemeier said there will be a need for farmers to make some sales this fall to meet cash flow demand. They’ll then store whatever they can until at least the first of the year – though that decision could change quickly, if a trade deal with China is struck.

“Certainly, storing a part of that [soybean] crop if you can afford to do until till we have a little bit more information on where prices are going to settle for the 2025 crop, would be a prudent strategy,” he says.

If no deal is struck with China, or it’s small, he encourages farmers to not hang onto the crop too long.

“My caveat there is, if things don’t look a little bit better by April and May be ready to sell them,” he says.

The Outlook For 2026 Acreage
Langemeier says there are few to no new production options for row crop farmers in the Midwest to embrace for next year.

“So, when push comes to shove with the plantings in 2026 you’re still looking at about 180 million acres of corn and soybeans,” he anticipates.

If the export outlook for soybeans doesn’t improve, more acres will go to corn because demand is strong despite low prices.

“Corn is firing on all cylinders with good demand from ethanol, good demand from the feed industry, and good demand from exports,” he says.

China's Trade War Playbook Keeps U.S. Soybeans Sidelined

Fri, 24 Oct 2025 18:35:25 GMT

As combines roll across soybean fields at the start of harvest, exports typically pick up. Vessels ladened with the U.S. oilseed usually begin heading to China, with the bulk of shipments made between September and January.

That’s not shaping up to be the case this year.

Not a single order for the U.S. soybean crop was placed by China at the start of harvest in September.

At about the same time, Brazil set a record for shipments to China – with sales of 2.474 billion bushels of soybeans – from January through August 2025, reports Michael Langemeier, Purdue University ag economist.

Brazil soybeans have accounted for approximately 93% of China’s total soybean imports this year, to date, according to Brazil’s National Association of Grain Exporters.

‘A More Reliable Source For Soybeans’
Langemeier expects Brazil to continue supplying the majority of China’s import needs for soybeans, a transition he says has been underway since the last round of U.S.-China trade tensions in 2017-18.

“Brazil has become a more reliable source for soybeans, if you will, than the U.S.,” Langemeier says.

He does anticipate U.S. soybean exports to China will resume eventually but not at previous levels.

“I don’t believe it’s going to go to zero – people ask me that all the time – but it’s going to be something less than what it was prior to 2025,” he says.

A large percentage of U.S. ag economists agree with Langemeier. In the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, when they were asked, ‘Do you believe U.S. agricultural exports to China will return to pre-trade war levels (e.g. 2017) in the future,’ 88% of economists responded no. Learn more here: Ag Economists Warn of Lingering Farm Economic Strain: ’Not the 1980s, But Close’

The ability of Brazil to capture more of China’s soybean business and improve its government policies pertaining to agriculture, in general, frustrates Steele, N.D., farmer Chase Dewitz.

“There’s so much progress going on there in agriculture in Brazil, outside of all the market share they’ve taken from us,” says Dewitz, referencing the country’s ethanol industry. “And here we just sit. We just keep getting backed into a corner here.”

China Prioritizes Its Own National Interests
Sandro Steinbach says China’s refusal to buy U.S. soybeans this fall is less about economics and more about politics.

“China is making a calculated move to limit its dependence on the United States,” says Steinbach, associate professor and director of the Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies at North Dakota State University.

“If Chinese leaders see Washington as a strategic threat, they have the resources to pay a little more for Brazilian soybeans or draw down state reserves,” he contends. “It’s about control and national leverage, not about getting the cheapest beans.”

Steinbach adds, in an effort to not be overly reliant on either Brazil or U.S., Beijing is also working to reduce its overall need for imported soybeans through domestic feed policy changes.

“Our latest analysis shows Chinese feed mills are exploring ways to lower the share of soybean meal in livestock rations, with limited pilot programs already underway in several provinces,” he says. “If those efforts expand, even small cuts in feeding intensity could trim import needs, but they come at a cost. Lower-protein rations reduce feed efficiency and could hurt China’s livestock productivity over time.”

Faith Parum, American Farm Bureau Federation economist, points out that the ongoing trade tensions between the U.S. and China aren’t limited to soybeans. She says China has not “purchased any U.S. corn, wheat or sorghum this year, and pork and cotton exports continue only at reduced levels.”

USDA projects that U.S. agricultural exports to China will total $17 billion in 2025, down 30% from 2024 and more than 50% from 2022. In 2026, exports to China are expected to fall to just $9 billion, the lowest level since the 2018 trade war, Parum adds.

Trade Talks Next Week Offer Hope
Jacquie Holland, American Soybean Association economist, says upcoming meetings between President Trump and China’s Xi Jinping at next week’s APEC summit in South Korea offer farmers some encouragement that trade between the two countries will resume soon.

“If we see a de-escalation of tariffs, then China will have financial incentive to buy cheap U.S. soybeans,” Holland says.

She adds that if Brazil farmers have any delays harvesting their crop early in 2026, the Chinese could face a potential supply crunch and move to source U.S. soybeans to bridge the gap.

“But our research suggests those volumes could be minimal, based on the high volume of South American purchases China has made so far in 2025, the capacity of their state reserves, the timing of China’s hog production cycles and negative Chinese crush margins right now,” Holland says.

Farmers across Brazil have begun planting the 2025/26 crop season, with expectations for another record in corn and soybean acreage, report Purdue Ag Economists Langemeier and Joana Colussi.

“In its preliminary estimate released on October 14, the National Supply Company (Conab) projected that Brazil’s soybean acreage will increase by 3.5%, reaching 121 million acres – the largest area on record. For comparison, U.S. farmers planted 81 million acres of soybeans in the current crop season,” Langemeier and Colussi write here .

If Trade Doesn’t Resume Soon, What Then?
Unfortunately, there is no one country or market that can absorb China’s lost U.S. soybean purchases.

“There are certainly opportunities for some market expansion, as evidenced by Japan’s sentiments to increase trade on Wednesday, but the biggest constraint is that demand outside of China is limited in the short-run,” Holland says. “Long-term, we are hoping to develop these markets, but that takes time and doesn’t provide immediate relief to U.S. farmers now.”

Looking ahead to next spring, farmers are likely to plant another huge corn crop if a trade agreement isn’t reached and soybean prices remain in the basement, Langemeier anticipates.

“In that scenario, if we have two big years of corn production back-to-back, you’re going to be looking at some very sick corn prices in the fall of 2026,” he says. “That’s a big concern. That worries me.”

Holland adds there are other factors to consider, as well. She believes soybean acreage next spring will also depend on usage factors like how quickly EPA finalizes 2026 and 2027 renewable volume obligations for biofuel blendings and how fast the U.S. can expand domestic livestock consumption and export sales for soymeal.

“With all of that uncertainty and sticky input prices, I wouldn’t blame farmers for picking lower risk acreage options next spring, and I’m guessing 2026 acreage allocations are going to rightly reflect that level of risk aversion,” she says.

Holland discusses the soybean trade outlook with China in detail with Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk, here:

Corn Growers' New Leader Says Profitability Is Top Priority

Wed, 08 Oct 2025 21:54:40 GMT

The new farmer leader for the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) says profitability is his No. 1 priority as he starts his one-year term and plans for the year ahead.

“It’s just not where it needs to be at the farm level. We’re looking at a 90-some-cent loss per bushel as we look at next year’s crop to put out,” says Jed Bower, NCGA president and a fifth-generation farmer from Fayette County, Ohio.

While Bower says export numbers are good, he notes the market doesn’t reflect that positive picture, and more opportunity for U.S. corn is needed.

It’s why, during a recent conversation with USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, Bower encouraged her to “go after the big players” domestically and abroad to boost market opportunities for corn.

“We need to move large volumes. The small volumes are great, but large volumes are going to be what helps rural America,” Bower told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory earlier this week.

For the same reason – to boost profitability – Bower says NCGA continues to encourage Congress to pass legislation that would increase consumer access to higher blends of ethanol year-round.

Corn grower leaders have repeatedly claimed that one of the quickest ways to create more demand for corn is by passing the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act of 2025. It would remove an outdated regulation under the Clean Air Act that bans the sale of fuel with 15% ethanol blends during the summer months.

“We’re pushing for this E15 thing – almost had it over the line last December,” Bower says. “We’re close again, but there’s just so many things that aren’t going on in Washington right now that we need to keep having those conversations.”

Positive Action By California Governor Newsom
Significant encouragement regarding E15 came by way of Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) just last week, when he signed a bill on Oct. 2 legalizing fuels with 15% ethanol blends.

“The potential volume for California alone is just tremendous,” Bower says. “I never thought I would be thanking the governor of California for signing that in, you know. That’s just not something that was on my radar, and I’m super pumped about it.”

Bower’s hope is the support Newsom gives for E15 puts leverage on the Trump administration and Congress to act immediately.

“Because, as we’ve talked numerous times, E15 cost taxpayers nothing,” Bower says. “It lowers the cost of gas at the pump for all their constituents, and for every 1% that we raise the blend, you’ve got 450-plus million bushels more grind. That helps make our corn worth a little more, and in turn, that strengthens rural America.”

The Need For More Trade And Fewer Regulatory Hurdles
During Bower’s time on AgriTalk, Flory asked him about his initial interactions with USDA Secretary Rollins and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin.

Bower says Rollins “appears to be a quick study,” and he appreciates how much she is advocating in the world marketplace on behalf of U.S. agricultural products.

“I think that is huge,” Bower told Flory. “We’ve seen Brazil doing that the past couple years for their products, and beating us to a lot of punches. We really appreciate Secretary Rollins for taking the time to travel around the world to push American ag products.”

Regarding Secretary Zeldin, Bower says he looks forward to meeting him in the near future, and that Zeldin seems to be bringing “common sense” back to the regulatory playing field.

“A lot of these regulations drive up the cost of what we need to do as farmers,” Bower says. “Secretary Zeldin has been accessible to a lot of our staff, and I’m looking forward to diving into some of the regulatory issues we have and see if we can’t get a little more relief in some of those areas.”

For more insights into Bower’s perspective on market opportunities for corn and his hope for reducing regulatory pressures on farmers, be sure to listen to his conversation with Flory on AgriTalk, available here:

From Setback to Comeback: Sorghum Looks For More Market Opportunity

Tue, 07 Oct 2025 17:58:52 GMT

2025 has been a year of extremes for U.S. row-crop farmers, including grain sorghum producers. Many will harvest one of their best crops in recent memory – often referred to as milo – while they simultaneously endure some of the worst export markets agriculture has seen in the last four decades.

“There’s a lot of commodities that are hurting, I won’t deny that. But the loss of the Chinese market and any significant trade opportunities is more severe for sorghum than any other commodity,” contends Amy France, chair of the National Sorghum Producers (NSP).

That’s not rhetoric but reality for sorghum growers.

China historically purchased up to 90% of all U.S. sorghum exports. Those sales ceased in April, on the heels of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs. The remaining 10% of U.S. exported sorghum went to Africa to combat hunger. That market closed in January, when the Trump administration abruptly canceled the Food For Peace program.

Prices for the nutrient-rich grain dropped precipitously. Bids have been as low as $2.35 in key sorghum states, according to John Duff, founder of Serō Ag Strategies and a consultant to NSP.

For over a decade, China has been the No. 1 export market for U.S. grain sorghum. Countries in east Africa have been a distant second, while Mexico has been third. The National Sorghum Producers sees tremendous potential for trade with India. While the road forward will require patience it’s promising, as India became a net importer of coarse grains for the first time in modern history just last year.

(USDA)

Laser Focused On Opportunity
France is on a mission to move sorghum’s story from one of recent struggle to success. She’s working to identify new opportunities, expand upon those that exist domestically – such as with ethanol and gluten-free foods – and spur legislators to restore trade with China and other countries.

“We want trade first and foremost, but if we’re going to keep going with [these tariffs], then our farmers are going to need some help,” says France, who started her second term as NSP chair on Oct. 1.

The following week, in the midst of the federal government shutdown, France saw an opportunity for connection with legislators when others might have expected only closed doors. She flew to Washington, while NSP staff made calls to set up meetings with senators and representatives from the sorghum belt, which runs from South Dakota to South Texas, and includes Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Colorado.

“I want to ensure our producers and the next generation can continue to farm, and that equates to what we are doing on the Hill,” she explains.

A Fresh Perspective
France took a unique path to the leadership role for the NSP. The daughter of two music educators, she embraced agriculture when she met her husband, Clint, 25-plus years ago. They farm, along with their five children, near Scott City, Kan., growing corn, sorghum, wheat and black Angus cattle.

Through their local Farm Bureau, France recognized her passion for creating opportunity via agriculture policy.

“I always say Farm Bureau opened the door for me. I just got involved on the county level and then kept going. I’m not afraid to ask tough questions and dig deeper,” she says.

Some of France’s tenacity was inspired by her late father-in-law, Leon, who told her grain sorghum kept him from losing the family farm in the 1980s.

“He told me, when I went onto the board, it was the only crop he could afford to put in the ground, because it didn’t have as much input costs as other commodities, and he would reap a good harvest,” she recalls.

France keeps their conversation in mind as she works to build a better future for sorghum and the farmers who grow it.

“In navigating the current farm economy, I think about what crop can farmers afford to put in the ground and still reap a harvest? I believe sorghum is that for a lot of farmers,” she says.

“We have the best product – far and above better than what any other country can grow,” she adds. “We just need markets, and that’s what is top of mind for me.”

Your next read: New Seed Treatment Offers A Solution to Soybean Cyst Nematode

‘We Need Action, Not Just Financial Aid’

Tue, 30 Sep 2025 16:55:01 GMT

Caleb Ragland describes 2026 as a year of extremes, whether the focus is on U.S. trade policy for soybeans or initial crop yields coming out of his Kentucky farm fields.

The frustration in his voice was palpable as he multitasked on Monday, harvesting with one of his three sons, Carter, in the combine and talking with Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk, at the same time.

“Our corn yields are about 25% below APH (average production history) … and soybean yields are kind of all over the board,” says Ragland, a LaRue County, Ky., farmer and president of the American Soybean Association (ASA).

Poor yield outcomes are no surprise, Ragland says, given excessive spring rains that delayed planting. Then, the water faucet shut off mid-summer, just after July 4, and it never turned back on.

“I’m thankful yields aren’t lower than what they are,” he notes. “It’s disappointing but not unexpected.”

The same is true for U.S. soybean trade opportunities.

Ragland says the soybean industry and farmers have a “five-alarm fire” on their hands, due to the lack of sales to China this year.

Potentially adding to the flames was the Trump administration’s recent pledge of a $20-billion taxpayer-funded economic rescue package for Argentina.

The decision was questioned and criticized by lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle last week.

“Why would USA help bail out Argentina while they take American soybean producers’ biggest market??? We shld use leverage at every turn to help hurting farm economy Family farmers shld be top of mind in negotiations by representatives of USA,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said on X, formerly Twitter.

Argentina Sells Shiploads Of Soybeans To China

The American Soybean Association reports that Argentina turned around and sold 20 shiploads of soybeans to China soon after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the U.S. was exploring a financial package to shore up Argentine President Javier Milei.

Ragland believes the situation is just a continuation of what’s been going on much of this year: China doesn’t want to buy American soybeans due to ongoing retaliatory tariffs and trade disputes. In the process, U.S. soybean growers are caught in the middle between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and President Trump.

“Unfortunately, I think that’s the situation we’re in, and that doesn’t have a likely, quick, positive outcome,” he says. “But it’s pretty obvious that if we had the opportunity price wise, that our soybeans would sell, but I think that it’s likely a long battle that we’re in for here.”

Farmers Want Opportunity, Not A Handout

Ragland says ASA Economist Scott Gerlt estimates U.S. soybean growers will lose “well over” $100 an acre this year.

Furthermore, Ragland notes that rural communities are suffering from the lack of economic infusion that soybean sales and exports specifically to China would provide. He says when farmers spend money in their local communities, those dollars get turned over six to eight times, supporting small businesses and the entire rural economy.

One answer to the economic pain in rural America is an infusion of financial aid, Trump contends.

He told a group of reporters in Washington last Thursday his administration would “take some of that tariff money that we made, we’re going to give it to our farmers, who are, for a little while, going to be hurt until the tariffs kick into their benefit. So, we’re going to make sure that our farmers are in great shape, because we’re taking in a lot of money.”

Ragland says farmers don’t want to be dependent on the government for aid to meet their financial obligations. It’s a message he has said repeatedly this year in farmer and legislative meetings and to media.

“We have to have opportunities within the market. That’s key, but we’ve got to have a level playing field,” he says.

Even so, a farm aid package is likely in the works. According to an article posted to Politico Trump officials expect “Congress will need to authorize the use of tariff revenue for the farm aid package and are hoping lawmakers will include it in their omnibus package due by Nov. 21. That means the rollout of cash will likely start in early 2026.”

Your next read: Breaking Down the 4 Biggest Challenges Facing the Ag Economy

Breaking Down the 4 Biggest Challenges Facing the Ag Economy

Mon, 29 Sep 2025 19:15:37 GMT

Farm Journal’s Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, an anonymous survey sent to nearly 70 ag economists each month, shows growing concern about the farm economy. “AgriTalk” host Chip Flory breaks down the latest results, pointing to four key findings.

1. Recession Calls Hit a Survey High

A record 91% of ag economists now say the farm economy is in a recession. That’s the highest level since the survey began, fueled by record input costs while commodity prices remain depressed. Still, about 10% pushed back, arguing that as long as farmland values hold strong, agriculture’s store of wealth remains intact and technically keeps the sector out of a recession.

“Basically what they’re saying is that we’re not going to be in a recession until we see land prices start to pull back,” Flory explains. “That’s where agriculture stores its wealth. As long as those land prices hold up … we are not going to be in a recession as long as that store of wealth remains safe.”

91% of ag economists say the crops sector of agriculture is currently experiencing a recession, which is a survey high.

(September Ag Economists’. Monthly Monitor )

2. Bleak Outlook for 2026

46% of ag economists say the economy situation is “somewhat worse off” compared to last month and 27% say it’s “much worse off” compared to last year.

(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

While opinions about the next 12 months are mixed — 50% expect some improvement, 30% think it will worsen — the longer-term picture is troubling. Economists expect 2026 corn and soybean crops to be breakeven at best, with potential losses of up to $200 per acre.

“The expectations on the ’26 crops are that, at best, it’s going to be breakeven on corn and soybeans,” Flory says. “There’s expectations for losses up to $200 an acre among the survey respondents … We’ve drained a lot of working capital out of the industry already. And it’s really going to get tight in 2026 if this continues.”

Results from the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound, Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

3. Soybean Exports Under Pressure

Economists see U.S. soybean demand as vulnerable. USDA currently projects 1.705 billion bushels in exports, but survey respondents say that’s a best-case scenario. Some expect exports could fall below 1.4 billion bushels, a 300-million-bushel drop that could be catastrophic.

“China is obviously doing everything that it possibly can to avoid buying U.S. soybeans,” Flory says. “The current USDA export estimate … is a best-case scenario that the economists expect. Some see it all the way down under 1.4 billion bushels. To take another 300 million bushels off of bean export demand might be catastrophic.”

There are still a majority of economists who think China will still buy soybeans from the U.S. this year, with 54% responding “yes.”

Even though China has bought zero new crop soybean cargoes from the U.S., more than half of economists still think China will come to the table in 2025.

(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

4. Screwworm Detection Near Border Raises Concerns Over Mexican Cattle Imports

This week, New World screwworm was detected just 70 miles from the U.S.–Mexico border, sparking renewed debate over cattle imports and whether USDA should keep the border closed to live cattle imports.

In the September Farm Journal Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, economists were asked: Should the U.S. reopen its border to cattle imports from Mexico? Eighty percent said no.

91% of ag economists say the crops sector of agriculture is currently experiencing a recession, which is a survey high.

(September Ag Economists’. Monthly Monitor )

Their concern is the risk of screwworm spreading to U.S. herds.

“It’s important we continue to protect the health of our beef herd. Screwworm could have a devastating effect,” said one economist.
“Each day of delay [on reopening the border] gives more time to develop effective treatments/response,” was another response.

With the U.S. cattle herd already at a 75-year low, screwworm infestations can cause massive losses in livestock, threatening both animal health and, according to economists, the ag economy.

The Bright Spot: Beef Demand Stays Strong

There is a bright spot. Despite record-high retail prices, which economists thought would taper the hunger for U.S. beef, beef demand is holding firm. Two-thirds of economists say beef demand is inelastic, meaning consumers keep buying even as prices rise.

Even with record retail beef prices, the majority of ag economists say beef demand is proving to be inelastic.

(Lindsay Pound, Ag Economsits’ Monthly Monitor )

“It’s quality. Quality is a big part of the reason why,” Flory says. “We’ve done an unbelievable job responding to consumer demands to put choice and prime beef in the meat case … Consumers recognize the improvement in quality, and they’re responding by continuing to buy beef. The other thing is … high protein diets. That is a real thing that we need to adjust to, not only in beef, but in pork too.”

You can see the full results of the latest Monthly Monitor here .

Survey High: 91% of Ag Economists Say Crop Sector in Recession, Losses Likely Through 2026

Fri, 26 Sep 2025 18:18:09 GMT

The financial squeeze gripping row crop agriculture is only growing more severe, according to the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor. As of September, 91% think the U.S. crops sector is in a recession, which is an all-time high for the anonymous survey, and few see relief in sight.

In July, 53% of ag economists responded agriculture was in a recession. That number was 72% in May .

Economists point to low grain prices, high input costs and trade uncertainty, especially with China, as t he biggest drags on the farm economy . Beef prices are providing some cushion, but economists say it’s not enough to offset row crop challenges.

“2025 is bringing negative returns for at least the third consecutive year across nearly all row crops, with 2026 setting up to be another negative returns year.”
“Multiple years of low to no profitability qualifies as a recession to me.”
“We are near record low prices and record high inputs.”
“Net farm income is consistently negative.”
“I fear that commodity prices may have found a ‘new normal,’ so adjustments may have to occur (painfully) on the cost side.”

Those economists who say row crop agriculture is not in a recession point to land values and cash rents as the main reasons.

“The U.S. crop sector is losing working capital, but cropland values are showing little weakness, either in terms of rents paid or cropland prices. Until the latter two start to weaken, the sector is not in a recession,” said one economist. “I understand government payments from crop insurance, commodity programs and ad hoc assistance are a key reason, but government payments have been a constant presence over the last 10 years. They are a second source of income. You cannot simply ignore them in answering this question, especially given the changes made in the 2025 farm bill.”

Consolidation Concerns Continue

As more farmers face financial collapse , 92% of economists think the situation will accelerate consolidation.

“We are currently in a sustained period of high costs and low prices across the crop sector — this will cause some farmers to go out of business sooner than expected.”
“Hard times drive us toward higher efficiencies, which often leads to consolidation.”
“Larger producers are likely to have more wherewithal to sustain losses than smaller producers.”
“The most efficient and well-capitalized producers will survive and absorb land from the least efficient producers.”

2026 Could Be Another Year of Negative Returns

46% of ag economists say the economy situation is “somewhat worse off” compared to last month and 27% say it’s “much worse off” compared to last year.

(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

Nearly half (46%) of ag economists say the ag economy is somewhat worse off in September compared with August, and 27% say it’s worse off versus 2024.

The outlook for next year is mixed. Fifty percent say it will be somewhat worse off or unchanged, while the other half expect the situation to slightly improve. Most economists expect continued financial stress into 2026, with projected losses of $100 to $199 per acre for corn and $100 to $199 per acre for soybeans.

Producers are Looking to Cut Costs

The September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked what is the most likely cost-saving option for producers for the upcoming year.

(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

Farmers are postponing major equipment purchases, a trend that’s plagued the equipment industry the past two years. The latest Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) report for August 2025 showed U.S. tractor sales fell 8.2% and combine sales dropped 34.6% compared with August 2024.

With the majority of economists forecasting the row crop side of agriculture to produce negative margins in 2026, farmers could be looking to cut back even more. Other than reducing machinery purchases, the majority of ag economists (85%) think farmers will slow technology upgrades. Fifteen percent say farmers will reduce fertilizer use. None of the economists surveyed think farmers will sell farmland.

The China Effect on the Ag Economy

Economists say the lack of export demand from China is having a negative impact on U.S. agriculture. In fact, 77% of economists surveyed say current U.S.-China trade policies are hurting farmers. Half of the respondents (54%) in the September survey think China will buy soybeans in 2025.

Even though China has bought zero new crop soybean cargoes from the U.S., more than half of economists still think China will come to the table in 2025.
(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )
“We have a demand problem — or more specifically we have a demand access problem,” said one economist.
“Record high cattle prices are helping to offset the challenging conditions for grain producers. Uncertainty related to China, trade policy and tariffs [is a major risk].”
“The long-term damage to our trade relations. It will take years to solve,” was another response.

Possible Economic Aid for Farmers

As China remains absent from buying U.S. soybeans , it’s having a negative impact on soybean prices. Areas that rely heavily on China’s business, such as the Northern Plains, are seeing cash soybean prices in the $8 range.

Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said Wednesday an economic aid package for farmers has been the focus of conversations at the White House. Some type of program and payments will be announced very soon, Rollins said, and while void of details, she promised such announcement will be made “in the next two weeks.”

President Donald Trump also made remarks in the Oval Office Thursday, saying he will use tariff revenue to bail out farmers.

“We’re going to take some of that tariff money that we made, we’re going to give it to our farmers, who are, for a little while, going to be hurt until the tariffs kick into their benefit,” Trump told reporters. “We’re going to make sure that our farmers are in great shape because we’re taking in a lot of money.”

62% of ag economists say direct payments like the Market Facilitation Program benefit crop producers.

(Lindsey Pound, September Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor )

Considering the factors impacting farmers, such as trade policy, interest rates, commodity prices and input costs, 62% of ag economists said government direct payments benefit crop producers. Fifteen percent say such payments wouldn’t adequately address the challenges, while 23% think a different approach would be more effective.

Overlooked Issues in Agriculture

Ag lenders in some regions, such as the mid-South, warn farmers are experiencing the most financial stress since the 1980s . While the issues are at the forefront of conversations, the latest survey also asked economists to chime in on other agricultural issues currently being overlooked:

“The increasing percentage of farmland that is owned by absentee, non-operators … I’m seeing more investor activity, creating greater competition with actual operators.”
“Storage problems in the northwestern Midwest due to a lack of trains moving soybeans to the PNW.”
“The risk to the U.S. farm economy of weaker global economic growth … there is a broader set of macroeconomic uncertainties that affect world demand for agricultural products.”
Interest rate impact on asset values (not borrowing costs).
“Macroeconomic uncertainties that affect world demand for agricultural products, many of which have little or nothing to do with U.S. policies.”
“Tax rollover and the fact that even with significant losses, many taxes will become due this year.”
“The benefits of trade. I know it is talked about a lot, but it’s still not enough relative to how important it is.”

MFP 2.0? Ag Committees Consider Farm Aid Through Farm Bill 2.0

Tue, 09 Sep 2025 16:50:29 GMT

Chairs of both the House and Senate Agriculture Committees are looking at farm aid through a Farm Bill 2.0.

House Agriculture Committee Chair G.T. Thompson says a framework is already underway with the goal of committee action in September.

Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman is also considering aid, but through the Commodity Credit Corporation. He says the other solutions will take too long. This comes after hundreds of farmers in his home state of Arkansas met with lawmakers to ask for help.

Market Facilitation Program 2.0?
The trigger is historically low grain prices, combined with tariffs of up to 23% on U.S. soybeans, keeping China out of the export market.

Steve Censky, chief executive officer of the American Soybean Association, says unless China buys soybeans soon, they may be looking at aid similar to the Market Facilitation Program used back in 2018-19 during the last trade war.

“I think unless we can get things turned around with China, we’re going to be in that position again,” Censky says.

Farmers in the Dakotas and Minnesota are already seeing $8 soybeans with no China business.

But whether MFP is warranted is tied to the timing of a possible China deal, according to Frayne Olson, crop economist and marketing specialist with North Dakota State University.

“Even if harvest is already started — if we can get the wheels moving — it will be a lot better than what we saw in 2019. So, I think it’s a little bit early to be talking about MFP payments,” Olson says.

ASA Holding Out for China Deal
And the American Soybean Association echoes that position.

Censky says: “We have not been publicly calling for another MFP-type program. Our priority has been to get a deal with China on soybeans — because having that market is what soybean farmers want.”

In fact, Censky says MFP payments are just a Band-Aid to help farmers survive for another year.

“No farmer wants to be dependent on getting his or her income from the government or from the mailbox rather than from the marketplace.”

Farm Aid Has Unintended Consequences
Plus, the payments have had — and will have — unintended consequences. Censky says, longer term, any form of government assistance gets capitalized into land rents and land values. That has consequences for farmers as well.

The tariff on U.S. soybeans going into China also incentivizes Brazil to increase acreage more quickly, according to Censky.

“That expanded production will be here to haunt, basically, U.S. soybean farmers for years to come — not only in the China market, but in other markets around the world,” Censky says.

Need for Farm Aid Greater Than in 2018
Still, both House and Senate Ag Committee chairs agree farm aid is needed.

Boozman is looking at the CCC rather than tariff revenue, saying it’s more immediate. Censky agrees there’s more urgency than in 2018.

“I think it’s more serious today. That’s because prices were higher back in 2018 and 2019,” he says. “Farmers were starting out from a better position. Not only did you have prices higher, but your inputs were not as expensive.”

Farmers may not be able to withstand the pain of a trade war like they did back then.

Can Biofuels Make Up for Lost China Soybean Export Demand?

Mon, 08 Sep 2025 18:21:07 GMT

China has still not bought one bushel of new crop soybean exports from the U.S. and they may not with U.S. product facing up to a 23% tariff.

Last year at this time China had bought 250 million bu. of U.S. soybeans but this year is buying from South America and without a China deal the U.S. could miss its prime export window which will further pressure soybean prices.

Can BioFuels Make Up for Lost China Export Business?

Due to the expected increase in demand for biofuels like renewable diesel and SAF the soybean processing industry was planning a 30% increase in crush capacity with the use of soybean oil as a feedstock.

With recent biofuels policy wins that finally looks more promising but experts says the biofuels ramp up won’t come soon enough to make up for lost exports to China.

Trifecta of Biofuels Policy Wins

The U.S. biofuels industry has had a trifecta of policy wins the last few months including EPA’s higher than expected proposed blending mandates for biomass based diesel according to Dr. Scott Irwin, Agricultural Economist, University of Illinois.

He says, “It started with the June Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOS’s) which were very healthy and included a what is called a half RIN proposal for imported biofuels or domestically produced biofuels made with imported feed stocks.”

A second positive was, as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill, the industry saw some much needed changes to the 45 tax credit program.

Steve Censky, Chief Executive Officer, American Soybean Association says the bill delivered many of the components they had asked for.

“Number one was to extend it because it was going to be expiring in 2028. And so it’s been extended for a couple of years. And then second thing is that we push to make the 45Z tax credit only available to fuels made with U.S. feed stocks,” he ssays.

Irwin says the third part of the hat trick was EPA’s decision on the backlog of Small Refinery Exemptions.

Irwin says, “We got an SRE refinery exemption u decision uh that stretches back going all the way back to 2016 that uh I believe is quite favorable as well.”

Biofuels Industry Awaiting Guidance on RVOs and 45Z

However, the biofuels industry has been waiting nearly two years for Treasury guidance on 45Z to get certainty for investment.

Irwin says, “We still have to wait to see what that guidance looks like. But the important point is that historically historically when those tax credits are awarded either to the uh blender or the producer they bid most of that into their feed stock prices.”

Censky says they also need finalized RVO levels from EPA, which are expected by October 31.

Censky, “f we can finalize the volumes that have been proposed by the EPA, and they propose to expand biomass-based diesel volumes by 67% from 2025 levels. So really historic announcements about the volumes. That really gives potential here for the biomass-based diesel industry.”

But that demand won’t kick in until January of 2026, so can biofuels make up for the loss of China?

Biofuels Ramp Up Too Late to Offset Lost China Exports

Irwin says, “The big thing of course is no matter how bullish you want to get on biofuels it doesn’t replace China on the soybean export side.”

Censky says that’s because while the U.S. soybean industry diversified its export portfolio since the 2018 trade war with China, it still buys over 25% of the soybean crop annually.

“I mean they import more soybeans than the rest of the world combined and so you can’t make up the loss of the China market by gaining a little bit here or there,” he explains.

And with up to 23% tariffs on U.S. soybeans, Censky says China is out of the new crop export market.

“So you’re talking 200 to 400 million bushels of soybeans that they would have purchased already that would be on the books and right now we have zero and what we’re hearing is that they’ve taken care of their needs for October, they’re taking care of their needs for November.” he says.

And without a deal, China could stay out of the U.S. export arena waiting for Brazil’s new crop soybeans to come to market.

Is This The Starting Point for A New Farm Bill?

Thu, 10 Jul 2025 13:44:33 GMT

From conversations in the legislative halls of Washington, D.C., to farmer fields across rural America, much of the talk in agricultural circles for months has revolved around H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB),

Now, the massive piece of legislation, signed by President Trump on the Fourth of July, is being hailed by some as farm bill 1.0.

That positioning caught the attention of farmers participating in the AgriTalk Farmer Forum on Wednesday, who shared their perspective. Listen to it here:

Hazelton, N.D., farmer Mike Appert said he values the improvement farmers will potentially see from an estate tax standpoint, as well as the changes made to Section 179 IRS tax code for machinery.

“The Section 179 bonus depreciation is so important on these farming operations,” Appert said. “If you’re going to keep buying machinery and trading in your old equipment, you know, we just needed that.”

Paul Neiffer, the Farm CPA and a Top Producer columnist, noted that farmers can now take advantage of 100% bonus depreciation for assets placed in service after Jan. 19, 2025, and Section 179 has been bumped to $2.5 million for 2025.

Neiffer adds that he would rate the OBBB as a B+ for most farmers. He provides an outline of some of the key details farmers need to know in his most recent column, available here .

More Risk Management Resources

“You know, really and truly, I like what I see in this legislative package because, especially for future years, this is a significant amount of money being addressed. I really like the risk management portion,” said Garry Niemeyer, an Illinois farmer and past president of the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA).

Niemeyer is particularly pleased to see increased support for the USDA Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) program, which he and many other farmers believe are crucial for expanding exports and market opportunities.

“Since my early days participating in Illinois Corn Growers, back in 1995, we had been requesting more funds for these two programs. And finally, 30 years later, it happened,” Niemeyer said.

Specifically, MAP annual funding would go from the current $200 million approved to $400 million annually, while FMD would go from $34.5 million to $69 million annually.

Sen. John Boozman, said what he heard from farmers leading up to passage of the OBBB, was how important trade programs are to farmers’ economic survival and their hopes for future prosperity.

“We were able to essentially double the amount of money that we spend on trade programs,” said Boozman, (R-AR), chair of the Senate Ag Committee, on Wednesday.

Boozman also highlighted the urgent need for safety net provisions for farmers, due to rising economic stress across the nation.

“It’s just such a difficult situation,” noted Boozman, highlighting what’s happening in his home state alone. “I read an article today about bankruptcies in Arkansas, how they’re up 67% over last year, and last year was a bad year.”

Looking ahead, Boozman says he plans to visit farmers on both sides of the political aisle this summer and into the fall to gather input for developing a new farm bill.

“We’ll be talking about the farm bill and what else we need to get done,” he said. “It is difficult in farm country right now, and we need to support farmers in any way we can.”

Catch Boozman’s wide-ranging discussion with AgriTalk Host Chip Flory, available here.

Your next read: Big Beautiful Bill: What Farmers Need to Know

U.S. Ag Trade Deficit Hits Record High In First Four Months Of 2025

Mon, 23 Jun 2025 21:02:20 GMT

Three years and counting – that’s how long U.S. agriculture has been in an agricultural trade deficit – reports Faith Parum, American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) economist.

“From January through April, the United States imported $78.2 billion in agricultural products while exporting just $58.5 billion. This $19.7 billion deficit is the largest ever recorded for the first four months of a year and signals that the 2025 deficit could surpass previous records,” Parum says in a new AFBF report .

(AFBF Calculations; USDA FAS)

In early June, the USDA raised its forecast of the U.S. agriculture trade deficit for fiscal-year 2025 to $49.5 billion, from the $49 billion it previously forecast in February.

Imports of high-value food items, such as fruits and vegetables, have driven the growing deficit, according to Parum, who says they represent the largest trade deficit category.

Have The Deficit Numbers Already Peaked?

While the forecast is concerning, Stephen Nicholson, Rabo AgriFinance global sector strategist for grains and oilseeds, says he is hopeful the agricultural trade deficit for 2025 has already reached its peak.

“My expectation is that we should see that trade deficit in agriculture come back a little because we have all this product, food, in our warehouses now, ready for consumers,” Nicholson told Farm Journal.

(USDA FAS GATS, USDA ERS Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade: May 2025)

Essentially, Nicholson says, many buyers made and imported larger food purchases than usual this spring to get those products into the U.S. ahead of potential trade tariffs the Trump administration announced would be imposed on Liberation Day, April 2.

“You know, when we saw that chart (from President Trump on the planned tariffs), I think a lot of us were pretty taken back by some of the eye-popping numbers we saw there. And then, of course, we came back a week later and they were cut in half.”

No One Knows ‘The Rules Of The Road’

Nicholson says the lack of certainty on tariffs, and other factors – ranging from conflict in the Middle East to high input costs and interest rates – has created challenges for all agricultural industries and farmers, including livestock producers.

“No one knows the rules of the road today,” he says. “Right now, no one wants to plan or invest or expend capital for plants, for expansion, because we don’t know what the economic environment is going to look like as we go six months to a year down the road.”

At the core of the problem is a rapidly evolving global marketplace that the U.S. appears increasingly ill-equipped to navigate, according to an article by Pro Farmer editors .

From shifting supply chains to aggressive trade strategies by key competitors like Brazil, Australia, and the EU, the landscape for ag exports is changing fast — and the U.S. is falling behind, they contend.

“We have no plan — none — to deal with this growing trade gap,” one senior industry executive says. “It’s not just bad policy; it’s no policy at all.”

Trade Deals Could Help The Situation

Farm groups continue to urge the White House to prioritize new trade deals that open markets for ag products.

But some industry insiders say the administration is too focused on broad tariff threats and “reciprocal tariffs,” while neglecting granular trade promotion and technical access issues that matter most for ag commodities, Pro Farmer reports.

At the grassroots level, Nicholson encourages corn and soybean to stay focused on market opportunities that could come up in the next week, given the weather conditions across the U.S.

“We’re in this very hot weather across the Corn Belt right now. If this forecast doesn’t quite pan out for the rest of the week, and more hot weather, and more rain or no rain, the market may react. Be prepared for those rallies in the market, and reward those rallies,” he encourages.

Your next read: Lift the Fog: 4 Drivers of Farm Profitability To Watch in 2025

Is The Trump Administration Trying To Make Trade Deals With Too Many Countries at Once?

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 20:35:01 GMT

The U.S.-China talks continued on Tuesday, as the Trump administration pushes to speed up the trade negotiation process. The U.S. sent a letter to trade partners as a “friendly reminder” that President Trump’s self-imposed 90-day pause on sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs is set to expire July 9.

While some news reports framed the letter as an ultimatum, other reports have described the letter as a way to steer ongoing trade talks rather than an ultimatum.

Either way, trade negotiation progress to date has been slow. The only agreement so far has been with the United Kingdom (UK) and called the U.S.-UK Economic Prosperity Deal (EPD), a framework agreement announced by President Trump in May.

Specific to agriculture, the EPD includes commitments to remove the UK’s 20% retaliatory tariff on U.S. beef and offers duty-free quotas for U.S. beef and ethanol. However, the agreement is not legally binding.

Too Many Countries At The Table

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) said on Monday that part of the challenge is the Trump administration is trying to negotiate with too many countries at one time.

“You’re having real serious negotiations with 18 countries, including China, South Korea, Japan, Europe, England, Indonesia, India – all of those are big trading partners of ours. But instead of trying to do 18 all at once, I would like to have you bring some certainty and the impression that you’re accomplishing something, reach an agreement with one or two and announce it,” Grassley advised. “That’s what I think would be good.”

The senior senator from Iowa, serving since 1981, said he is concerned about how the protracted trade and tariff discussions are impacting the U.S. economy.

“You keep reading in the business newspapers and publications about the fact that business is holding up making decisions because they don’t know what’s really happening out there in the trade world,” he said. “And if you have these big tariffs that go up [on July 9] … I think it just slows down the economy, I guess is the best way to say it.”

Does Congress Need More Authority Over Tariffs?

In a discussion on AgriTalk , Host Chip Flory asked Grassley whether Congress should have more say on whether and when tariffs are used by the U.S.

“Yeah, we made a big mistake back in 1974,” Grassley replied, referencing the Trade Act of 1974 , a significant step Congress took to delegate more tariff authority to the executive branch.

“Once [authority] is delegated away, I’m telling you, it’s hard to get it back, because unless you have a two-thirds vote of Congress to get it back, you’ve got to count on the president giving up any authority that Congress has given them,” he said. “And I’m not talking just about Trump. I’m talking about any president in the past or any president in the future. They’ve got this power and are not going to want to give it up.”

It’s one reason why Grassley said he decided to co-sponsor a bill with Washington Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell that would require presidents to justify new tariffs and secure congressional approval within 60 days; otherwise, the tariffs would expire.

Grassley said he was working on the bill before the current trade tariff issues became a major focus.

“It’s not affecting what Trump’s doing right now. I know he won the election, he has a mandate to do what he’s doing, and I hope he’s successful,” Grassley told Flory.

If passed, the “Trade Review Act of 2025” would require congressional approval of tariffs proposed by the executive branch.

The bill restores Congress’ authority and responsibility over tariffs as outlined in Article I, Section 8.

Under this legislation, the president must notify Congress of the imposition of (or increase in) the tariff within 48 hours. The notification must include an explanation of the president’s reasoning for imposing or raising the tariff and provide analysis of potential impact on American businesses and consumers, according to the bill’s text .

“In the future, the way I [see this] is the president puts on a tariff, and within 60 days Congress can review it, and we can reject it,” Grassley said.

During the wide-ranging discussion on AgriTalk, Grassley also weighed in on the budget reconciliation bill (the “one big, beautiful bill”), saying progress is being made. He expects the Senate to have a bill ready for review by the end of the week.

Grassley said the bill would include provisions likely to be supported by the Senate Agriculture Committee. Hear more of the key highlights, including Grassley’s expectations on reference pricing and funding for exports on AgriTalk:

Your next read: What’s Missing in the Big Beautiful Bill When It Comes to Agriculture?

ADM Nears Completion of Major Investment in St. Louis Grain Facility

Fri, 06 Jun 2025 19:33:23 GMT

ADM St. Louis will soon complete a project doubling the capacity of its rail and barge systems. This is biggest investment ADM regional manager Travis Sayers has seen ADM make in St. Louis.

Announced two years ago, this project aims to help the site stay competitive and continue to supply the demand in the grain market.

“For export markets, with the increase in supply of soybean meal from the soybean crush plants getting built in the United States, we needed to make improvements to our facilities to improve our competitiveness,” he says. “At the same time, it’s the perfect time to improve our rail loadout capabilities.”

Sayers explains ADM St. Louis is unique in its geographic market providing rail for domestic destinations along with the Mississippi River access for New Orleans bound exports.

“We are the only facility here in the St. Louis market that has the ability to load shuttle trains that can hit different markets. We’re on the BNSF railroad, and so talking about corn specifically, we hit the Hereford, Texas, market,” he says. “For other facilities in St. Louis, their only outlet is the river. We have multiple outlets to send corn to keep us competitive and potentially pay better values if that’s what the market is indicating.”

Upgrades for Higher Capacity, Faster Speeds

Since January, the barge loading part of this project has been complete.

“It’s been full speed ahead since then,” Sayers says. “April was the biggest month we’ve had so far on the amount of product we put through. Our goal is to just continue to grow that.”

He explains the site has two loading belts filling two barges at the same time. The improvements came from doubling the capacity of one of those belts, from 30,000 bu. an hour to now 60,000 bu. and hour.

On the outbound rail project, where it previously took the on-site team 20 hours to fill a 110-car train, now it’s projected to only take 12 hours.

“We have a ladder track here at our facility in in St. Louis,” Sayers says. “We added a ladder to our track, so we can hold more cars and move cars more efficiently through the facility. We replaced the locomotive with one that was a little more powerful and a little more efficient for us. And then previously, we could only load one car at a time when we were loading trains. Now we can load two cars at the same time.”

The rail project is expected to be fully complete in six weeks.

Trump's Aggressive Trade Agenda Is Back On

Thu, 29 May 2025 20:40:21 GMT

The interruption to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda was short lived.

A federal appeals court has now granted the Trump administration’s request to temporarily pause the Wednesday lower-court ruling that declared an emergency law does not provide President Trump with unilateral authority to impose tariffs on nearly every country — a decision that would have blocked reciprocal tariff announcements dating back to February.

The original ruling was issued by a three-judge panel at The U.S. Court of International Trade. The judges said the sweeping tariffs and other global levies imposed under the International Emergency Economic Power Act were unlawful, which invalidates President Trump’s April 2 reciprocal tariff order. That order included 30% tariffs on Chinese imports, 25% tariffs on select goods from Mexico and Canada, as well as a blanket 10% tariff on most imported goods.

The Trump administration then filed a notice of appeal, which was granted on Thursday by a federal appeals court. The pause gives the Trump administration some additional time to prepare to argue the law empowers the president to unilaterally launch a global tariff strategy.

Before the appeal was announced, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt slammed the U.S. Court of International Trade ruling on Trump’s tariffs. Leavitt said the judges were “overstepping their bounds.” You can listen to her comments below.

How could this ruling potentially impact trade? We asked Alan Brugler of Brugler Marketing that question before the appeals court weighed in. He says to answer that, you first need to ask two main questions.

“In the short run, not much. You have to assume the administration is going to appeal the ruling and the question is going to be ‘Will the appeals process result in a stay, either freezing the tariff implementation or allowing it to continue during the appeal process?’ That’s the first question,” Brugler says.

Brugler says his second question is how this could impact current trade negotiations. Just last week, treasury secretary Scott Bessent said he expects several large trade deals to be announced in the next couple of weeks.

“What does it do to the administration’s leverage on the deals that they said we were coming close to,” Brugler adds. “The EU is one example. For now, I think we have to take it with a grain of salt. We also need to remember that it does not affect some of the tariffs, such as the aluminum and steel. Those were implemented under a different section of law that had been used back in the 2017 and 2018 era. Those are still in place. So, it does offer some potential for a lot less aggressive tariff war. But again, this is probably just the first step in the overall process.”

Mike North of Ever.Ag doesn’t think this gives President Trump’s administration less leverage. Instead, he chalks up the ruling to the ongoing theme of federal courts trying to overturn any major action Trump tries to take.

“I think as you look at the landscape, he’s come into office very aggressively — trying to enact very quickly the promises he made in his campaign. Ultimately, as you look at the flow of things, we had to expect the court was going to weigh in on this tariff discussion at some point. There hasn’t been a thing he’s done that hasn’t resulted in some form of a lawsuit, court order, court filing, judgment or otherwise. This is just the natural next step in this discussion,” North says.

North points out there are ways to differentiate how President Trump can leverage this, specifically referencing the 1974 Trade Act.

“That ultimately has many parts and pieces to it, and to Alan’s point, allows him to take a lot of different angles here. So, I don’t think anything that’s come out over the last couple of days on this discussion is really going to change the course of much of anything — at least in the short run,” North says.

What is the U.S. Court of International Trade?
If you’ve never heard of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), you aren’t alone. CIT is based in New York, and its purpose is to resolve disputes between governments, manufacturers, trade associations and other parties that may be privy to trade dealings.

According to the Court’s website, “from the time of its establishment, the United States Court of International Trade and its predecessor bodies have been designed to provide a comprehensive system for judicial review of civil actions arising out of import transactions and federal transactions affecting international trade.”

Mark A. Barnett, chief judge at CIT, says, “As the impact of international trade on the U.S. economy has expanded, there has been a corresponding increase in international trade disputes — involving governments, foreign and domestic manufacturers, workers’ unions, trade associations and individuals — and a continued need to provide consistent, fair and impartial adjudication of these disputes. While the nature of these disputes shifts between classification and valuation, unfair trade practices and various types of enforcement measures, the United States Court of International Trade continues to strive for the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding brought before it.”

EU Halts Brazil Poultry and Meat Imports After HPAI Outbreak

Mon, 19 May 2025 19:40:51 GMT

Brazil, the world’s largest poultry exporter and main poultry meat importer into the European Union, is no longer allowed to ship poultry and meat products to the EU due to the recent outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI).

Brazil confirmed the country’s first HPAI outbreak on a commercial farm in the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul on May 16.

The entire territory of Brazil has suspended its official status of being “free of highly pathogenic avian influenza.” The EU joins with bans from top buyer China, Reuters reported. According to a European Commission spokesperson, EU import conditions require that the country of export (Brazil) is free of HPAI.

Why do U.S. farmers need to pay attention?

There are two reasons for U.S. farmers to be watching the developments of the disease and its effect on the Brazilian poultry industry.

Dan Basse, AgResource Company, says Brazil poultry exports account for about 33% of the global poultry supply.

“A good portion of that goes to China,” Basse says. “The Chinese are out and already saying that they are going to be restricting Brazilian poultry but, we’ll see. The Chinese took last year about 570,000 tons of Brazilian product. I don’t know where they would replace it–but they’re not going to do it from the United States with the trade war.”

He says another reason to watch is the feed side of the Brazilian poultry flock.

“Those birds consume a lot of meal and a lot of corn, it’s like 17.6 million metric tons of Brazilian meal, and 42 to 43 million tons of corn,” Basse says. “So we’ve got to think about this not only from a export opportunity for US poultry, but from a demand concern of what the Brazilians will do in terms of feed consumption. They’ll become more aggressive in offering meal and corn to the world market if flocks down there do need to be depopulated and are starting over.”

What are teh next steps?

Restriction on poultry exports follows rules agreed on with each importing country, based on international health certificate requirements, the Agriculture and Livestock ministry told the Associated Press (AP). Depending on the type of the disease, some deals apply to the whole country while others involve limits on where products can come from — for example, a specific state, city or just the area of the outbreak.

Countries like Japan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the Philippines have already accepted this regional approach, AP reported.

Brazil exported more than 5 million tons of poultry meat in 2024. Reuters reported that approximately 4.4% headed to the EU. Of total EU poultry imports, Brazil is the main origin with a share of 32% last year, according to official EU data.

The U.S. bird flu outbreak and wider trade tensions with Washington have limited Chinese appetite for American poultry. China now blocks poultry from more than 40 U.S. states over HPAI, according to U.S. government data, Reuters reported .

If the HPAI outbreak spreads across Brazil, as it did in the U.S., officials and analysts said outlooks could get dimmer, Reuters reported. That scenario would raise U.S. hopes for China to ease restrictions on American poultry.

Under a Phase 1 trade agreement China signed with U.S. President Donald Trump during his first term in 2020, China is supposed to lift statewide bans on U.S. poultry 90 days after states eliminate bird flu from infected farms.

However, China has kept bans in place longer than it had agreed in that deal, according to the article.

Greg Tyler, CEO of the USA Poultry and Egg Export Council industry group, told Reuters he is hopeful China will move back to abiding by that regionalization agreement.

Your Next Read: Certainty in Uncertain Times: How Maria Zieba Fights for U.S. Pork Producers in DC

Secretary Rollins Takes On a Global Agenda for U.S. Agriculture

Sun, 18 May 2025 14:43:07 GMT

A day after returning from the United Kingdom (UK), Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins says agriculture is a “big, big deal” in the trade agreement now being negotiated between the U.S. and UK.

“The No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 concessions that we received from the UK were for agriculture. It was beef cattle, it was ethanol and the conversations continue on pork,” Rollins told “AgriTalk” host Chip Flory in an exclusive interview on Friday. “I was so proud of President Trump for putting our farmers first as he promised to do.”

During her time in the UK, she met with four cabinet members, her counterpart and three others, and key advisers to the prime minister to work toward striking a deal they’ve “been trying to get it done for 25 years.”

When it comes to non-tariff trade barriers between the U.S. and UK, particularly with beef, Rollins says progress is being made. She prioritizes social media and interviews with the media to talk about the robust, abundant and safe products U.S. farmers grow and produce.

📍Day one in the UK: Kicked off a powerful U.S. agriculture cooperator roundtable at the U.S. Embassy in London.

We’re building on President Trump’s historic trade announcement and his promise to put farmers FIRST—at home and around the world. 🇺🇸🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/xqsIoDLyAe
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) May 12, 2025

While in the UK, she was often asked about chlorinated chicken and hormone filled beef.

“I would immediately push back, and they all seemed a little bit surprised. I think by my final day in the UK, they knew what my answer was going to be. I asked him to go look at the science and understand the data and what we’re producing here is so safe and so reliable,” Rollins says.

When it comes to potential opportunities for the U.S., the ag secretary sees additional potential for:

pork
poultry
rice
specialty crops
seafood

While Rollins is quick to point out the U.S. doesn’t agree with the UK on everything, such as net zero goals, she says they “desperately needs our ethanol,” including biofuels, biomass and wood pellets.

“The zero percent tariff on our ethanol is going to play a huge part in them achieving [their net zero] goal and, for our farmers in America, that’s a really big deal,” Rollins says.

“So you see, with Rochambeau’s fleet in the Chesapeake and Washington’s army on the peninsula, your garrison at Yorktown had no chance. Caught, as between my fingers here.” 😁😂

No, seriously — so grateful for our time at 10 Downing Street today. Grateful too, as America… pic.twitter.com/OKAOtLkSqB
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) May 14, 2025

Imports of Live Cattle from Mexico Remain Off Limits Due to New World Screwworm

Prior to leaving for the UK, the U.S. suspended Mexican cattle, horse and bison imports from Mexico because of the threat of New World Screwworm (NWS).

“My commitment to Secretary Villalobos, who is my counterpart in Mexico, was that we weren’t just going to shut the border down and then just go away for a couple of months. This would be a daily discussion with repercussions not just to the farmers and ranchers in his country but also in ours. This is not good for us either in the short term or the long term, but we have to protect our beef cattle industry,” Rollins says. “There were some promises made and data points given to us that we didn’t fully trust were in best interest of our cattle ranchers. That’s why I made that decision, though it wasn’t an easy decision.

While Rollins continues to analyzes the situation and assess next steps, she stresses the real threat the pest poses.

“It has gotten within 700 miles of our southern border in Texas, which is inexcusable and unsustainable and we can’t let it get any closer,” Rollins says.

Secondary Screwworm Fly

She says production of sterile flies is being considered and hopes to have some good news to announce on that very soon.

In the mean time, the border will remain closed until Mexico can put more miles between NWS and the U.S. border. A couple weeks ago, NWS was 1,100 miles from the border, Rollins says, but then that gap narrowed.

“There’s just too much at stake. It took us 30 years to eradicate [NWS] the last time, and we just can’t get there again,” she adds.

‘Make America Healthy Again’ Report to be Released May 22

On May 22, a report is expected to be released by supporters of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement. What can farmers expect in that report?

“As you can imagine, it’s a work in progress,” Rollins says. “I and my team at USDA, my partners across the Trump cabinet, including Lee Zeldin at EPA, Russell Vought at OMB and Kevin Hassett with the National Economic Council, and, of course, Bobby Kennedy, chair of the committee, just finished a couple hour discussion on that and we’ll be continuing over the weekend. I think it will make some really important points about the chronic diseases in our country, about diabetes in our country and about addiction to medicine and prescriptions. It’s really an all-encompassing report.”

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins posted this photo with RFK Jr. on X, saying “Supporting hardworking farmers like the Sawyer family is vital for Making America Healthy Again.”

(Secretary Brooks Rollins X Account)

“Of course, my lane is making sure our farmers and ranchers are put first and that we’re able to continue to feed and fuel and provide fiber for not only America, but the rest of the world, so that will be a big part of it. I feel confident President Trump’s vision of putting America first and putting American farmers and ranchers first will be reflective in that document as it comes out next week, and we continue to talk about it,” she continues.

Your Next Read: China Plans ‘World’s Biggest Export Terminal’ For Brazil Amid U.S. Trade Talks