U.S. Department of Agriculture

USDA Projects Smallest US Wheat Harvest Since 1972 Due to Plains Drought

Tue, 12 May 2026 19:00:03 GMT

U.S. farmers this year will harvest their smallest wheat crop since 1972, as a severe drought in the U.S. Plains has curbed production of hard red winter wheat, the largest variety grown in the U.S., the Department of Agriculture said on Tuesday.

This autumn, U.S. growers will also harvest their second-largest soybean crop on record, while corn production is expected to drop 6% from last year, the USDA said in its first official forecast of the 2026/27 crop season.

Rising fuel and fertilizer prices due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have sent grain production costs sharply higher, heaping further stress on the U.S. farm economy already reeling from trade disruptions caused by U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff battles.

May 12, 2026 WASDE Winter Wheat

(Farm Journal)

U.S. growers expanded plantings of soybeans, which require less fertilizer than grains like corn and wheat. Winter wheat was already planted when the war began at the end of February, but soaring fertilizer costs curbed spring nutrient applications for winter wheat and spring-seeded crops like corn, soy and spring wheat.

Benchmark hard red winter wheat futures KWv1 and soft red winter wheat futures Wv1 on the Chicago Board of Trade rallied by their daily 45-cent-per-bushel trading limits.

The USDA projected U.S. wheat production in the 2026/27 season at 1.561 billion bushels, down from 1.985 billion in 2025/26, as a severe drought in the U.S. Plains was likely to slash the hard red winter wheat crop by 25% from a year earlier. Analysts polled by Reuters, on average, expected the USDA to project a 1.735-billion-bushel all-wheat crop.

The USDA rated just 28% of the U.S. winter wheat crop in good-to-excellent condition in a weekly crop conditions report on Monday, the lowest rating for this point in the growing season in four years.

May 12, 2026 WASDE Corn & Soybeans

(Farm Journal)

The USDA pegged the 2026 U.S. soybean harvest at 4.435 billion bushels, up from 4.262 billion bushels last year, but below the average trade estimate of 4.445 billion.

Corn production was forecast to decline to 15.995 billion bushels from a record 17.021 billion bushels last year. The estimate was above the average analyst estimate of 15.934 billion bushels.

But soybean demand remains unclear as top importer China has slashed purchases from the U.S. amid ongoing trade tensions between Washington and Beijing and abundant supplies from rival exporters Brazil and Argentina.

China and the U.S. may reach a farm deal at their summit this week that expands Beijing’s purchases of grains and meat, but market watchers said they did not expect major new soybean purchases beyond what was agreed in a deal last October.

The USDA projected U.S. soybean exports in the current 2025/26 season at 1.530 billion bushels and at 1.630 billion bushels in the 2026/27 season.

U.S. soybean stocks were forecast to shrink to 310 million bushels by the end of the 2026/27 marketing year, from 340 million at the end of the current season on August 31.

Corn supplies were expected to remain ample at 1.957 billion bushels at the end of the 2026/27 season, down from 2.142 billion for 2025/26.

(Reporting by Karl Plume in Chicago; Editing by David Gregorio)

Trump Admin to Roll Out Major Fertilizer Plan This Week, Accelerate U.S. Production Push

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 16:36:31 GMT

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins says the Trump administration will unveil a sweeping set of fertilizer initiatives this week, warning that surging input costs are putting intense pressure on American farmers. Speaking at a Missouri farm on Friday, Rollins told those in attendance that fertilizer has become an issue of national security, which is why she says this week’s announcement will be broader than just USDA, also including EPA, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce and Department of the Interior.

While at GR Farms in Higginsville, Mo., on Friday to roll out an announcement on the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) top-up payments, Rollins described the Trump administration’s upcoming announcement on fertilizer as a large-scale investment initiative. She says while she hoped to roll out the plan while in Missouri, the administration is still finalizing the size of the funding package.

Rollins says the plan will address both immediate actions to stabilize fertilizer prices and a longer-term roadmap aimed at ensuring affordable, domestically produced supply for U.S. farmers.

Washington analyst Jim Wiesemeyer says the plan will likely need to include a mix of financial and policy tools, such as grants, tax incentives, loan guarantees outside of existing USDA programs and greater consistency in U.S. trade policy, while noting imports will still play a role, particularly for key nutrients like potash sourced from Canada.

Short-Term Fertilizer Price Pain

During her comments Friday, Rollins highlighted how quickly fertilizer prices have increased since the conflict started in Iran, outlining the additional strain it is placing on producers.

“We know that urea prices have gone up 50% over the last month. Ammonia is up 30% or more,” she said, adding that “our farmers are feeling that pinch.”

Rollins also told the crowd fertilizer has been a longer-term challenge, even before the situation in Iran caused the latest price spike.

“To be clear, this has been a problem for years. The actual numbers are lower, believe it or not, than they were even in 2022,” she says. “But nevertheless, that jump in prices overnight, we have to address.”

Framing the issue as more than just an economic challenge and one that is a matter of national security after decades of offshoring fertilizer production, Rollins says the administration views the issue as part of a broader structural problem within the fertilizer industry.

“The loss of competition in the fertilizer industry has obviously led to higher fertilizer costs over time,” she says. “When combined with what’s happening overseas with the current geopolitical issues facing our world, certainly we have come to a crossroads that requires immediate action. This is indeed a matter of national security, and we are working to tackle it head on.”

Focus on Domestic Fertilizer Production

While Rollins didn’t give details, she hinted the centerpiece of this week’s announcement will be a major push to reshore fertilizer production, backed by federal investment to accomplish that. Working with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, she says the administration is preparing to direct significant funding toward building new fertilizer plants across the country, while also supporting existing projects.

“I have asked Howard to do, and his team to do, and what we’re doing in partnership is to identify a significant number ... that we can deploy into building out fertilizer plants in America,” she says.

Rollins emphasizes cutting regulatory delays will be critical to making that plan work. She says projects are already being identified nationwide, but permitting delays remain a major obstacle — with the goal of getting that process down to months versus the current years it takes.

“We’ve already begun to identify all over the country. Some are under production. How do we move them along more quickly? Some are in the permitting bureaucracy, which sometimes takes years to get through permitting,” she says. “Our goal is to, instead of years, to get to permitting in a matter of weeks, or perhaps months, so that even in one year, two years and three years, we will have facilities up and running that we will never have had that opportunity or option before.”

United States’ Energy Advantage for Nitrogen Fertilizer

Rollins also points to domestic energy resources as a key factor in expanding fertilizer output, particularly for nitrogen production.

“We became, in a matter of just a short period of time, a net exporter of LNG versus importer, meaning we were producing our own energy in America, so much so that we no longer had to rely on other countries,” she says. “The reason that is important is, as our farmers are facing these exponential nitrogen fertilizer costs, we now have the resources in America. We just have to build the facilities, the manufacturing facilities, to turn that LNG into nitrogen. So this is going to happen quicker than you would normally expect, I think because of the pieces of the puzzle that have already been put into place.”

In the meantime, Rollins says the administration is continuing short-term efforts to improve supply availability and reduce costs.

While the longer-term strategy ramps up, she says the administration is continuing short-term interventions to ease pressure on farmers. These include:

Extending a waiver of the Jones Act
Opening new import channels
Working and meeting with industry/fertilizer companies

Highlighting cooperation with domestic producers, she pointed to CF Industries as an example.

“They have said, in order to protect our farmers, we are going to stop maintenance. We are going look at holding our prices steady,” she says.

She also points to ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice.

“Last year, we signed a joint agreement, USDA did, with the Department of Justice, ensuring that farmers have access to competitive and affordable inputs,” she says. “Looking into the activities of our fertilizer companies and what has happened over the last few years, but with a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Long-Term Goal: Reduce Foreign Dependence

Looking longer term, Rollins says the administration is focused on reversing decades of reliance on foreign suppliers.

“America has offshored for far too long, far too much of our fertilizer production, leaving us dangerously reliant on Russia and China,” she says. “Changing that long-standing industry that is reliant on global markets won’t happen overnight,” she says. “But working with our farmers and across industry and government, we will find ways to make fertilizer that we can do here in America and make sure it is a price that our great farmers can afford.”

At the same time, the administration is increasing scrutiny of fertilizer markets. Rollins noted ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice, saying officials are taking “a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Ultimately, she framed this week’s announcement as the beginning of a broader shift away from foreign dependence.

Rollins says additional details, including funding levels and project specifics, will be included in next week’s announcement.

“We’re at a crossroads that requires immediate action,” she says.

Watch Rollins’ full press conference here:

USDA Expands Farmer Surveys to Improve Data Accuracy, Relocates Staff Closer to the Farm

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 13:40:47 GMT

USDA is moving to adjust how it collects and communicates agricultural data following an April 22 meeting with stakeholders in Kansas City, pairing expanded farmer surveys, increased transparency efforts and new performance tracking with a sweeping reorganization that will relocate staff closer to agricultural regions.

Leading into the USDA Data Users meeting on Wednesday, Farm Journal spoke one-on-one with USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden. While he wasn’t in the room physically on Wednesday, instead joining virtually, Vaden made clear he intended to play an active role in the discussion.

“I’m excited about that because one of the things that both the Secretary and I are committed to is better transparency, especially when it comes to our data,” he says. “USDA data needs to be the gold standard, and we need to be brave enough to take feedback. Everyone can always improve.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by U.S. Farm Report (@usfarmreport)

That theme, being “brave enough” to hear criticism, carried through both the meeting and the department’s broader outreach effort. As USDA, ERS, NASS, World Board and others participated in a panel on stage followed by Q&A, they had unified message that they’ll do whatever it takes to rebuild farmer trust and restore confidence in USDA data and reporting.

Earlier this month, USDA closed a public comment period inviting anyone who interacts with its data to weigh in on how it could improve.

“What we have done is we had a public comment process which just closed on the 9th of April, where we asked everyone who has any interaction with our data, tell us what you think,” Vaden says. “Are there ways that we can collect data better? Are there ways that we can report data better?”

Data Users Meeting Highlights Concerns Over Participation, Accuracy

At the Kansas City meeting, one issue stood out: falling farmer participation in USDA surveys and what that means for the reliability of widely watched reports.

Officials from USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) acknowledged that response rates have dropped to historically low levels. The March 31 planting intentions report drew responses from just 37.6% of surveyed producers, down from 44.3% a year earlier and the lowest on record. But they also talked about plans to improve those numbers.

That decline has raised concerns across the agriculture sector, particularly after USDA made sizable revisions to 2025 corn acreage estimates earlier this year. Because markets rely heavily on USDA data for price discovery, risk management, and policy decisions, even small questions about accuracy can ripple widely.

In response, NASS plans to significantly expand its farmer survey efforts in an attempt to rebuild participation and improve data quality.

USDA Plans Expanded Farmer Surveys to Improve Data Reliability

According to NASS Administrator Joseph Parsons, the agency intends to increase the number of farmers surveyed for major acreage reports, pending approval from the Office of Management and Budget.

The most immediate change would come with the June 30 acreage report, where USDA plans to boost its sample size by roughly 35%. Additional increases of about 10% are planned for the September, December, and March reports.

The goal is straightforward: generate more usable responses and improve the precision of crop estimates.

Beyond simply expanding outreach, USDA is also working to improve how it communicates uncertainty in its reports. Parsons says the agency will incorporate more “plain language” explanations to help producers, traders, and policymakers better understand confidence levels and potential variability in the data.

Reorganization Announcement Follows Immediately After Data Meeting

Just one day after the Data Users meeting, USDA underscored how quickly change is unfolding across the department by announcing a sweeping reorganization that will relocate major divisions, including positions tied to data and research, out of Washington, D.C.

The agency announced the broad reorganization and relocation of staff, saying it will modernize operations. But some stakeholders warn the changes could strain staffing levels and institutional expertise at data-focused offices, including NASS and the World Agricultural Outlook Board, following recent departures tied to the Deferred Resignation Program.

According to USDA’s Thursday announcement, the overhaul will shift key components of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and the Research, Education, and Economics (REE) mission area closer to agricultural regions, in what officials describe as an effort to modernize operations and better align staff with the producers they serve.

At the center of the changes is the creation of a new National Food Safety Center in Urbandale, Iowa, which will serve as the primary hub for FSIS administrative, technical, and support functions. The facility is expected to house roughly 200 employees and become the agency’s largest office. A separate science center in Athens, Georgia, will expand capabilities in microbiology, chemistry, and epidemiology.

USDA officials emphasize that frontline inspection operations, which account for roughly 85% of FSIS personnel, will not be affected, and no reductions in force are planned. Additional staff tied to international operations will be located in Fort Collins, Colorado, while about 100 positions will remain in Washington for policy and congressional work.

The restructuring also reaches into the department’s data and research arms.

The Economic Research Service (ERS) and National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) will relocate additional positions to Kansas City, reinforcing a move first initiated during the previous Trump administration. NASS will also shift certain Washington-based roles to St. Louis and other regional offices while maintaining its nationwide data collection network.

Meanwhile, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) will begin decommissioning the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Maryland, redistributing research programs across the country to better align with regional agricultural needs and modernize aging infrastructure.

USDA leaders frame the reorganization as a move to reduce duplication, improve accountability, and strengthen connections between federal agencies and the agricultural sector. Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says the changes are intended to better align staff with mission needs, while agency leaders emphasize improved workforce support, training, and recruitment.

Greater Transparency and Accountability Ahead

The timing of the reorganization, coming immediately after a meeting focused on data credibility, highlights the broader scope of USDA’s efforts to rebuild trust and improve performance.

Alongside expanded surveys and structural changes, the department is also taking steps to more directly evaluate its forecasting accuracy.

Vaden says USDA is planning to launch an annual report, potentially beginning this fall, that will compare its crop forecasts against final production totals after the marketing year concludes. The effort is designed to give stakeholders a clearer picture of how USDA estimates stack up over time.

“This is not something that will be solved in a day,” Vaden says. “But we have to be brave enough to take feedback and issue public reports on how we did and how our numbers ended up stacking up against the final facts, so that we can begin the process of ensuring that there is continuous improvement with regard to the quality of USDA data.”

Behind the scenes, that process is already underway. Vaden says he is receiving internal briefings on the feedback submitted through the Request for Information and is meeting directly with trade groups and farmer representatives.

“I, as a matter of fact, am receiving a briefing later today on what the comments that came in as part of our request for information show, and how we can have further areas of improvement,” he says. “And I am meeting with some of the commenters… to hear from them personally about how we could do our job better.”

Is USDA’s Reorganization Impacting Data Accuracy?

Even before the formal announcement, questions had already been circulating about whether internal restructuring could affect USDA reporting.

Vaden dismisses that idea.

“Well, first, with regard to your question about whether there’s a link to the data, the answer is no,” he says. “Our WASDE professionals are professionals in the Office of the Chief Economist. They are unbothered by the reorganization. It doesn’t affect their day-to-day work at all.”

In practical terms, he suggests the impact on those teams is minimal.

“The only thing they’re going to have to do is leave the South Building and come over here to the Witten Building for lockup,” he says.

Still, the scale of the changes is significant. USDA is looking to shrink its Washington footprint, where the South Building is more than 70% vacant and carries over $1.6 billion in deferred maintenance, while relocating employees closer to rural communities.

“No private sector company in the world would pay for real estate that is more than 70% vacant,” Vaden says.

Q&A Underscores Concerns Over Trust, Participation, and Transparency

The question-and-answer session at the close of the Data Users meeting made clear that concerns about USDA data go beyond methodology.

Several attendees pressed officials on how the agency plans to reverse declining farmer response rates, with some noting that lower participation could introduce bias into key reports. NASS officials acknowledged the concern and pointed to expanded survey efforts as a primary solution, while also emphasizing outreach to better explain why farmer participation matters.

Officials say they are exploring additional ways to engage producers directly, including clearer communication about how survey data is used and stronger assurances around confidentiality.

Questions also focused on large revisions to recent crop estimates, with market participants asking whether those changes signal deeper issues in data collection or modeling. USDA representatives stressed that revisions are a normal part of the statistical process but acknowledged the need to better communicate why those adjustments occur and what they mean for users.

Another recurring theme was transparency, specifically, how USDA conveys uncertainty in its reports. Attendees urged the department to provide clearer indicators of confidence levels and potential variability, particularly during periods of market volatility. NASS officials pointed to planned “plain language” additions as one step toward making reports more accessible and easier to interpret.

Some participants also raised concerns about whether internal changes, including the department’s broader reorganization, could disrupt data quality or continuity. USDA officials reiterated that statistical staff and processes remain intact and said efforts are being made to ensure consistency regardless of organizational shifts.

Finally, several questions centered on accountability, and how USDA evaluates its own performance over time. Officials confirmed that the department is working toward publishing a regular assessment comparing forecasts to final outcomes, a move widely viewed by attendees as a meaningful step toward rebuilding confidence.

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden Says High-Level Washington Meeting Puts Fertilizer Industry on the Spot

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:10:01 GMT

The fertilizer market has been a growing point of tension in agriculture for years, but USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says recent meetings in Washington marked a more direct and wide-ranging confrontation between federal officials and the companies that dominate input supply. Those discussions, he says, were not limited to USDA alone but included a broader slice of the administration’s economic leadership, signaling how central fertilizer costs have become to the national conversation on food production and inflation.

Vaden says cabinet-level officials from the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative were present, alongside USDA leadership and state agriculture commissioners from Iowa and Georgia. Fertilizer executives were also in the room, making the meeting a rare setting where policy makers, regulators and industry leaders sat together to address pricing, supply constraints and long-term market structure.

He says the purpose was not simply informational, but confrontational in the sense of putting real-world farm impacts directly in front of industry decision-makers.

“It was an opportunity for those other cabinet officials to hear from the fertilizer company executives,” Vaden says, “and for those fertilizer company executives to hear from the secretary and me, as well as our two state counterparts who joined, about the real harm that farmers are facing from uncertainty in the market and, equally as importantly, years of elevated prices.”

Vaden says what often gets lost outside agriculture is that the current fertilizer environment is not a short-term disruption, but the continuation of a multi-year pricing trend that has reshaped farm budgets.

“For people who don’t pay attention to ag every day like your listeners do, they may think this fertilizer thing came out of nowhere,” Vaden says. “But American farmers know that we’re on year five or more of elevated prices for fertilizer, and questions about adequate supply of all fertilizer types.”

He adds that the timing of the discussions is critical, as global geopolitical tensions are only adding pressure to already strained markets.

“So I see this as an opportunity now that the attention of everyone is focused on fertilizer, not just agriculture, to begin to solve the problem that has taken years to develop and that has been exacerbated by the current situation in the Middle East,” Vaden says. “So that we don’t find ourselves in another long-term question about fertilizer supply going forward.”

USDA Pushes Industry: Bring Projects Forward or Explain the Bottlenecks

As discussions continue with fertilizer companies, Vaden says USDA is shifting the conversation from general concern to specific accountability. Rather than broad discussions about market conditions, he says officials are now asking companies to identify concrete projects that could increase supply and to explain why those investments have not yet materialized.

This approach, he says, reflects a broader strategy inside the department to move beyond analysis and toward action, particularly in areas where supply constraints have persisted for years without meaningful change.

In meetings held both jointly and separately with industry leaders, Vaden says USDA has been consistent in its message to fertilizer companies.

“We are saying the same thing to everyone who comes before the department,” Vaden says. “Be a part of the solution, don’t be a part of the problem.”

He says that includes detailed questions about whether expansion projects are already in development but stalled due to permitting delays, regulatory barriers or capital constraints. In some cases, he says, USDA is asking companies to identify where federal or state action could realistically speed up timelines.

“We are asking them what projects they have in the pipeline that they can bring on board to create new fertilizer supplies, hopefully here domestically, but if necessary, near-shoring overseas,” Vaden says. “And are there steps that we can take to make those projects move faster? Are there permits that are held up? Are there states or localities that are holding up their expansions? Are there investments that they are looking for with regard to needing capital to be able to expand their production capacity?”

He adds the department is not approaching the issue passively, but actively pressing for answers.

“We’re asking as many questions as we are making declarative statements, and we’re trying to see what levers we can pull to get more supply on the market,” Vaden says.

Market Concentration at Center of USDA Concerns

Beyond supply timelines and permitting issues, Vaden says one of the core structural concerns in fertilizer markets is the level of consolidation, particularly in phosphate production where a small number of companies control a dominant share of supply.

He says that level of concentration raises fundamental questions about how prices are formed and whether farmers are receiving signals that reflect true market conditions.

With that in mind, Vaden says USDA is focusing heavily on competition and price discovery as part of its broader review of input markets.

“With one of our fertilizer markets, there are two companies that control 90% market share,” Vaden says. “Anybody, I don’t care whether it’s fertilizer or what any other commodity you want to talk about, if there are only two major players, how can anyone be sure that the price you are paying reflects actual market conditions?”

He says the issue is not simply about individual price spikes, but about whether enough competition exists to keep pricing behavior transparent and responsive.

“In order to have adequate price discovery in a market, you need multiple players,” Vaden says.

That concern, he adds, is one of the reasons fertilizer investigations already underway by federal agencies predate recent geopolitical disruptions and continue to expand.

Vaden Details Heated Meeting With Mosaic: “A Different Tune in My Conference Room”

Among the most pointed parts of Vaden’s interview are his comments about a recent face-to-face meeting with Mosaic, one of the most influential players in the phosphate fertilizer market. He says the discussion, held in his conference room just this week, was direct and, at times, uncomfortable, focusing heavily on production decisions, capacity investment and the company’s role in a highly concentrated global market.

Vaden says he challenged Mosaic on why additional production capacity has not been brought online in the United States over a long period of time, and what barriers the company believes are preventing expansion.

He says he left the meeting with clear expectations for follow-up information from the company, describing it as an assignment rather than a casual discussion.

“I gave them a homework assignment,” Vaden says. “I told them what I expected to see, and I hope that they will get back to me as soon as possible.”

But what stood out most to him, he says, was not just what was said in the room, but how it contrasted with the company’s public messaging.

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

In his view, there was a noticeable difference between internal discussions and external communications, particularly on social media, where fertilizer policy debates have increasingly played out in public.

“And I will say, without being able to go into details, when they were in my office, they were singing a slightly different tune than they were signing on Twitter responding to the president’s Truth Social message that you noted,” Vaden says.

He uses that contrast to underscore what he sees as a broader disconnect between industry messaging and the realities USDA believes farmers are facing.

“We need more supply, we need answers, your company hasn’t provided either of those two things,” Vaden says. “It’s about time that you did.”

Industry Responses, Trade Policy Pressure and the Mosaic Question

While Vaden applies pressure to Mosaic, he notes that not all fertilizer companies are taking the same stance on trade policy and tariffs. He points specifically to Nutrien, which he says has indicated support for removing certain trade enforcement measures.

“I was very happy after I met with the Nutrien CEO that they came out and announced we don’t need this CVD order anymore,” Vaden says.

By contrast, he says Mosaic’s position on countervailing duties and phosphate trade enforcement remains unresolved, and that broader policy decisions are now effectively waiting on the company’s response.

He characterizes the situation as fluid but heavily dependent on industry input.

“Right now the question is in Mosaic’s court, if you will,” Vaden says. “And we’re waiting for an answer from them.”

He adds that regulatory or executive action is unlikely to be taken in a vacuum while negotiations and responses are still unfolding.

“One thing that I know as a lawyer is that there’s a whole lot more possible if you have consent of the parties than if you don’t,” Vaden says. “With consent, nearly all things are possible.”

Investigations Expand as USDA Seeks Farmer-Reported Data

Alongside industry meetings, Vaden says USDA is working with the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission on ongoing fertilizer market investigations, with a particular focus on pricing behavior and market transparency.

He says one challenge is the nature of pricing information itself, which often reaches farmers through informal channels and can change quickly.

“We’re asking questions and waiting for answers, and we need farmers’ help as part of our question asking,” Vaden says.

He describes a pattern many farmers have reported directly to USDA, where fertilizer prices are quoted in a way that encourages immediate purchase rather than delayed buying.

“I know in my own family’s operation that you get phone calls, and those phone calls tell you ‘Here’s what the price is now, and if you wait, here’s what the price will be later,’” Vaden says. “And that later price is never lower than the price that it is now.”

To address that, he says USDA is working on a confidential reporting system designed to protect farmer identity while improving data quality for investigators.

“If they trust us with their information, if they trust us with the facts that they have, they’ll be able to remain anonymous,” Vaden says. “And the companies under investigation will not know who shared what data with us.”

“This Has Been Going On for Too Long”

Vaden closes by emphasizing that fertilizer prices and supply constraints are not a new challenge for agriculture, but an entrenched issue that has persisted through multiple years and market cycles.

He says the administration is trying to shift both short-term supply conditions and long-term structural dynamics at the same time, adding that USDA’s goal is not temporary relief, but sustained changes in supply, competition and pricing stability.

“We are focused on getting new supplies here now, and not just now, but next year and the year after that and the years after that,” Vaden says. “So that we can have guaranteed new supplies over the long term.”

Vaden’s Message to Farmers: “We’re Saying the Same Thing in Public and in Private”

At the end of the conversation, Vaden returned to what he described as the central audience for everything USDA is doing on fertilizer: farmers themselves. He acknowledged frustration is not just growing, but it has become a defining sentiment across much of farm country as input costs remain elevated and supply questions persist year after year.

He emphasized USDA’s posture is not different depending on the room or the audience, whether speaking with industry executives, other federal agencies, or producers themselves.

“I want farmers to know that when I am sitting with representatives of other cabinet departments or when I am sitting with big fertilizer CEOs, I am saying the same thing in private that you hear me saying in public,” Vaden says. “I do not change my tune. I may be slightly more polite, but I am equally as direct in terms of telling them what I think the situation is.”

Vaden says that directness is rooted in what he believes farmers are already experiencing on the ground, particularly when it comes to fertilizer pricing volatility and uncertainty in purchasing decisions. He says producers are not misreading the situation — they are responding to real, long-running pressures.

He also acknowledges the emotional toll on producers is part of the reality USDA is hearing more frequently.

“I especially communicate to them that farmers have gone from exasperation to anger with the situation that we have now,” Vaden says. “They are not wrong to be feeling those emotions because they understand that this is not a new situation.”

Looking ahead, Vaden says USDA’s goal is not just to address short-term pricing spikes, but to change the underlying conditions that have kept fertilizer costs elevated for years. That includes expanding supply, increasing competition and improving long-term stability in input markets.

“This is an issue that has bedeviled American agriculture for at least five years, and it is time that it stopped,” Vaden says.

Trump Warns Fertilizer Giants Against "Price Gouging" as Costs Soar 40%

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:46:55 GMT

Fertilizer market volatility is once again taking center stage as geopolitical tensions disrupt global supply lines and push input costs sharply higher. New analysis shows the increase in fertilizer prices may not be over, even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens soon.

Even with the situation in Iran pushing prices even higher, the sharp increase in fertilizer prices from 2020 to now is catching attention in Washington. Not only did President Donald Trump take to social media to warn of ‘price gouging,’ but Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also posted on X Monday, specifically expressing frustration over Mosaic’s response to farmers.

While Rollins and USDA Under Secretary Stephen Vaden have raised concerns over fertilizer prices this year, the president posted on Truth Social over the weekend that he is closely monitoring fertilizer prices and pledged support for American farmers.

Trump said Saturday on his Truth Social platform he is “watching fertilizer prices CLOSELY” during what he described as the US “FIGHT FOR FREEDOM in Iran”, adding that the administration “will not accept PRICE GOUGING from the fertilizer monopoly”.

On Monday, Rollins posted on X, saying she was “So disappointed in this response” from Mosaic, “especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market.”

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

Mosaic announced last week the decision to shut down major phosphate operations in Brazil, a move the that will cut production, reduce jobs, and signal a *strategic shift in how the fertilizer giant deploys its capital.

Mosaic Company announced Thursday it will idle two phosphate facilities in Brazil as part of a broader effort to cut costs and shift capital. Mosaic expects idling of the facilities to reduce annual phosphate production by approximately 1 million tonnes. CEO Bruce Bodine says the decision reflects what he calls a disciplined focus on long-term returns.

.@MosaicCompany, you’re right that U.S. farmers are facing a difficult economic situation, only made worse by the extra $6.9 BILLION they have had to spend on fertilizer since you petitioned the government to place duties on imported phosphorus. This has played a major role in… https://t.co/UuOqjE0jBu
— National Corn (NCGA) (@NationalCorn) April 13, 2026

Mosaic and Simplot have also been in the cross hairs of the push to remove countervailing duties on Moroccan phosphate . Groups like the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) claim the CVDs are costing U.S. agriculture $1 billion each year.

The CVDs on Moroccan phosphate were put into place by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in 2021. As the sunset review begins, more than 50 state grower groups including the Texas Corn Producers Association, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce and the ITC to revoke the countervailing duties on imported phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia.

In separate filings by Mosaic and Simplot to the ITC and the Department of Commerce, both companies said the continuation is necessary to maintain a “level playing field.”

In a written response to Farm Journal, Mosaic said:

“American farmers depend on a strong domestic fertilizer industry, which in turn depends on strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws that ensure a level playing field. Mosaic is proud to support U.S. agriculture with high-quality, reliable products produced here at home.”

Iran War’s Current Impact on Fertilizer Prices

The message from the Trump adminstration comes as tensions escalate in the Strait of Hormuz, where the United States is weighing a potential full naval blockade. Ship traffic through the critical waterway has already dropped from roughly 135 vessels per day to the single digits. A complete shutdown could halt flows entirely, further increasing fertilizer prices.

The stakes are high as roughly one-third of global fertilizer shipments move through the strait, and the disruption is already sending prices higher, up more than 40% compared to a year ago.

It is the 6-week anniversary of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Fert price comparisons:

NOLA urea - +$230 or 49%
NOLA UAN - +$145 or 38%
Midwest NH3 - +$245 or 32%
NOLA DAP - +$130 or 21%
NOLA potash - +$10 or 3%

...corn - 2-cents or 0.5% higher#sickeningforfarmers
— Josh Linville (@JLinvilleFert) April 10, 2026

Market data shows the impact Iran is having on already high fertilizer prices. According to StoneX analyst Josh Linville says in the six weeks since the war started:

Urea prices have surged by $230 per ton, a 49% increase
UAN is up $145 per ton, or 38%
Anhydrous ammonia has climbed $245 per ton, a 32% jump.
In contrast, corn prices have barely responded, rising just two cents, or about half a percent. The divergence is putting additional pressure on farm margins.

DOJ Probe Into Fertilizer Costs Seeks Input From Farmers

The Trump administration is asking farmers to help provide information as part of an ongoing U.S. Department of Justice investigation into elevated costs for fertilizer, machinery and other key agricultural inputs, according to reporting from Bloomberg.

Bloomberg reported the effort is aimed at gathering more on-the-ground data as regulators examine whether fertilizer producers may have coordinated to raise prices. The DOJ investigation was first reported in early March, when Bloomberg said federal officials had begun looking into whether fertilizer companies engaged in price coordination.

According to the Bloomberg report, Vaden said he has already met with officials at both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to discuss potential lines of inquiry. He also noted that farmers could play a key role in the process.

Vaden said farmers “have a lot of information that might be relevant to these investigations.”

Bloomberg previously reported in early March that the Department of Justice is investigating whether fertilizer producers colluded to increase prices.

Speaking at the North American Agricultural Journalists’ annual conference in Washington on Monday, Vaden encouraged farmer participation in the probe, emphasizing confidentiality protections.

“We need farmers to help provide us with that information on a confidential basis, so that that can help inform the investigations that are ongoing,” Vaden said, according to Bloomberg. “I think we will have a mechanism in order to help encourage that exchange of information.”

NCGA Surveys Show Not All Farmers Have Fertilizer Secured for 2026

Against that backdrop, along with fertilizer prices climbing even higher in the six weeks after the conflict started with Iran, new surveys results from NCGA highlight how those market pressures are translating to on-farm realities.

Krista Swanson, chief economist for NCGA, says the organization conducted the survey to better understand fertilizer availability from the farmer perspective. Ag Secretary Rollins has told mainstream media that 80% of farmers have fertilizer locked in for 2026, but NCGA data contradicts that figure.

“We’re hearing that number being thrown around too, which is why we really wanted to find out directly from farmers what the status is for them,” Swanson says.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

A Significant Gap in Fertilizer Readiness

The surveys show that only 60% of farmers report having their nitrogen fully purchased or secured for the 2026 growing season, while 64% say the same for phosphate. That leaves a sizable portion of producers still working to lock in supplies.

“When you think about over 500,000 corn farmers in the U.S., this isn’t a small number,” Swanson says. “Our survey results indicate that over 200,000 farmers still need at least some fertilizer for this year.”

Nitrogen remains a critical input for corn production and is closely tied to yield potential. Any shortfall, whether driven by availability or cost, can directly affect productivity and profitability.

NCGA Grower Surveys

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

Younger Farmers Feeling the Pressure Most

The survey also points to uneven impacts across the farm sector, with younger farmers facing greater challenges in securing fertilizer.

Swanson says younger producers reported having more nitrogen left to purchase compared to older farmers.

“You think about younger farmers that have less capital already built up in their business, maybe tighter cash flow needs because of their equity position,” she says. “This does seem to have a disproportional impact on younger farmers.”

That dynamic raises concerns about financial strain among newer operations in a high-cost environment.

Corn Acres Likely Stable, But With Reduced Inputs

Despite the challenges, most farmers are not planning to reduce corn acreage. The survey found that 80% of respondents expect to maintain their planned acres.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

At the same time, fertilizer application rates may fall short. Half of the farmers surveyed say they do not expect to apply their full amount of fertilizer.

“Pairing these two together, it seems to me like we are still going to see a lot of corn acres get planted,” Swanson says. “But those corn acres will have less fertilizer than maybe what they would have otherwise had.”

That combination could limit yield potential if input reductions become widespread.

Growing Concern Shifts to 2027

While fertilizer availability remains a concern for 2026, attention is already turning to the next crop year. Fertilizer purchasing follows a rolling cycle, and planning for 2027 will begin soon.

Survey responses show that for every one farmer more concerned about fertilizer price and availability for 2026, nearly two are more concerned about 2027.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

“So farmers are concerned as we look ahead to next year,” Swanson says.

The shift reflects uncertainty about how long supply disruptions and elevated prices will persist.

Supply Chain Recovery May Take Time

Even if geopolitical tensions ease, relief may not come quickly. Swanson notes that the fertilizer market is still dealing with production disruptions and supply chain backlogs.

“A short-term ceasefire has limited immediate impact on this ongoing fertilizer crisis for farmers,” she says. “Even when a permanent end to the situation is reached, we’re still looking at recovery from supply chain backlogs and halted production that could take a long time to recover from.”

Damage to key inputs such as liquid natural gas and sulfur production could take years to repair, keeping pressure on supply.

A Tightening Outlook

The NCGA survey underscores a challenging environment for corn producers. Most acres are expected to be planted this year, but not all will receive optimal fertilizer applications. At the same time, concern is building for 2027 as farmers look ahead to the next purchasing cycle.

For many producers, the issue is no longer just securing fertilizer for this season. It is navigating a period of sustained uncertainty that could shape production decisions, costs, and risk management strategies across the U.S. corn sector.

Longstanding Concerns Over Market Concentration

In September 2025, USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice signed a Memorandum of Understanding, committing both agencies to jointly examine high and volatile input costs, which included fertilizer, by scrutinizing competitive conditions in agricultural markets and enforcing antitrust laws, particularly around price setting and market concentration.

While geopolitical tensions are the latest driver of volatility, many farm groups argue the root of the problem runs deeper. Matt Perdue, president of the North Dakota Farmers Union, says ongoing federal investigations into fertilizer pricing must lead to meaningful action.

“We appreciate the administration’s investigations into input costs,” Perdue says. “But investigations don’t do anything if they’re not followed by enforcement, and they don’t do anything if we don’t learn what came out of those investigations.”

Groups like the Texas Corn Producers Association have been raising concerns about fertilizer market concentration for years. Texas farmer Dee Vaughan says the organization began studying the issue in 2020, working with the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M to examine pricing trends.

“We’ve been very concerned about all of our input costs, but specifically fertilizer, because it’s the one that just keeps going up almost exponentially,” Vaughan says.

He adds those studies found a shift in how fertilizer prices are determined . Historically tied closely to natural gas costs, the study found nitrogen fertilizer pricing began tracking corn prices more closely after 2010, a change Vaughan says reflects deeper structural issues.

According to Vaughan, the small number of firms controlling the market have the data and market awareness to price inputs based on farmers’ revenue potential, rather than production costs.

“They all have economists on staff,” Vaughan says. “They know exactly what our costs are, what our income is, and they’re able to extract value based on what they see as the gross income of a farmer. It’s not based on cost of production any longer.”

The Scoop Podcast: A Voice For the Industry

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 18:18:36 GMT

During its annual fly-in, more than 120 Agricultural Retailers Association members visited 130 congressional offices to promote ARA’s policy priorities. ARA took its priorities to Capitol Hill to push for a Farm Bill finish line and fixes that affect retailers’ day-to-day operations—especially transportation rules, trade uncertainty, and biofuels policy.

“Being engaged, having a voice for the industry is critically important,” says Richard Gupton, ARA’s senior vice president of public policy.

Those policies span the Farm Bill, transportation, trade, labor and more.

The fly-in occurred on the same day of the scheduled markup session for the Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2026 (the skinny Farm Bill). And Gupton joined The Scoop podcast to give a recap, a policy outlook, and more than a handful of reasons for retailers to stay engaged in advocacy.

Gupton is encouraged by the bipartisan support of the Farm Bill through the House Agriculture Committee, and he expects the senate version to be similar.

Regarding transportation, Gupton says retailers need drivers to help move products to farmer customers—a key service provided in their business. The seasonal CDL program was started in 1992, which provides the ability to hire drivers on a temporary basis during peak times of the year. However, updates are needed.

“Congressman Tracy Mann, a Republican of Kansas, and Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas, Republican, have introduced identical bills to address issues with the heavier trucks, heavier pickup trucks and trailers,” Gupton says. “The technology over time has gotten actually better and safer to haul these products. But the weight of those trailers and truck combinations has also gotten over 26,000 pounds and that makes it potentially considered a Class A vehicle, where you need a Class A CDL. The seasonal ag CDL was set up for only for what they call Class B drivers. And so, for decades, it hadn’t been an issue until these heavier trailers and trucks hauling the same amount of products.”

Gupton says the bills will provide for regulatory clarity and update the language to modern equipment and needs.

Other policy highlights from the conversation include:

Trade, tariffs and supply chain
MAHA
Energy and year-round E15
The Executive Order on domestic glyphosate production

At the end of the fly-in, ARA’s Board of Directors met with six Trump Administration senior officials:

Justin Schwab, the General Counsel for the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
Ambassador Julie Callahan, the Ambassador to the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and Chief Agricultural Negotiator of the United States
Courtney Knupp, the Senior Advisor to United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Deputy Secretary and the Senior Policy Advisor to USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins for Trade and Food Safety
Kelsey Barnes, the Senior Advisor to the USDA Secretary for Rural Development, Biofuels, and Research, Education, and Economics
Kyle Kunkler, the Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Calley Means, the Senior Advisor to U.S. Health and Human Services Department (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy

“We covered a lot of ground in a few hours at the White House meeting. But it was a productive discussion, a frank discussion, let’s put it that way, to make sure that our members and the ag retailers’ voices are heard,” Gupton says.

Advocacy Is Ongoing

“You can take action on the Farm Bill; we urgently need support, and our members and industry to weigh in with their lawmakers,” Gupton says. “The MAHA movement is certainly weighing in, so we need to weigh on that. Weigh in on the E15 year-round legislation and Congressman Mann’s and Senator Moran’s seasonal CDL bill.”

House Ag Committee Starts Farm Bill Mark Up

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 16:24:42 GMT

The push to get a five-year farm bill has been renewed in the House Ag Committee as Chairman G.T. Thompson released language and mark up began on Tuesday.

One Big Beautiful Bill Omits Farm Bill Titles

While some question why a new long term farm bill is needed, a cross section of the nation’s farm groups explain the bill did not cover all the titles normal included in a long-term farm bill.

“We had a lot of the provisions of the farm bill that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill — the increase in reference prices, some changes and improvements to crop insurance, etc. But there’s still some really important aspects of the farm bill that need to be passed,” says Steve Censky, chief executive officer of the American Soybean Association.

Sam Kieffer, chief executive officer of the National Association of Wheat Growers, points out the One Big Beautiful Bill did not touch the conservation title or reauthorize programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Nor did the legislation deal with credit or expand farm loan limits.

“It is time to give our folks some certainty when it comes to conservation programs, when it comes to credit. The cost of doing business is drastically different than it was in 2018. And the 2018 Farm Bill was based off of data from three, four years prior. So, we want to make sure that we improve the credit section of of the farm bill, get that finished,” Kieffer says.

Farm Safety Net Needed

Kieffer adds a farm bill is also needed to provide certainty to farmers and offer a farm safety net in times of negative margins.

“There’s three years of market loss that our growers are struggling with at the moment, and they’re making hard decisions. Some of them are reducing acres, some of them are letting land go and there’s a price to be paid for that as well,” Kieffer says.

House Ag Committee Language Includes Prop 12 Ag Labeling Uniformity Act

Chairman Thompson’s farm bill language includes a Ag Labeling Uniformity Act, which covers pesticide registrations, according to Censky.

“Which means that the EPA is going to have preeminence when they make a health and safety determination of a pesticide, a crop protection product. You can’t have a state adopt different rules,” Censky says.

The House language also includes a national fix to California’s strict Prop 12 sow production standards and the possible patchwork of rules in other states.

However, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) would lose around $1 billion in budget authority over the next four fiscal years under the House Agriculture Committee’s GOP farm bill draft, according to calculations by the Congressional Budget Office. EQIP was essentially used as a funding source for other priorities in the legislation.

Include Food for Peace Program

Kieffer says NAWG also wants Congress to move the Food for Peace Program to USDA in the language of the Farm Bill.

“USDA knows how to deal with farm commodities. USDA is already in the business of engaging in food aid programs globally. They have the infrastructure. They have the personnel and they understand agriculture. So, the farm bill that is ready to be moved in the house here soon has a provision that would include that,” Kieffer adds.

Senate Preparing for Farm Bill Mark Up

While the Senate Agriculture Committee has not released farm bill language or scheduled a mark-up, chairman John Boozman told Agri-Pulse his committee will take up a farm bill of its own in the coming months. Timing will be dependent in part on how debate over a House version proceeds.

Will Congress Pass a Farm Bill?

Still there’s uncertainty about the appetite for passage of a farm bill in Congress according to Tim Lust, chief executive officer of National Sorghum Producers.

“A lot of these details honestly have been negotiated for a year or two, and it’s maybe little tweaks to them, but a lot of the main things haven’t really changed. It’s a matter of how do we get that across the finish line and find a way to get it signed into law?” he says.

USDA Ag Outlook: Farm Economy 'Making Progress' in 2026, But Headwinds Persist

Thu, 19 Feb 2026 22:03:53 GMT

For the first time in several years, the heavy cloud of skyrocketing production costs is beginning to lift, according to USDA chief economist Justin Benavidez. Speaking at USDA’s 102^nd annual Agricultural Outlook Forum on Thursday , Benavidez unveiled a 2026 forecast that suggests “progress is being made,” even as the row-crop sector navigates a significant transition in acreage and a shifting policy landscape.

After his outlook, Farm Journal had the chance to speak one-on-one with the new USDA chief economist. When asked his biggest takeaway from the outlook on the ag economy, he was positive about progress.

“I think the big story for this year is that progress is being made,” Benavidez says. “Obviously, we are not out of the woods in terms of cost of production, in terms of finding higher prices through new sources of demand, but we are making progress.”

USDA Ag Outlook Forum

(Lori Hayes)

Costs: Finally Turning a Modest Corner?

After multiple years of relentless increases, USDA now forecasts production expenses to moderate. Benavidez points to a key inflection point: inflation-adjusted costs.

“We’ll see cost of production moderate for the first time in several years,” he says. “When adjusted for inflation, total cost of production will decline marginally.”

That doesn’t mean every farmer will see lower costs in 2026.

“Certain producers are obviously going to see that nominal cost still go up marginally, in the neighborhood of 1% on average,” he adds.

Behind the recent volatility, Benavidez says, lies a longer-term structural issue.

“We are still working very hard to get out of what is really a 15-year discrepancy in that cost of production and price received for crops,” he says. “We’ve had some black swan events that have masked a long-term gap in cost of production and price received.”

Closing that gap will require more than cost control. Benavidez says it will require more sources of demand.

The Biggest Wild Cards

If there is one factor that could significantly alter the 2026 outlook, Benavidez says it is biofuels policy.

“I’m going to be watching closely to see what happens with the RFS debate as well as [the] 45Z rule,” he says.

The 45Z Clean Fuel Production Credit provides tax incentives to refiners, increasing derived demand for feedstocks such as corn, soybeans and potentially canola. USDA is working on flexible feedstock provisions that could further influence farm-level incentives.

“It provides a tax credit to refiners of those biofuels, and then that increases a derived demand for some of the biofuel input products, like corn, beans and canola,” he explains.

At the same time, negotiations around the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and E15 could reshape demand expectations.

“That could really impact both the demand for corn and for beans, depending on where the RFS and that debate over E15 winds up going,” Benavidez says.

However, he notes the timing of these policies is critical, which is why he considers them the biggest wild cards he’s watching.

“If those changes and updates happen prior to planting, we could see a significant change in what the acreage forecast looks like, as well as what the price forecast looks like.”

The ripple effects could extend beyond Washington.

“We know that in some places where you might swap into planting soybeans, you’re more favorable toward cotton,” he says. “We might see that if one of the policies on the biofuels side goes into place that favors soybeans a little bit more, we might see a reduction in cotton acres — or the opposite could be the case for corn.”

The Numbers You Need to Know

USDA Ag Outlook Forum Acreage Projections

(Lori Hayes )

According to Pro Farmer, the highlights from USDA’s Grains and Oilseeds outlook released on Thursday include:

Corn yield is projected at 183 bu. per acre, producing a 15.8 billion bushel corn crop, down about 7% from 2025. USDA says the yield projection “assumes normal planting progress and summer growing season weather.”
Total corn supplies are forecast at 17.9 billion bushels, down from the record of 18.6 billion in 2025/26.
Total U.S. corn use for 2026-27 is forecast to decline about 2% on lower domestic use and exports.
Food, seed and industrial is flat at 7.0 billion bushels.
Corn used for ethanol is forecast at 5.6 billion bushels, based on expectations of essentially unchanged motor gasoline consumption and exports.
Feed and residual use is down about 3% to 6.0 billion bushels on lower supplies.
Exports are down 200 million bushels to 3.1 billion. “U.S. global trade share is expected to decline slightly on larger competitor exports from South America and modest global demand growth,” USDA says.
Ending stocks are projected at 1.8 billion bushels, down 290 million from a year ago and resulting in stocks relative to use at 11.4%, down from 2025-26 but higher than the most recent 5-year average of about 10.8%.
The season-average corn price received by producers is forecast up 10¢ to $4.20 per bushel.

USDA’s projected corn acreage for 2026 released during the 2026 Ag Outlook Forum.

(Lori Hayes )

Soybeans and Stronger Profit Potential?

USDA says the projected rise in soybean acres reflects “stronger profitability compared to other crops, along with expected crop rotations across the Corn Belt and the Delta.”

Assuming normal weather conditions, yields are expected to average 53.0 bu. per acre, leading to a 188-million-bushel increase to production to 4.45 billion bushels.
U.S. soybean crush is projected to rise by 85 million bushels, reaching 2.655 billion, supported by rising soybean meal and oil demand.
Given normal weather, oilseed meal supplies are expected to be ample in 2026-27, keeping soybean meal prices relatively flat with the prior marketing year at $300 per short ton.
U.S. soybean exports for 2026-27 are projected at 1.7 billion bushels, a recovery from the 2025-26 forecast of 1.58 billion bushels (or 42.9 million tons).
Exports for the 2025-26 marketing year are forecast to decline to the lowest level in 13 years. Accounting for a record-low share of just 23% of global soybean trade, USDA says tariff measures curtailed shipments to China, the largest export destination for the U.S., which imported an average 28.7 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans during the 2021-22 through 2023-24 marketing years. Argentina’s temporary elimination of export taxes last September also led to a counter-seasonal surge in exports in November, further impacting U.S. market share globally, USDA adds.
Soybean ending stocks for 2026-27 are projected at 355 million bushels, nearly flat with the 2025-26 forecast.
The season-average farm price is projected at $10.30 per bushel, marginally higher than the prior marketing year.

USDA’s projected soybean acreage for 2026 released during the 2026 Ag Outlook Forum.

(Lori Hayes)

Benavidez says USDA’s price forecast is for marginal improvements, but he notes headwinds are still in the forecast.

Acreage Shifts: Fewer Corn Acres, More Soybeans

One of the more closely watched projections from USDA is a 5 million acre decline in corn plantings and an increase in soybean acreage to 85 million. The corn reduction is roughly 1 million acres larger than some private trade forecasts.

“There’s always discrepancy in forecasts, right?” Benavidez says, noting the projections are early-season estimates.

He says it’s important to note USDA’s World Agricultural Outlook Board evaluates multiple variables when looking at acreage forecasts this early.

“They’re looking into factors, obviously the soy-to-corn price ratio, which is trending toward more bean acres relative to previous years,” he explains. “We’re getting close back to that 10-year average of the ratio between soy and corn price, which trends toward a little bit more bean acreage this year when compared to corn.”

USDA’s projected acreage for 2026 released during the 2026 Ag Outlook Forum.

(Lori Hayes)

Global and domestic stocks also play into the equation. Ultimately, he says it boils down to where producers think they will make the highest net return.

Total principal crop acres are forecast to decline about 1.5 million acres. However, shifts among crops could offset some of that.

“Our principal crops will see about a 1.5 million acre decline in terms of total acres planted,” Benavidez says. “But the mix of other acres is going to moderate some of that acreage decline a little bit.”

He pointed to cotton as one example, but he notes regional impacts are harder to pin down at this stage.

“It will vary across the country,” he says. “But regional specifics — I think this is very early to be talking about regional specifics.”

Cotton: Sustained Headwinds

Among the major crops, cotton faces some of the most persistent structural challenges.

“You know, we do look at the cotton complex as something that is facing sustained headwinds,” Benavidez says.

He acknowledges recent gains in net cash farm income for cotton producers, attributing part of that improvement to policy support. But globally, competition remains intense.

“There’s a lot of increased production in Brazil that is competing with our exports from the United States,” he says. “They have, in some cases, a lower cost of production than our producers here in the United States.”

Long-term consumption trends also weigh on the sector, as he notes the long-term trend toward more synthetic fiber and flat demand for cotton fibers is a headwind the cotton industry is going to face long term.

“The cotton complex is one that I certainly do think that I’ll pay a lot of attention to this year,” he says.

Trade: A Global Balance Sheet Approach

USDA’s outlook also includes China’s commitment to purchase 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans annually through 2028. But Benavidez emphasizes USDA does not model trade strategy; it models global supply and demand.

“As an economist, we don’t really focus on what the strategy is in terms of making those decisions,” he says.

Instead, the World Agricultural Outlook Board looks at total global demand and total global supply.

“If China or any other partner has demand for a certain amount of bean imports, that’s going to offset any readjustment in trade with other partners throughout the globe,” he explains. “We balance that with global supply and build a market picture based on those two factors.”

Attendees say some sessions during the 2026 Ag Outlook Forum were standing room only.

(Farm Journal )

Fewer Headwinds — But Not Clear Skies

The overarching theme of Benavidez’s 2026 outlook is cautious optimism.

“We are not out of the woods, but we are making progress,” he says.

With moderating costs, modest price gains and potential demand expansion through biofuels, the farm economy may finally be seeing some easing pressure. Yet structural imbalances, global competition and policy uncertainty remain central forces shaping the year ahead.

No Pulled Punches: Mike Tyson, Federal Leaders Target Processed Food in New Dietary Guidelines

Thu, 12 Feb 2026 14:28:10 GMT

At a Feb. 11 press conference about the implementation of the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins framed the new guidance around a simple directive: Eat real food.

With speakers ranging from physicians and chefs to military leaders, prison officials and former heavyweight boxing champion Mike Tyson, the event positions fresh, minimally processed foods — including fruits, vegetables, seafood and whole proteins — as central to reversing what Kennedy calls “the defining health crisis of our time.”

A Shift Toward Whole Foods

Calley Means, a senior adviser to Kennedy, opened the event by criticizing decades of federal policy that he says steered dollars toward highly processed foods through programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and school meals.

“We must get to whole food,” he says, arguing that chronic disease and rising health care costs are tied to the modern American diet.

Joe Gebbia, U.S. chief design officer, says the new food pyramid flips the script, placing “high-quality protein, dairy, healthy fats, vibrant vegetables and fruits” at the forefront, with whole grains as the foundation and “highly processed junk” clearly identified.

That message was echoed repeatedly: Nutrient-dense, minimally processed foods, such as fresh produce, are no longer peripheral recommendations but rather are central to federal guidance.

Pictured is American Medical Association President Bobby Mukkamala.

(Screenshot via Dietary Guidelines for Americans press conference)

‘Food Is Medicine’

American Medical Association President Bobby Mukkamala connects the new guidelines directly to prevention.

“Choosing protein-rich whole foods while limiting heavily processed foods that are high in sodium and added sugar can help slow or reverse our nation’s growing chronic disease burden,” he says.

He calls the guidelines “a conversation starter and a call to action” and emphasizes the growing movement within medicine to recognize that “food is medicine.”

For the produce industry, the remarks reinforce an expanding role for fruits and vegetables not just in dietary advice but also in clinical conversations, public health strategy and federal procurement.

Pictured is chef Andrew Gruel.

(Screenshot via Dietary Guidelines for Americans press conference)

Chefs Champion Accessibility and American Agriculture

Chef Andrew Gruel underscored that real food is not only healthier but also affordable and widely available. He described a full day of meals built around eggs, fruit, vegetables, seafood and whole cuts of meat that he says could be prepared for $15 to $20 per day.

“Real food is wholesome food. Food is nutritious food. It’s also sustainable food,” he says, adding that the U.S. food supply chain — including produce, ranching and seafood — is “the best of any other country in the world.”

His comments place farmers, ranchers and produce providers at the center of the health conversation.

Mike Tyson speaks at the Dietary Guidelines for Americans press conference.

(Screenshot via Dietary Guidelines for Americans press conference)

Boxing Legend’s Personal Testimony

Tyson provided one of the event’s most emotional moments, speaking candidly about his past struggles with obesity and self-image.

“I was so fat and nasty, I would eat anything. I was like 345 pounds — a quart of ice cream every hour. I had so much self-hate when I was like that, I just wanted to kill myself,” he says.

Tyson connects his transformation to dietary change and sharply criticizes the role of processed foods in the U.S. food system.

“We’re the most powerful country in the world, and we have the most obese, fudgy people,” he says. “Something has to be done about processed food in this country.”

Tyson’s appearance, along with a campaign that aired during the Super Bowl , “Processed food kills. Eat Real Food,” was positioned as a cultural push to normalize fresh, whole ingredients over packaged, ultraprocessed products.

Federal Procurement as a Market Driver

Rollins emphasizes that USDA’s scale gives it leverage to shift demand.

“Every day, the U.S. Department of Agriculture spends almost $400 million on our 16 nutrition programs,” she says, calling that spending “a market mover.”

She points to 18 approved state SNAP waivers removing soda and junk food from eligibility and says updated stocking standards will require retailers accepting SNAP benefits to expand healthy offerings.

Rollins also announced new guidance encouraging child nutrition program leaders to incorporate the updated dietary recommendations, with a proposed school meals rule expected this spring.

Kennedy says the administration is “redirecting government procurement dollars toward American farmers and not junk food manufacturers,” adding that the guidelines will influence food served in schools, the military, prisons and other federal institutions.

Beyond Schools: Military and Prisons

Military and correctional facility leaders shared how nutrition changes are already underway.

Army Undersecretary Mike Obadal says the military branch is increasing access to “lean proteins and complex carbohydrates” and streamlining procurement of “local unprocessed foods” and “fresh American seafoods and produce.”

Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall says dietary reform aligns with safety and rehabilitation goals, citing research linking improved diet quality to reductions in aggression and disciplinary infractions.

For produce suppliers, these institutional shifts represent potential long-term demand growth across large-volume federal channels.

Cultural Reset

Kennedy frames the guidelines as a turning point.

“For the first time in our nation’s history, the federal government put real food at the center of the American diet and protein in the center of the American plate,” he says.

Rollins distills the message further: “Eat real food.”

For the fresh produce industry, the rollout signals more than a revised pyramid. It suggests an alignment of federal policy, medical advocacy, cultural messaging and procurement dollars around whole fruits, vegetables and minimally processed foods — positioning fresh as foundational to national health strategy through 2030 and beyond.

A Crisis of Confidence: Inside the Ag Economy and How Farmers Are Preparing for What’s Next

Wed, 11 Feb 2026 15:11:32 GMT

If there is one word that defines the U.S. agricultural economy in early 2026, it’s confidence, or more precisely, the lack of it. It’s not just an eroding confidence in data, but declining confidence in policy and whether the traditional tools used to stabilize farm income still work.

The first Farm Journal Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor of 2026, coupled with input from producers and ag retailers, reveals an industry that broadly agrees it is in trouble, but sharply disagrees on why, who should fix it and how farmers will survive it.

Across the economists, farmers and retailers surveyed, the results paint a picture of a crop sector stuck in recession, magnified by the squeeze caused by high input costs and low commodity prices.

Factors Driving the Health of the Ag Economy Today

Economists in January’s survey pointed to a familiar but intensifying split in the ag economy: strength in livestock, particularly beef cattle, versus persistent financial stress across much of the row-crop sector. Tight cattle supplies and strong global demand for animal protein continue to support profitability in the livestock sector, even as economists warn that future prospects remain uncertain. At the same time, global surpluses of corn, soybeans and wheat, combined with weak export demand for certain commodities, are weighing heavily on crop prices.

(January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor)

Across nearly all responses, margin pressure emerged as a dominant concern. Elevated input costs, rising interest rates and tightening access to operating loans are pushing break-even costs above market prices for many producers, especially in grain production.

Economists repeatedly cited policy uncertainty, ranging from trade relations to biofuels policy, as a pivotal factor. While government assistance and expectations of additional ad hoc payments are providing some near-term relief, many note those funds are largely being used to service debt rather than reinvest in operations, underscoring ongoing liquidity challenges in farm country.

In the anonymous survey, when asked the two factors driving the health of the ag economy today, the economists said:

“Continued strength in the cattle business and that the world is awash in corn, wheat and soybeans.”
“Cost-price margins: Agriculture’s economic health is being driven first by whether commodity prices are high enough to cover still-elevated input, labor and operating costs.”
“Policy uncertainty hurting export demand and biofuels demand — cattle receipts providing lucrative returns but with uncertain future prospects.”
“Break-even costs above market prices, demand uncertainty on multiple fronts.”
“Persistent high input costs and uncertainty regarding trade, particularly trade with China.”
“Access to operating loans and the amount of debt producers are carrying from the previous two years of down revenue.”
“Positives include strong beef cattle margins and relatively stable land prices; negatives are burdensome crop supplies, high input prices and very low liquidity.”

A Crop Sector in Recession By Consensus

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

On the state of the economy itself, there is little debate:

76% of economists say the U.S. crop sector is in a recession.
74% of producers agree.
More than 76% of economists believe conditions are worse than a year ago.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Economists warn this environment is accelerating consolidation, with 72% expecting low prices and high costs to push weaker operations out of the market with 80% of retailers saying it will increase consolidation in the industry.

When you look at what’s preventing profitability, high input costs remain the dominant hurdle for producers:

67% of producers cite input prices as their biggest obstacle.
62% of economists agree that high input costs are a hurdle for farmers in 2026.

Sticky costs for fertilizer, labor, interest rates and materials, combined with soft commodity prices, have pushed many producers to sell at or below break-even.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

“Maximum Is Rarely Optimum:” How Farmers Say They’ll Stay Alive and Competitive in 2026

When asked a simple but heavy question: “What can you do to be successful in 2026,” farmers didn’t sugarcoat the challenge. Their answers reflect pressure, fatigue and uncertainty. But underneath the blunt language is a clear, consistent strategy emerging across operations: protect cash, defend ROI and stay flexible long enough to outlast the cycle.

While several producers said they’re looking to diversify as a key to success, the most dominant theme was cutting costs to the bone, especially when it comes to capital spending. Farmers repeatedly emphasized zero, or near-zero, capex, delaying equipment upgrades and scrutinizing every purchase.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

The mindset is not panic, but discipline. In this month’s survey, farmers said the key to success is:

“Zero capital spending or as close to zero as possible.”
“Don’t buy anything that isn’t absolutely necessary.”
“Hold off on major capital expenditures.”
“Ask yourself before you purchase something, is it a want or a need. Wants can break you fast.”

Many farmers framed this as a return to fundamentals: preserving working capital, maintaining flexibility, and avoiding irreversible decisions in an uncertain margin environment.

The Federal Aid Gap: Band-Aid or Lifeline?

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Few issues expose the disconnect between economists and producers more clearly than federal aid.

There is broad agreement on one point: Ad hoc farm payments are not a long-term solution. Just under 60% of both economists and producers describe them as “a Band-Aid that won’t heal the wound.”

January 2025 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Beyond that, thoughts on federal aid differ.

51% of producers believe more than $20 billion in additional aid is required to stabilize the ag economy.
28% of economists believe no additional aid is needed at all while the remainder are split across ranges from $11 billion to $20 billion.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

This gap matters because it directly influences behavior. Both groups agree that government policy will be a major driver of planting decisions in 2026, with a clear bias toward corn . Expectations around payments, programs and biofuels demand are shaping acres before a seed ever goes in the ground.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Biofuels: One Industry, Two Visions of Salvation

No policy area reveals the philosophical divide between “on the ground” agriculture and “on the spreadsheet” analysis more clearly than biofuels. Producers want more demand now, whereas economists are looking five to 10 years out.

Producers and retailers overwhelmingly prioritize E15 expansion, viewing it as the single fastest way to generate real, immediate demand for corn and reduce reliance on government support.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

Economists, while supportive of E15, are more focused on structural, longer-term demand drivers, particularly:

45Z tax credit
Development of Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) markets

Among economists, 39% ranked the 45Z tax credit as the most impactful policy, while SAF ranked much higher than it did among producers where 44% ranked SAF as least impactful.

The Collapse of Trust in USDA Data

USDA’s January Crop Production Report was a point of contention last month. With much debate about the validity of the latest yield, acreage and production data from USDA, Farm Journal’s January survey results is the near-universal erosion of trust in USDA data, not only among producers, but also economists and retailers.

68% of economists say they are not as confident in USDA reporting as they were in the past.
73% of producers agree.
78% of retailers say their confidence in USDA has waned.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

For economists, the concern centers on revisions, lagging indicators and the challenge of modeling markets amid policy uncertainty. For producers, the distrust is far more emotional and personal. Open-ended responses frequently referenced “market manipulation,” “bearish curveballs” and a sense that official numbers no longer reflect what’s happening at the farm gate.

In a market environment already defined by thin margins, the loss of confidence in baseline data further complicates marketing, risk management and lending decisions. When trust in the numbers erodes, so does the ability to plan.

Political Support Remains, But Confidence Is Slipping

One year into the Trump administration, producers remain broadly supportive of the president. But confidence in Washington’s ability to improve the ag economy is fading.

52% of economists say they are less confident the administration can improve agriculture.
44% of producers report declining confidence as well.

January 2026 Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

The divide between the groups is notable. Only 8% of economists feel more confident than a year ago, while 34% of producers say their confidence has increased, suggesting optimism on the farm still exists, even as economists grow more skeptical.

Trade uncertainty, shifting biofuels policy signals and questions about the future of ad hoc aid have all contributed to a sense that political alignment does not automatically translate into economic relief.

Strategy vs. Survival

Where the survey becomes most revealing is in the open-ended responses about survival. Economists see a severe but cyclical downturn. Many producers see a structural breaking point.

Economists speak the language of optimization. Their recommendations include:

Margin-first decision-making
Defensive marketing
Strategic planning
Focusing on high-productivity acres
Driving down per-unit input costs

Producers speak the language of survival, saying the key to weathering this story will be:

“Find an off-farm job”
“Send my spouse back to work”
“Sell out”

Some responses went further, referencing bankruptcy and financial collapse, a level of personal desperation absent from economists’ professional analysis.

One producer wrote: “I am facing financial crisis and homelessness … in the worst financial situation ever.”

An economist, by contrast, said: “Key to profitability lies in driving input costs down… a shift from maximizing inputs to optimization.”

Navigating 2026: From Maximum Yield to Maximum ROI

Despite the pressure, confidence in farmers themselves remains surprisingly strong.

Between 62% and 80% of respondents believe producers will find a way through, by abandoning the long-held pursuit of maximum yield in favor of maximum return on investment.

January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

How that transition looks will vary, according to economists and producers, including:

More defensive marketing
Reduced input intensity
Greater scrutiny of every acre
More off-farm income
Tough conversations with lenders

The 2026 ag economy will not be defined by a single policy fix or market rally. It will be shaped by trust, or the lack of it, by how quickly demand can be grown without government intervention and by how much pain producers can absorb before the structure of the industry permanently changes.

Bottom Line for the Ag Industry

The U.S. ag economy enters 2026 in a clear crop-sector recession, but the deeper crisis is one of confidence. High input costs, weak prices, policy uncertainty and eroding trust in data have pushed many producers from planning for profitability into fighting for survival. Economists largely view the downturn as cyclical and manageable through optimization, while farmers experience it as a structural stress test on their operations and livelihoods.

How 2026 ultimately unfolds will depend less on short-term aid and more on rebuilding trust, growing demand without permanent government support and farmers’ ability to preserve cash, adapt quickly and endure a prolonged margin squeeze.

One Big Beautiful Bill Might Force Farmers to Rethink Farm Business Structures

Tue, 10 Feb 2026 15:02:09 GMT

At a time when farm income is under growing pressure, the One Big Beautiful Bill is reshaping the farm safety net in ways that go well beyond bigger checks or better crop insurance coverage. According to Farm CPA Paul Neiffer, the legislation could quietly push producers toward fundamental changes in how their farm businesses are structured, decisions that could have long-term implications for taxes, payments, and succession planning.

While the bill was signed into law in July of 2025, there’s still guidance that needs to be set before farmers can make vital decisions. And some of the most favorable changes- like to crop insurance coverage- won’t go into effect until late this year.

While much of the early conversation around the bill has focused on higher reference prices and stronger crop insurance subsidies, during the 2026 Top Producer Summit, Neiffer told attendees the real impact may not be fully understood yet, and farmers should be paying close attention.

“This bill changes the rules we’ve all been operating under for the last 20 years,” Neiffer says. “And when the rules change, the structure of the farm suddenly matters a lot more than it used to.”

Financial Stress Is Already Building in Farm Country

The bill arrives against a backdrop of tightening farm finances. USDA’s updated net farm income forecast showed a sharper-than-expected decline for 2025 , with early projections for 2026 offering little comfort, particularly for row-crop producers, a trend doesn’t surprise Neiffer.

“It peaked out in 2022, and it’s definitely been going down ever since,” he explains. “If you’re a row-crop farmer, 2026 is probably going to look a lot like 2025 unless something changes on the price side.”

While government payments will help stabilize income, Neiffer is blunt about what would happen without them.

“Without ARC, PLC, the FSA payments, the SDRP top-ups, without all of that, most row crop farmers would absolutely be struggling right now,” he says.

Payments tied to the One Big Beautiful Bill are expected to start flowing in October, providing a critical backstop during a period when margins remain thin and balance sheets are tightening across large parts of the country.

Crop Insurance: One of the Bill’s Biggest Wins

Neiffer gives the crop insurance provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill high marks , calling them one of the clearest positives for producers.

“I’d give it a B-plus to A-minus,” says Neiffer.

Why such a high grade? The bill boosts premium subsidies across most revenue protection levels:

Coverage levels from 55% to 75% receive a 5 percentage-point increase in premium subsidies.
80% and 85% coverage levels see a 3 percentage-point increase.
Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) now extends up to 90% coverage, and farmers can now pair ARC with SCO, something previously prohibited.
SCO subsidies jump from 65% to 80%, making higher coverage far more affordable.

For many producers, especially wheat growers, these changes significantly reduce out-of-pocket costs while expanding protection.

Beginning farmers also receive a major boost. Previously limited to a 10% premium subsidy bump for five years, the bill expands the benefit to 10 years, with even higher subsidies in the early years.

“For young farmers, it can now make financial sense to farm on their own instead of with their parents,” Neiffer said. “From a family standpoint, they’re actually going to make more money.”

Prevent Plant Still a Pain Point

Not everything is a win. One of the main reasons Neiffer doesn’t give the crop insurance changes a straight A is because of changes to prevent plant, something that remains a concern, especially in high-risk regions like Arkansas and the Dakotas.

Under previous rules, farmers could buy up an additional 10% of coverage. That was later reduced to 5%, and Neiffer says USDA’s Risk Management Agency is still discussing cutting or eliminating that option entirely.

“That extra 5% really matters when you’ve got too much water,” he said.

While not enough to outweigh the bill’s positives, the issue drags down what could otherwise be a near-perfect crop insurance package.

Beginning Farmers See Expanded Incentives

The bill also significantly expands benefits for beginning farmers, extending premium subsidy incentives from five years to ten , while also increasing the subsidy percentages in the early years.

“Before, they got a 10% bump, but only for five years,” Neiffer says. “Now it’s 15% in years one and two, 13% in year three, 11% in year four, and 10% all the way through year ten.”

That change, he says, could alter how farm families bring the next generation into the operation.

“For a lot of young farmers, it may actually make more sense financially to farm on their own instead of farming with their parents,” Neiffer says. “If they’re part of the parents’ operation, they may or may not qualify for those premium subsidies. On their own, they do.”

From a purely financial standpoint, Neiffer says some families could generate more income overall by restructuring how younger operators enter the business.

Prevent Plant Remains a Lingering Concern

Despite the positives, not every provision landed well with producers. Prevent plant coverage remains a contentious issue, particularly in regions prone to excess moisture.

“Under the old rules, you could buy up an extra 10% of prevent plant coverage,” Neiffer adds. “That got cut to 5%, and now RMA is still talking about cutting or eliminating that extra 5% altogether.”

For producers in places like Arkansas and the Dakotas, that reduction matters.

“When you’ve got too much water, that extra coverage helps mitigate a really bad situation,” he says. “Losing it would hurt.”

Even so, Neiffer says the overall crop insurance package remains strong.

“That’s really the only thing dragging it down just a little bit,” he said.

ARC and PLC Changes Offer Ongoing Protection

Beyond insurance, Neiffer points to ARC and PLC changes as one of the most important income stabilizers in the bill, especially because they are designed to work over time, not just in a single marketing year.

“The increase in reference prices and effective reference prices isn’t a one-shot deal,” he says. “It happens this year, it happens next year, and it keeps happening as long as prices stay depressed.”

The bill also includes what Neiffer describes as an “automatic put” built into ARC and PLC, designed to cushion farmers during prolonged periods of weak prices.

“That’s going to help smooth out income over multiple years, and right now, that’s exactly what farmers need,” says Neiffer.

The Structural Shift Farmers May Not Be Ready For

The most overlooked part of the One Big Beautiful Bill, and potentially what may be the most consequential part of the legislation, is how it changes payment limits tied to farm business structure.

Under old rules, LLCs and S corporations were often limited to a single payment cap. The new law shifts that framework, allowing multiple payment limits based on the number of equal owners , depending on how the operation is structured.

That opens the door to significant restructuring. According to Neiffer:

General partnerships may move to LLCs for liability protection and expanded payment eligibility.
C corporations, which remain stuck with a single payment limit, may convert to S corporations.
Some farms are already making the switch.

“I’ve talked to several farmers already that either have switched or will be switching,” Neiffer says. “And it’s completely because of the One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Still, he urges caution. USDA guidance on how these new rules will be applied has not yet been released.

“Before I tell anyone to change their structure, we need that guidance,” Neiffer says. “Otherwise, you risk unintended consequences that wipe out the benefit.”

A Note of Caution on Taxes and Spending

Neiffer also warns producers not to let tax provisions drive equipment purchases or expansion decisions.

“There are a lot of good tax provisions in this bill,” he said. “But farmers tend to get hooked on them.”

He points specifically to bonus depreciation as an area of concern.

“They go out and buy something just because they can deduct it,” he says. “If they finance it with debt, they don’t always think about what happens the next year, or the year after that, or the year after that.”

The result, he says, can be financial strain that lasts long after the tax benefit fades.

Guidance Still Needed Before Big Decisions

Despite the potential advantages of restructuring, Neiffer urges farmers to have patience. USDA guidance on how the new payment limit rules will be applied has not yet been released.

“Before I’m telling anybody to change their structure, we really need that guidance,” he says. “I worry about the law of unintended consequences, where we think the rule is going to work one way, and then something else kicks in and negates the benefit.”

Farmers were expecting clarity by the end of 2025. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re already almost to March,” Neiffer says. “But we should have it any day now.”

When it arrives, Neiffer believes it could prompt some of the most significant farm business decisions producers have faced in years , driven not just by markets, but by policy.

Inside the Room: What Farmers Heard as USDA Rolled Out Its $700M Regenerative Ag Plan

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 21:55:25 GMT

When USDA quietly selected a small group of farmers to help roll out a new $700 million regenerative agriculture pilot program, most producers never knew the meetings were happening. Missouri farmers Jon and Brittany Hemme did, because they were invited into the room, sitting face-to-face with two cabinet secretaries and hearing firsthand how Washington plans to reshape soil health policy.

“We are very average farmers,” Hemme says. “It was a very humbling experience that we were chosen. My biggest takeaway is that I truly believe they’re trying to do the right things, bringing better health options to people through the way food is produced.”

Reinventing a Small Dairy to Stay Viable

Jon is one of three Hemme brothers continuing a dairy operation their father started 30 years ago. Today, the Hemmes operate the only dairy left in Saline County. Survival hasn’t come easily. As small dairies disappeared, the Hemmes reinvented their business model, adding on-farm processing and direct-to-consumer sales.

“That’s where our direct market part of our business came in, the creamery,” Hemme says. “Being able to go to processing and then direct market that end product has made us a viable operation yet as a small dairy.”

Their Hemme Brothers cheeses are now sold throughout Kansas City and central Missouri, but what also caught the attention of USDA was how they manage their land.

“We started planting cover crops the first time in 2017, got really aggressive by 2018 to where we tried to have all of our acres covered in one way or another,” Hemme says.

That shift began at the request of a landlord nearly a decade ago. Hemme says it pushed him to learn what regenerative agriculture really meant and how it could pencil out.

“We initially started just looking to try to reduce inputs to where we could keep a little more of our income,” he says. “For quite a few years we managed them that way trying to reduce our herbicide and we were successful, but that takes a lot of time and management. Here recently we’ve kind of mainstreamed it to where the main reason for them is erosion control.”

A Text Message From USDA

That work that started nearly a decade ago led to an unexpected invitation from Washington.

“We got a text message on Dec. 8 saying: ‘Would you and Jon want to come to USDA and be a part of Secretary Rollins’ announcement?’” Brittany Hemme says. “Thought it was a joke maybe at first, because it was so random. But we were on a plane the next morning and then with them in D.C. on Dec. 10.”

In the midst of the madness of the holiday season and school activities for their kids, the Hemmes went ahead and said yes, knowing this could be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

A First-of-its-Kind $700 Million Pilot Program

Not knowing exactly what USDA was going to unveil, at the event, USDA and HHS announced what they call a first-of-its-kind, $700-million Regenerative Agriculture Pilot Program, administered through NRCS. The goal is to test a farmer-first model that improves soil health while maintaining long-term farm viability.

“We’re doing things a little bit differently than typical Washington, D.C.,” said U.S Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins during the announcement at USDA. “We have encouraged the states to think differently and creatively as our laboratories of innovation about how to solve the many health issues facing America ... but really today is about the next step in making America healthy again, and that is talking about regenerative agriculture.”

During thee announcement, Rollins said the focus of USDA and HHS for the new pilot program was on protecting soil and is critical for farm productivity and longevity.

“Protecting and improving the health of our soil is critical not only for the future viability of farmland, but to the future success of American farmers,” she said. “We must protect our top soil from unnecessary erosion and boost the microbiome of the soil.”

But it wasn’t just USDA unveiling the new program. Rollins was standing beside Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who called the program a milestone tied to promises outlined in the MAHA Report.

“Among the recommendations of the report was the promise to make it easier for farmers in this country, farmers who are dependent on chemical and fertilizer inputs, to give them an off-ramp,” Kennedy said in December. “An off-ramp where they can transition to a model that emphasizes soil health. And with soil health comes nutrient density.”

An ‘Off Ramp’ for Farmers

When “U.S. Farm Report” recently caught up with the Hemmes to get their reaction, Jon says one of the key takeaways from the announcement is the structure of the pilot program and why that matters.

“It’s a five-year program, a five-year contract,” he says. “You can address multiple things in the same contract that you want to address. The farmer gets to pick his goal. They’ll develop a plan to help them achieve that goal, and then they’re going to quantify it with a soil test up front and one at the end.”

Along with the announcement, the Hemmes then had the chance to take part in a closed-door roundtable discussion with Rollins, Kennedy and Dr. Mehmet Oz, who serves as administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under Kennedy.

“They notified us that we would be in a roundtable discussion with Secretary Kennedy, Secretary Rollins and Dr. Oz; that made us pretty nervous,” says Jon, laughing.

Brittany says one word stood out during that discussion.

“He said ‘off-ramp’ several times,” she says. “I really appreciated that, because this is voluntary. There’s nobody forcing anyone to do this program. It’s not all or nothing. You can work with USDA NRCS and come up with a plan that is going to work for you on your farm, in your context.”

With no cameras in the room, Hemme says the conversation felt genuine.

“They wanted some feedback from farmers,” he says. “They allowed us to each go down the line and explain our operations, our motivations behind using regenerative agriculture, and then they followed it up with some really good questions.”

Those questions included market access and how long the transition takes.

“You could see him, the wheels turning,” Hemme says of Kennedy.

What Was (And Wasn’t) Discussed

Before Kennedy joined the cabinet, some farmers worried his focus would be on restricting tools like glyphosate. The Hemmes say that never came up.

“It’s been more voluntary, putting something out there instead of coming in with a stick,” Jon says.

“There was mention of tools in the toolbox, and there was no mention of taking any of those tools away,” Brittany adds.

As Brittany has watched Jon’s regenerative journey on their own farm, she says regenerative agriculture is often misunderstood.

“Some of the negative connotation has come in from an all-or-nothing mindset,” she says. “They demonize certain tools in the toolbox, and that’s unfortunate. True regeneration is what works in your context.”

Lessons From Their Nearly Decade-Long Journey in Regenerative Ag

For Jon, this really isn’t unconventional or something new. He says regenerative ag, to him, all comes back to building resilience in your soil.

“It is conservation, but it’s also trying to build resilience into your soil,” he says. “If you follow the soil health principles, minimize disturbance, keep residue on the surface, a living root in the soil, you will start to build carbon. You’ll hold more water, perform better in dry conditions, and handle weather shifts.”

But in the nearly 10 years of diving into regenerative ag, Jon says that journey didn’t come without mistakes.

“I was very aggressive when I started out, and I kind of set myself back,” Hemme says. “If I were to give any advice, it would be to start slow and safe.”

He points specifically to cover crops. He says by trying to put cover crops on every acre at the start, he learned the hard way that if you let those cover crops get too tall, it can actually negatively impact crop production.

“If you’re too aggressive up front, you almost constipate your soil,” he says. “Eventually that residue has to leave.”

As the Hemmes say, they still want to pinch themselves over a trip that seemed like a dream, it was those direct conversations with President Donald Trump’s cabinet members that made them believe USDA’s support of regenerative ag will be a practical approach and one any farmer can try or do.

What else should you expect when it comes to regenerative ag? That’s exactly what “AgriTalk” Host Chip Flory asked Richard Fordyce, USDA Undersecretary for Farm Production and Conservation, just last week.

Trump Confirms Support for Year-Round E-15 Deal

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 23:18:12 GMT

President Donald Trump made a planned visit to Iowa — his first since July 2025 — on Tuesday, focusing on affordability, saying Iowa families are “winning” again under his leadership. Standing in front of a packed crowd in Clive, Iowa, with signs posted on the stage and scattered throughout the crowd that said “lower prices” and “bigger paychecks,” the visit unofficially kicked off the midterm elections where costs for consumers are expected to be one of the main political talking points.

While in Iowa, President Trump highlighted what the White House calls improving economic conditions for Iowa families, pointing to lower fuel prices, tax savings and agriculture-driven growth as signs the state is “winning again.” The President touted all the trade wins, including China buying soybeans and the EU agreeing to buy U.S. ethanol. He says by removing those trade barriers, exports are starting to flow to countries that had stopped buying U.S. ag goods before he took office.

But the reality is agriculture is at a crossroads, especially on the row crop side. Even with the recent trade deals, current economic pressures are creating a crisis in agriculture. Trump did briefly mention that crisis, blaming it on former President Joe Biden.

Trump Pushes Year-Round E15 During Iowa Visit

During his speech in Iowa, President Trump reaffirmed his campaign promise to support year-round E15, signaling a major win for corn growers and the ethanol industry.

“But I’m also working hard to expand your markets domestically,” Trump says. “In the campaign, I promised to support E15 all year round. I did. E15 all year round if I get elected, and I want to let you know, we’ll start right now.”

The statement sparked applause as Trump emphasized that efforts are underway in Congress to finalize approval, calling on House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Leader John Thune to deliver a deal that benefits farmers, consumers, and refiners, including small and mid-sized operations.

“I’m trusting Speaker Mike Johnson, who’s great, and Leader John Thune, who’s great, to find a deal that works. They’re very close to getting it done,” he says. “And I will sign it without delay.”

The president framed year-round E15 as a key part of his broader strategy to expand markets for U.S. corn, support rural communities, and strengthen domestic energy production.

🚨 BREAKING: President Trump announces Congress is actively working on a deal to allow E15 ALL YEAR ROUND that works for farmers, consumers, & refiners.

"Congress is working on a deal, and when they send it to my desk — I will sign it without delay."pic.twitter.com/TOpo3VUDI4
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 27, 2026

Trump Highlights “Historic Turnaround” for U.S. Manufacturing, Touts Deere’s Stock Hitting All-Time High

During his Iowa visit, President Trump touted what he called a historic one-year economic turnaround, pointing to manufacturing growth and new investments across the country.

“And America is respected all over the world like they’ve never been respected,” Trump says. “I thought it would take us two years. This has been the most dramatic one-year turnaround of any country in history in terms of the speed.”

Trump spotlighted John Deere as an example of American manufacturing success. He welcomed the company’s chairman at the event and praised the expansion of production facilities, including what he called two massive new plants.

“You’re opening one in North Carolina, one someplace else, and then you’re expanding all over the place. You’re doing a great job,” he says. “I bought a lot of John Deere stuff. Great country, great company, it’s an honor to have you here.”

The president attributed much of the growth to tariffs and economic policies aimed at attracting investment back to the U.S.

“It is because of tariffs and it is also because of the fact that we had such a tremendous November 5th. That November 5 brought spirit back to our country,” Trump says.

Trump then said that proof in the growth is in the stock market’s performance, including Deere stock hitting an all-time high of 529.51 on January 21, 2026.

But with strains in the farm economy, farm equipment sales saw a steep decline in 2025. Deere and Company, which has a large footprint in the Quad Cities and Des Moines, has laid off over 3,500 employees since October 2023. That downsizing, which the company says is driven by decreasing demand and lower sales, has hit the company’s manufacturing facilities hard, including locations in Waterloo and Ankeny.

John Deere Expands U.S. Manufacturing with Two New Facilities

President Trump highlighted John Deere’s plans to open two major U.S. facilities, marking a significant boost for American manufacturing and rural jobs. The president saying Deere’s decision was due to tariffs.

After the president’s remarks, the company sent out a press release, with John Deere announcing a major expansion with two new U.S. facilities coming soon to the U.S .

Dere says it will build:

A state-of-the-art distribution center near Hebron, Indiana, and a $70 million excavator factory in Kernersville, North Carolina, both set to open within the next year.
The North Carolina factory will bring excavator production back from Japan to the U.S., making John Deere the top domestic producer of excavators.

Together, Deere says the projects are expected to create hundreds of new American jobs, strengthen local economies, and advance John Deere’s commitment to $20 billion in U.S. manufacturing investments over the next decade.

John Deere executives emphasized the expansion as a continuation of their mission to “build America”, enhance innovation, and support the nation’s agriculture, construction, and manufacturing sectors.

The Strong Push for E15 to Help Turn The Ag Economy Around

As corn growers pressed for year-round E15 ahead of the president’s visit, ethanol advocates say the issue is no longer about executive action. It’s about Congress finishing the job.

Emily Skor, CEO of Growth Energy, says the Trump administration has already taken every step available to it through regulatory action.

Leading into Tuesday’s talk, biofuels leaders pushed for the president to focus on E15, saying rural America’s financial stress is colliding with a narrow policy window to get things like E15 done, and that could generate more demand, quickly changing the outlook for corn and soybean growers.

“What we hear from the team around the president is he did what he could,” Skor told Chip Flory during “AgriTalk” on Tuesday. “He issued an executive order. EPA gave us the summer waivers for last summer. We all know that what we need right now is an act of Congress.”

Skor says the White House wants lawmakers to deliver a bill that can be signed into law and end the seasonal E15 debate for good.

“The conversation has to be ‘Congress, do your job,’” she says. “The White House wants to see Congress get something done so they can bring a bill to his desk, so he can sign it and we can be done with this once and for all.”

That urgency is being echoed across agriculture, she says.

“I’ve got CEOs of all kinds of agriculture trade groups calling me saying: ‘What can we do to be helpful? We’ve got to get this done,’” Skor says. “All of agriculture is supportive of this.”

Iowa’s Reality: Corn Prices Below Cost of Production

Ahead of Trump’s second visit to Iowa in less than a year, corn growers and renewable fuels advocates used the moment to renew pressure for nationwide, year-round access to E15. Corn groups say the timing is critical, as lawmakers continue to stall on permanent E15 access despite strong Midwestern support. To make the push even more visible, Iowa Corn and the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) released an open letter on Tuesday , thanking the president for his past support of E15 and urging him to help push the policy across the finish line in Congress, while also running a full-page ad in Tuesday’s “Des Moines Register”.

ICGA and @iowafuel today released an open letter thanking @POTUS for his constant support of nationwide, year-round #E15 and asking for his help to finally push E15 access through Congress @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/cxACXijKMN
— Iowa Corn (@iowa_corn) January 26, 2026

According to the letter, corn growers across the country, and especially in Iowa, are struggling as prices remain well below the cost of production. That pressure, they say, is rippling through the broader state economy.

The groups cite recent data from the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank, which ranked Iowa 50th among states for economic growth. They say expanding E15 is one of the fastest ways to reverse that trend.

“The best way to boost corn prices and create meaningful market demand is the immediate authorization of nationwide, year-round E15,” the letter states.

After Trump’s announcement on Tuesday, saying a deal is close, Iowa Corn Growers Association Vice President and farmer from Knoxville, Iowa, Steve Kuiper, expressed Iowa Corn’s appreciation, while highlighting what this could mean for farmers at a critical time.

“Iowa’s corn growers appreciate President Trump shining light on E15 and recognizing the weight this legislation holds to us as corn growers. Farmers are struggling with low commodity prices, high input costs and lack of markets. Passage of year-round E15 is the lifeline many of us need to be able to continue farming,” says Kuiper. “A recent study by Iowa Corn and the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association shared the positive effects year-round E15 would mean for corn growers. This is a goal we have been working towards for over a decade and getting this issue to the president’s desk and across the finish line is a win we all desperately need. The fact that the President sees this problem and promises a solution is coming is very encouraging and valued by us as farmers.”

Fun fact: today when @realDonaldTrump referenced supporting year-round E15 on the campaign trail, that started on January 19, 2016 at the Iowa Renewable Fuels Summit, where he was a speaker.

The next Summit is on February 5th and is FREE and open to the public. You might want to… https://t.co/g0G57UWrbF
— Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (@iowafuel) January 28, 2026

Leading up to today’s statements by Trump, both Iowa Corn and Iowa Renewable Fuels reminded the Trump administration that year-round E15 would immediately expand domestic demand for corn at a time when farmers are under intense financial pressure. Even with the latest round of financial aid through the Farmer Bridge Assistance Program payments, 92% of agricultural economists surveyed in Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor said the row crop side of agriculture is in a recession. More than 90% said that will accelerate consolidation in agriculture — something Iowa agriculture is seeing firsthand.

Biofuels Seen as Economic Pressure Point and Opportunity

Kurt Kovarik, vice president of federal affairs at Clean Fuels Alliance America, appeared on “AgriTalk” before Trump’s talk on Tuesday. He says the group sent a letter to the president earlier this week urging the administration to focus on two immediate policy opportunities.

“We’re excited to see him head to Iowa,” Kovarik says. “We were briefed that the purpose of the conversation was to highlight economic opportunity, perhaps domestic energy dominance.”

Kovarik says Clean Fuels asked the administration to spotlight progress on renewable fuels, particularly finalizing renewable volume obligations under the Renewable Fuel Standard and issuing long-awaited guidance on the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit.

“I’m sure you’ve had a lot of conversations around E15 — that’s in the hands of Congress,” he says. “So, what we want to do is highlight for the president the EPA’s efforts to finalize the renewable volume obligations under the RFS as an opportunity to provide market certainty and growth for our industry, as well as finalizing the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit guidance, which we do not yet have.”

That certainty, Kovarik says, has been missing, and the consequences have been felt across rural America.

“Our industry had a really, really tough 2025,” he says. “Following a really great ’24, ’25 was really poor, as it was along the farm economy.”

He says the downturn wasn’t driven by demand alone, but by uncertainty around federal policy.

“It was a lack of profit, lack of margin, which meant reduced capacity,” Kovarik says. “In fact, we’ve had a lot of plants idling.”

After producing more than 5 billion gallons of clean fuels domestically in 2024, Kovarik says output dropped sharply in 2025. Plants across the industry operated at just 60% to 70% of capacity.

“In some cases that may be a plant dialing back to 80%,” he says. “In a lot of cases, particularly the smaller plants, maybe in Iowa, those that don’t produce their own feedstock came offline entirely.”

But it’s not just corn at a crossroads. He says that slowdown directly affects farm demand, especially for soybean oil.

“If our industry got those two things in the near term, we would flip around this industry nearly immediately,” Kovarik says. “Turn these plants back on, buy more soybean oil, add value to the soybean farmer and get this fuel to the consumer.”

Kovarik points to renewable volume obligations as a key pressure point. Under the Biden administration’s final three-year RFS rule, biomass-based diesel volumes for 2025 were set at 3.35 billion gallons — well below what the industry was capable of producing.

“We produced over 5 billion gallons in 2024,” he says. “So, that’s part of the reason our industry had a tough year.”

Looking ahead, Clean Fuels, petroleum refiners and agriculture groups asked EPA to raise 2026 volumes to 5.25 billion gallons. EPA’s proposal came in even higher.

“EPA actually proposed an estimate around 5.6 billion gallons,” Kovarik says. “They were even above ours.”

If final numbers land near that range, Kovarik says it would send a powerful market signal.

“Our feeling is if it comes down anywhere in the neighborhood between what we asked and what EPA proposed, it’s going to be a very, very strong market signal,” he says.

Timing matters, too. Kovarik says EPA has indicated the rule could be finalized soon.

“Our expectation is EPA is committed to have it done within the first quarter of 2026 — that means the end of March,” he says. “Hopefully early- to mid-March.”

As corn growers push for year-round E15 and broader biofuels support during Trump’s Iowa visit, Kovarik says optimism is returning, even after a difficult year.

“Although most folks are really feeling bad about how ’25 was, they’re also very optimistic about 2026,” he says. “Because of what we feel we’re on the cusp of.”

Corn Growers Disgusted as Congress Leaves E15 Out of Government Spending Bills

Just last week, E15 and corn groups were dealt a blow. That’s because year-round E15 was left out of the latest spending package , something corn and renewable fuels groups had been pushing to get included in the latest bill.

When asked how year-round E15 failed to advance earlier this year, Skor points to political realities inside the House.

“Parochial politics,” Skor said on AgriTalk Tuesday. “It’s incredibly frustrating.”

Despite broad ag support and mounting corn supplies, Skor says narrow vote margins and competing interests stalled progress.

“We have been a chorus saying, ‘We want markets, not handouts. We want markets,’” she says. “Look at how much corn we’ve grown in the U.S. We need to find markets.”

Skor says House leadership ultimately pulled the issue from budget negotiations due to concerns over securing enough votes, particularly from members tied to small refinery interests.

“He knew that he could not get the votes he needed to pass the budget,” she says. “So he said, ‘We’re going to table this. We’re going to create a council. We’re going to deal with this separately.’ And that’s what happened.”

Looking ahead, Skor says attaching year-round E15 to a must-pass spending bill remains possible, but unlikely in the near term.

“I’m never going to say never,” she says. “But I think the realistic, immediate path for us is trusting our champions.”

She points to Rep. Randy Feenstra of Iowa as a key leader on biofuels policy.

“He’s fantastic on our issues,” Skor says. “He proved to be very, very strong in advocating for the Clean Fuel Production Tax Credit, 45Z.”

Skor says biofuels groups are now unified behind a legislative compromise that protects liquid fuels while expanding growth opportunities for American ethanol.

“We have the vast majority of liquid fuels united behind a legislative proposal,” she says. “We’ve done a really good job coming up with a compromise that has a future for liquid fuels and growth opportunities for American biofuels.”

As farmers look for demand-side solutions amid tight margins and large corn supplies, Skor says the message to Washington during Trump’s Iowa visit is straightforward: permanent E15 isn’t a wish list item. It’s a market fix agriculture needs now.

In the letter Iowa Corn and IRFA sent this week, both also pointed to Congress’ decision to sidestep E15 language in recent spending bills, instead creating a task force to study the issue. That task force, which is co-chaired by Feenstra, is scheduled to take action by February 28.

“Without permanent access to this market, the long-term viability of our state’s largest economic driver is at serious risk,” the groups wrote. “Today, we are asking for your help to finally push E15 access through Congress.”

It’s that same sentiment that was relayed in a statement from National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) president Jed Bower last week, who said corn growers “were disgusted, disappointed and disillusioned” after spending years of calling on Congress to pass E15.

“I met with Speaker Johnson back in November. He said he was frustrated because DOGE had pulled this out last year. He said he would get something done, and here we are again,” said the Ohio farmer. “The same thing we get all the time. Let’s step on and push on the farmers because there’s not very many of them and we can get away with it.”

Small Refiners Still a Roadblock to Year-Round E15

Even with support from major oil groups, Skor says a small group of refiners continues to wield outsized influence in Washington — enough to stall year-round E15 despite broad backing from agriculture and much of the energy sector.

“Well, enough that they could hamstring the speaker and they could hold up the votes on the budget,” Skor says, responding to questions about whether small refiners still carry weight in Congress.

Skor says the current proposal on the table represents a significant compromise, one she believes should be moving now.

“Let’s get year-round E15. Let’s reform the small refinery program so fewer refiners get it and we have more clarity,” she says. “We are supportive of that.”

She argues the small refinery exemption program has been abused, pointing to a growing number of legal challenges.

“There are over 15 lawsuits that have been filed in 2025 because of these small refiners. They’re greedy,” Skor says. “They’re whiny. They claim and allege hardship, and then they get on investor calls and talk about all the money they made in the quarter. You can’t have it both ways.”

Skor says the ethanol industry and its allies are now focused on exposing what she calls that hypocrisy while maintaining pressure on lawmakers.

“We have a very strong coalition now that should win the day,” she says.

Corn Growers Argue E15 Is a ‘No-Cost’ Solution

Iowa Corn and IRFA frame E15 as both an economic and regulatory fix, calling the current restrictions outdated and unnecessary.

“Removing the outdated regulatory hurdle for E15 is exactly the type of government efficiency you’ve worked for,” the groups wrote, urging Trump to continue applying pressure as Congress debates the issue over the coming weeks.

They also emphasize permanent E15 access would come at no cost to taxpayers, while strengthening American energy dominance and providing a critical lifeline to corn producers.

“Permanent nationwide access to E15 is a common-sense, no-cost solution,” the letter sent earlier this week concludes. “Now is the time.”

With the task force deadline looming and the president back in Iowa, corn growers hope the renewed push will translate into action and finally deliver year-round E15 access they’ve been seeking for more than a decade.

Trump Defends Tariffs, Says Farmers Will Be “Biggest Beneficiary”

Ahead of his Iowa talk, President Trump made an appearance at the Machine Shed restaurant in Urbandale, where he had an exclusive interview with Fox News. During that interview, Trump strongly defended his use of tariffs, calling them “indispensable” to economic growth and long-term benefits for farmers.

“Tariffs have been indispensable toward success,” Trump says. “We’ve taken in $600 billion in tariffs.”

Trump says some of that revenue has already been directed back to agriculture, including the Farmer Bridge program payments, which are scheduled to be in farmers’ bank accounts by the end of February.

“I gave the farmers $12 billion last week and took them out of tariff money,” he says.

When asked about concerns from Iowa farmers who worry tariffs could hurt exports and commodity prices, Trump says the benefits will take time to materialize.

“It’s going to take a little while to kick in,” he says. “But I think the farmers are going to be the biggest beneficiary.”

Trump points to protections against foreign crops being sold into the U.S. at below-market prices.

“When you used to have people coming in and dumping their crops into the United States, you guys were hurt,” he says. “They’re not allowed to do that because we’re tariffing those crops.”

He also draws parallels to his first-term trade battles, particularly with China.

“The farmers stuck with me the first time, and I was right,” Trump says. “We gave them $28 billion then. Now we gave them $12 billion, sort of a minimal payment.”

While acknowledging legal challenges could arise as the Trump administration awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling, Trump still signaled tariffs, or similar tools, will remain part of his strategy.

“If the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs, we will find something — some other way of doing a similar thing,” he says. “But it’ll be more inconvenient.”

As Trump delivers his message in Iowa, tariffs remain a flashpoint for rural America, balancing promises of long-term protection with near-term uncertainty for farmers navigating tight margins and volatile markets.

In The Bull's-Eye For USDA: Foreign-Owned Land, Breaking Up Anti-Competitive Practices and More

Fri, 23 Jan 2026 22:18:36 GMT

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden outlined a list of priority topics for the agency in 2026 during a recent webinar hosted by the National Ag Law Center. Vaden leads the department’s operations and implements policies that support America’s food and farm systems.

Included in his remarks:

Antitrust and Competition. Vaden says antitrust laws exist for a reason: when an industry gets too concentrated, certain actions undermine free enterprise.

“There are signs that that may be happening in American agriculture. That’s why President Trump has signed at least two executive orders asking USDA to work with the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to investigate these antitrust concerns,” he says.

He shares three examples — two in farm equipment and one in crop inputs.

“This administration thinks farmers should be able to repair their own equipment, and the industry’s efforts to prevent them from doing so are illegal,” he says. “That’s why this administration’s Federal Trade Commission is currently suing John Deere and some of the fellow equipment manufacturers to stand up for American farmers’ rights to repair their own equipment and to not to have to suffer under a system where, when their equipment breaks down in the field, they have to call a John Deere dealer, for example, and wait for them to send out someone to fix a simple issue that the farmer can repair him or herself — costing them time, productivity and money.”

He also says the administration is looking into how manufacturers distribute and sell their equipment. Specifically, the geography assignment and trade territories of dealers are being questioned in light of any price differences.

“If you should happen to pick any other dealer than the one they designate as your local dealer, they’ll charge you more for the same piece of equipment — the exact same piece equipment. There’s a financial penalty, which is prohibitive to you exercising choice over which dealer you use to buy your equipment — eliminating the ability to compete on the basis of price,” Vaden says.

He adds the exclusive use of OEM parts at the dealership adds costs to farmers.

“So, all of these three things, when added together, limiting your choice of where you can buy, and then when you have purchased a piece of equipment, preventing you from repairing it, and preventing you from using anybody else’s other than their own parts, give them more pricing power and allow them to drive up the cost of not only purchasing the equipment, but of ownership and operating the equipment — all which goes directly to their bottom line,” Vaden says.

John Deere provided Farm Journal with the following statement from Deanna Kovar, President, Worldwide Agriculture & Turf Division for Production & Precision Agriculture:

“For nearly 190 years, John Deere has been committed to providing best-in-class support for farmers and ranchers, and we know just how important our network of more than 1,600 Agriculture & Turf dealer locations supported by more than 50,000 dealer employees across the U.S. are to that commitment. Importantly, because dealer trade areas are not exclusive, our customers can choose to work with any John Deere Agriculture & Turf dealer in the U.S. and John Deere does not penalize customers or dealers for doing business outside of a dealer’s assigned area of responsibility.

At the same time, we wholeheartedly agree that farmers should be able to repair their own equipment, and that’s why John Deere offers an industry-leading self-repair tool like John Deere Operations Center PRO Service. Our approach is simple - whether you want to work with your trusted John Deere dealer, a local service provider, or do the work yourself, we empower you to choose how your equipment is maintained, diagnosed, and repaired. For more on our commitment, customers are encouraged to visit www.JohnDeere.com/RunItYourWay.”

Vaden directed his farm input comments to the fertilizer sector.

“The duopoly that is Mosaic and Nutrien and their successful efforts over the past several years to constrain fertilizer supply in this country and drive up the costs that farmers are paying,” he says. “This administration is going to do everything it can to ensure that farmers have the fertilizer they need, at a price that they can pay, and a price it allows food to be purchased at the price the consumer can pay.”

He says a new company, BHP, will enter the mining sector for potash in Saskatchewan, Canada, with a $13 billion investment in a mine that should be operational by mid-2027, with exports coming into the U.S.

“We’re not going allow these two companies to do anything to undermine this or any other new market participant that wants to come in, provide new fertilizer supply and break up the cute little game that Mosaic and Nutrien have been playing for the last several years,” Vaden says.

Farm Journal reached out to Mosaic and Nutrien for comment, but they did not respond.

In a previous role, Vaden served on the U.S. Court for International Trade and oversaw the case regarding countervailing duties on Moroccan phosphate.

Foreign Land Ownership. USDA recently unveiled a new online portal to report foreign-owned agricultural land transactions. Vaden previewed this new tool as a modernized way to help USDA enforce regulations that have been on the books since 1978.

“AFITA, the Agriculture Foreign Investment Disclosure Act, has required any time a foreign person comes in possession of farmland here in the United States, they are required to register with USDA. Now in all honesty, over the past nearly 50 years, that statute has probably been ignored more often than it has been followed,” Vaden says.

Biofuels Policy. “We need a proper biofuels policy to open up domestic demand. The Secretary has endorsed E-15,” Vaden says. “We need Congress to pass that. That’s going to instantly result in at least 50% more corn usage for ethanol, meaning millions of more bushels will need to be purchased from American farmers to meet that increased biofuel demand.”

Vaden credits EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and his team for their RVO rule, which sets ‘aggressive’ targets.

“The targets that they have set are aggressive. Some of the most aggressive that have ever been set,” Vaden says. “But what’s equally critical is that, for the first time, the EPA is proposing to make those targeted numbers — which make the headlines, real. Because they’re proposing, for the first time ever, to reallocate volumes that have been waived through the small refinery waiver exemption.”

He adds: “For the first time ever, that top line number — which gets so much attention as to how many gallons of biofuels we need to blend — it’ll be true. And that’s saying something. That will make a difference.”

Pesticide Regulation. Late last week, it was announced the Supreme Court would take up the Durnell case, which is related to Roundup litigation.

“I’m glad the Supreme Court saw that. I’m glad that they took the Solicitor General’s suggestion that they hear this case. And I hope they’ll listen very carefully to what Solicitor General Sauer and his team have to say as this case is briefed and argued. Because this really could make the difference in between whether America is able to retain its status as the innovation leader in agriculture or whether we potentially have a threat to lose that crown because we’re going to let juries second guess PhD experts who’ve spent decades at this work,” Vaden says.

In favor of federal preemption, Vaden goes on to detail the years of paperwork, approval and regulatory steps EPA regulates every commercially available chemical under.

“We have the EPA relying on decades and decades of scientific study, which shows the label they have approved is sufficient to tell farmers how to use the product without harming themselves or the environment, or anyone else,” Vaden says. “And we have that being second-guessed by juries located in jurisdictions specially selected by trial lawyers who know where there is a jury pool that is more than willing to engage in jackpot justice, listen to them weave their tale and then write incredibly large numbers down on the verdict floor. And those two things cannot coexist in a world where the statute is clear that it is EPA that regulates these chemicals.”

USDA Reorganization. Vaden says the agency is being transparent, thoughtful and strategic in its announced reorganization.

“We have a footprint in D.C. that calling it ‘underused’ is diplomatic. The south building can seat 7,500 employees. On its busiest day — we require everyone to come into the office — that building hasn’t reached 40% occupancy,” he says. “As a business manager or managing tax payer money, it makes no sense to keep up facilities that are largely empty.”

Vaden says it’s time to make the department footprint match its needs. Regular updates are being posted to USDA.gov/reorg, but the under secretary says implementation is going on right now with forthcoming announcements on locations for its new hub model.

“I signed a memorandum, USDA can start to enter into leases. They are already government owned or leased. But they are newer, tech adept and ready for us to move into,” he says. “This is at no additional cost to the taxpayer, but at less cost, because they don’t have the $2.2 billion in backlog maintenance. As we go forward this year, you’ll see leases, you’ll see notices to employees who we request to move to the hub. And taking into account employees have kids in school, the move will take place after the end of this school year. So they are able to move during the summer and are settled before the school year begins.”

'Dust Bowl' Agency at USDA Looks to Cut Red Tape and Speed Up Slow Computers That Frustrate Farmers

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:55:32 GMT

USDA’s reorganization plan in 2025 drew criticism over the number of job cuts and headcount reduction’s potential impact on farmers, with fears it would hinder field office staff and county offices, many of which were already understaffed. However, third-generation California farmer Aubrey Bettencourt, who’s now serving as chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), says those local constraints aren’t due to staff reductions. She says those issues stem from outdated infrastructure and processes that are creating bottlenecks for farmers and ranchers trying to sign up for programs through USDA agencies such as NRCS. And that’s something she’s now working to change.

By any measure, Bettencourt did not come to Washington to keep things the same. But then, her background for a government official isn’t that traditional either. Bettencourt was raised on her family’s farm in Hanford, Calif. But her political interest really started with her efforts to help lead California’s fight over water.

During the first Trump administration, she first served as the state executive director for USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA). She was then selected to work with both the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA as a deputy assistant secretary with the DOI, where she oversaw water and science policy.

Bettencourt says conservation policy has never been theoretical for her. Instead, it is personal and it is operational, as she’s experienced the frustration firsthand with the slow speed at which many USDA agencies were forced to work.

As she entered into her role as chief of NRCS, Bettencourt says the changes she’s working to implement are about time and how much of it farmers lose navigating paperwork and how much time NRCS staff lose staring at what she calls the “spinning wheel of death” on outdated systems.

“I’ve always said my whole goal has been to keep farmers farming, get water to people who need it, take care of the resources that take care of all of us, and have high-speed internet everywhere in the United States, the indoor plumbing of the 21^st century,” Bettencourt says. “NRCS gets to do all of that.”

Now, nearly 90 years after the agency was created in response to the Dust Bowl, Bettencourt says NRCS is again confronting a foundational threat. This time, it is not erosion or war but the pace at which farmland is disappearing and the friction farmers face trying to stay productive on what remains.

“We are losing 5,000 acres of farmland a day in the United States,” she says. “Two thousand acres of prime farmland a day.”

To meet that challenge, Bettencourt is driving sweeping internal reforms, many of them invisible to farmers at first glance, that aim to reduce the number of times producers have to sign up, re-sign up, re-enter data or wait for answers. The goal, she says, is to get NRCS staff out from behind desks and back into the field, and to make USDA work at the speed agriculture actually operates.

From Policy to Processing, NRCS Is Undergoing Rapid Change

One of the most consequential changes underway is how NRCS processes applications for its flagship programs, EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program) and CSP (Conservation Stewardship Program). Bettencourt explains years of layering subcategories, scenarios and hyper-specific ranking criteria slowed everything down, not just for farmers, but also for USDA field staff.

“The reason it took so long for us to get an answer back as a customer of ‘where is my application and where am I in this process’ is because we had so many individualized and subcategories and scenarios of practices that we would have to rank and score the application for every scenario, every single time,” she says

Rather than forcing applications through dozens of narrowly defined pathways, NRCS is shifting toward higher-level practice codes that still rely on vetted science but allow district conservationists, those who she says are closest to the land, to make judgment calls based on local conditions.

“I think it’s getting people to where they need to be, and it’s giving them the tools they need to be there. So one is freeing up time. Time is a huge component, and the ability for someone to have less time in front of a computer,” she says. “And the numbers, I kid you not, just by going to email notifications, we’re going to save 96,000 hours a year. 96,00 hours. Just by going to a singular ranking that then, you on your adventure. We’re going to save over 75,000 hours. That amount of time is a huge capacity builder for us, for our staff.”

Fixing the Infrastructure Farmers Never See

While some reforms focus on simplifying rules, Bettencourt points out some of the most significant barriers to faster program delivery have nothing to do with policy at all. They are physical and technological shortcomings inside USDA field offices, and problems farmers rarely see, but ones they often feel.

“I already knew we had rough bandwidth capacity at our offices,” Bettencourt says drawing on her experience at FSA. “What I didn’t realize is statistically how bad it was.”

She says industry standards call for five to eight megabits per second per person. Many NRCS offices, she says, operate with roughly 10 megabits total per office, regardless of whether that office has four employees or two dozen employees. She says the result is a system where applications stall through no fault of the farmer or the staff.

“You get your application in on time, and staff is working their rear ends off trying to get these things uploaded,” she points out. “And you miss out on the opportunity, not by any fault of your own, not by fault of the staff’s own, but because of a failure of the basic infrastructure to support the operations of our mission.”

As USDA programs have become more digital and data-heavy, those limitations have only been compounded. Bettencourt says improving connectivity might not sound exciting, but it is essential to restoring fairness and predictability in the process.

“It may sound boring. It may just sound not that sexy,” she says, “but it is so vitally important that we get the basic structure available to our staff, because that is doing respect to them and doing respect to our customer.”

The payoff, she says, is capacity. When staff are not losing hours to failed uploads and system delays, they can spend that time where it matters, and that’s working directly with farmers on conservation solutions.

“That’s how you build capacity,” Bettencourt says. “Not by asking people to work harder but by removing the friction.”

New Initiative Called ‘One Farmer, One File’

If infrastructure fixes address how fast data can move, the new “One Farmer, One File” initiative tackles how often that data has to move at all.

Bettencourt says USDA agencies routinely ask farmers for the same information, even though that data already exists elsewhere within the department, just often with a different agency within USDA.

“That’s why I have to fill out the same eligibility form twice,” she says. “That’s why I have to fill out the same direct deposit form twice. It makes no sense. It’s the exact same form with the same information.”

Working with FSA and RMA, NRCS is building a unified, protected back-end system that allows agencies to securely share core farmer information. Privacy protections remain unchanged, Bettencourt emphasizes, but usability improve dramatically.

“We share so much data between us to operate our different programs,” she adds. “But we don’t actually have it in one place where we can see it … It saves time, it saves energy and it saves my dad having to drive 50 miles back to the office to sign the same farm file that he signed four months earlier for FSA.”

For farmers who participate in multiple USDA programs, Bettencourt says redundancy has been a persistent barrier, especially during busy seasons. One Farmer, One File is designed to remove that friction by allowing USDA to view farmers holistically rather than as separate program participants.

“When we can see the farmer as a whole. It improves the customer experience, and it improves our operational capacity,” she says.

The More Talked About Issue: USDA Faces Major Workforce Shake-Up Amid Departures and Reorganization

The reality in 2026, though, is USDA has seen a sharp decline in staffing over the past year, with more than 20,000 employees leaving between mid-January and mid-June 2025, which was a 20% drop in total workforce during that time. Data also shows roughly 15,000 employees accepted voluntary buyouts through the Deferred Resignation Program, while others retired or resigned. Reports also show agencies such as NRCS and FSA experienced some of the steepest losses.

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the downsizing last summer and said she would oversee a rapid reorganization aimed at reducing bureaucracy. That included the relocation of 2,600 Washington-based staff to five regional hubs and aligning staffing with budget constraints. That relocation plan is still underway.

At the time, Rollins framed the restructuring as a move to make USDA “efficient, nimble and innovative” while bringing staff closer to rural farmers and ranchers.

“Over the last four years, USDA’s workforce grew by 8%, and employees’ salaries increased by 14.5%, including hiring thousands of employees with no sustainable way to pay them,” USDA’s announcement stated last summer. “This all occurred without any tangible increase in service to USDA’s core constituencies across the agricultural sector.”

Still, it’s those cuts that critics say will further strain field staff. But Bettencourt says it’s current changes underway with processes and infrastructure that will help relieve some of the time constraints on staff, ultimately getting staff back in front of farmers and bringing NRCS back to its roots as a field-based agency.

Bringing the Office to the Farmer

Through a new Integrated Field Tool, NRCS staff will be able to build conservation plans with farmers in real time, on the farm and in the field.

“Our staff will be able to go out in the field with you and design your farm plan in the field with you,” Bettencourt says. “Auto-populate your application, verify it, sign it, send it off and get the process going.”

Rather than requiring multiple office visits, Bettencourt says NRCS wants to reverse the dynamic.

“This will actually be a digital and mobile-based platform where our staff at NRCS will be able to go out in the field with you, the farmer, and design your farm plan in the field with you in real time and say, ‘All right, here’s your options. What would you like to focus on? Let’s go ahead and do these EQIP practices here, here and here. Let me auto-populate your farm and your application. Can you verify this is right for me? Great let’s go ahead and just sign that and send that off and get this process going,’ and we’ll be able to do that in the field with the farmer in real time,” she says. “Again that’s back where we should be; that’s where we’re working with you instead of, you know, trying to make you come to the office and go back and forth 9 million times. We’re just going to be out in the field and bring the office to you.”

County offices will still play a role, she says, but the future of NRCS is face-to-face where it’s convenient for farmers.

A New Sense of Urgency Inside USDA

Behind the scenes, Bettencourt says collaboration across the administration is happening at a pace she has not seen before, including with USDA’s recently announced $700 million Regenerative Ag Pilot Program , which will be administered through NRCS.

“The conversations are happening lightning fast, and there is that sense of urgency,” she says.

That urgency, she says comes from a shared understanding that redundancy, inconsistency and delay cost farmers real money.

“As a Californian, I pay for the privilege to farm to 86 separate agencies,” she adds. “I know that frustration.”

Her charge at NRCS is to ensure farmers feel the difference, not through press releases but through fewer forms, fewer trips to the office and faster answers.

“We’re judged by one lens every day,” Bettencourt says. “Farmer first, and how are we producing in practical and measurable terms?”

For Bettencourt, she says it’s vital NRCS gets back to the basics, which is exactly what this new plan intends to do.

You can watch the full episode of “Unscripted” on the Farm Journal YouTube page.

Ag Retailers Association Says These Issues and Policies Are On the Forefront

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 16:06:19 GMT

Ag labor, modern ag technologies, transportation and supply chains are on the list of policy priorities for the Ag Retailers Association.

ARA’s senior director of government affairs Hunter Carpenter gave details on the recommendations from the public policy committee which will go in front of the full board at its upcoming meeting.

He says while some issues always make the list, there are notable timely updates for issues and policies that could directly effect ag retail businesses.

“Transportation is probably one that’s taking on the biggest role right now,” Carpenter says. “You have the UP Norfolk Southern merger which is at the table. You have the effort trying to modernize the commercial driver’s license. And we’ve still got to get some policy objectives done on the Farm Bill side of things.”

Regarding the potential UP/Norfolk Southern merger, Carpenter says it’s a “big deal.”

“We do have concerns about that possible merger,” he says. “They have filed their merger application with the Surface Transportation Board. So we are in discussions with our members on what ARA should say or should not say on the matter.”

As for what’s left from Farm Bill related legislation, he says while many facets of Farm Bill were addressed in the One Big Beautiful Bill, there are some left on the table:

biostimulant definition
increased TSP Access Act to try and get more, technical service providers certified
pesticide labeling uniformity
NPDS permit relief

He also highlights Congress currently operating under its continuing resolution which has a Jan. 30 deadline with bills moving but still needing to get those passed before another shutdown.

“Those are just a number of the policy objectives we had in that Farm Bill that passed the House Ag Committee in May of 2024 that included a lot of our priorities that were not included in the budget process because they did not touch the actual budget numbers,” Carpenter says.

Retailers can learn more about the upcoming ARA Fly-in at ARADC.org. Last year, ARA organized more than 135 meetings with different offices on the Hill. This year’s event takes place March 2 Mar 4, 2026.

New Dietary Guidelines Move Food Pyramid Closer to the Farm

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 20:43:25 GMT

The White House delivered a simple but clear message to Americans today: Eat real food.

“We are finally putting real food back at the center of the American diet. Real food that nourishes the body, restores health, fuels energy and builds strength,” says Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. “This pivot also leans into the abundant, affordable and healthy food supply already available from America’s incredible farmers and ranchers. By making milk, raising cattle and growing wholesome fruits, vegetables and grains, they hold the key to solving our national health crisis.”

In the “most significant reset of federal nutrition policy in decades,” the White House released the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030 . The updated pyramid inverts the 1992 USDA version by prioritizing:

Protein (1.2 to 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, an increase from 0.8 grams)
Dairy and healthy fats as the foundation
Vegetables (3 servings per day)
Fruits (2 servings per day)

Unlike the old pyramid’s grain-heavy base and processed carbs, new recommendations limit whole grains to 2 to 4 servings per day and added sugars and highly processed oils should be avoided entirely.

Eat More Protein

Rollins says the previous dietary guidelines demonized protein in favor of carbohydrates.

“These guidelines reflect gold standard science by prioritizing high-quality, nutrient-dense protein foods in every meal,” Rollins says. “This includes a variety of animal sources, including eggs, poultry, seafood, and red meat, in addition to plant-sourced protein foods such as beans, peas, lentils, legumes, nuts, seeds and soy.”

To put the new protein recommendations into perspective, Sigrid Johannes, executive director of government affairs for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, says for folks who should be consuming 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight that’s a 100% increase in recommended daily protein intake.

Dairy’s Seat at the Table

Dairy emerged in a strong position under the new dietary guidelines, with federal nutrition guidance supporting dairy at all fat levels for the first time.

“One of the key messages they’re telling consumers is eat dairy and eat dairy at all fat levels — that’s whole milk, cheese and butter,” says Matt Herrick of the International Dairy Foods Association. He calls it “a significant watershed moment,” reflecting how many families currently eat and shop today.

Echoing Herrick’s perspective, National Milk Producers Federation President and CEO Gregg Doud adds by better recognizing both fat and protein, the guidelines give a fuller picture of dairy’s nutritional value.

“Not all fats are created equal, and because the guidelines acknowledge this, dairy’s benefits are better reflected in this iteration of the guidelines,” Doud says.

When it comes to protein, consumer demand is reshaping the category, with cottage cheese at its highest level since the 1980s because of the high-protein trend, Herrick notes.

“Consumers are looking at labels more than ever and trying to find cleaner, less processed foods. Dairy fits that bill. Most products have just a handful of ingredients, and they’re all high in protein. People are turning to protein for growth, energy and overall health, and we’re going to continue to see consumers look to dairy to fulfill their protein and healthy fats needs,” Herrick says.

The processing sector has grown alongside the rising demand for dairy, reflecting both increased production and changing consumer preferences. Roughly $8 billion has been invested in new processing facilities from 2022 to 2025, with another $11 billion expected through 2028.

“We’re going to continue to see investments in processing facilities — new plants, updated lines and more capacity — to meet growing consumer demand for dairy protein and healthy fats,” Herrick notes.

Eat More Meat and Poultry

When it comes to meat and poultry, Julie Anna Potts, Meat Institute President and CEO, says Secretary Rollins and Secretary Kennedy’s leadership have simplified the dietary guidelines making it clear meat is a protein powerhouse.

“Robust scientific evidence demonstrates that meat is a rich source of high-quality protein, essential vitamins and highly bioavailable minerals that support human health throughout the lifespan,” Potts says.

Kansas beef producer Marisa Kleysteuber describes the new “commonsense” dietary guidelines as “exciting and refreshing.”

“As beef producers we are blessed to work with a ruminant animal that can utilize Mother Nature’s production of cellulose from rain and sunshine and then convert it to one of the most nutrient rich proteins there is,” she says. “Whether the consumer is desiring an organic, grass fed or corn fed beef product, there are cattlemen and women all over the U.S. who put their heart into raising these cattle to produce a nutritious and delicious product that we have always believed in and now our leaders are standing behind the ranchers and farmers of America.”

Quintessentially American foods such as burgers, steaks, pork chops and Easter hams can remain a staple of American households, and the guidelines go so far as to recommend parents introduce nutrient-dense foods, including meat, early and continue focusing on “nutrient-dense foods such as protein foods” throughout childhood.

“America’s pork producers appreciate the 2025 dietary guidelines putting pork front and center on the plate. They took note of producer concerns and rightly gave pork and other high-protein, nutrient-dense and delicious meats their due when it comes to Americans’ health and dietary habits,” says Rob Brenneman , National Pork Producers Council president-elect and pork producer from Washington, Iowa.

Maddie Hokanson , a Minnesota pork producer and mother of two, says the new dietary guidelines’ strong emphasis on protein is a positive for the pork industry. She believes the new guidelines, paired with pork’s quality nutrition and versatility, bring together the perfect opportunity to increase pork consumption and demand in the U.S.

“As pig farmers, we are proud to produce a meat product that is packed with high-quality protein, while also being nutrient-dense with many essential vitamins and minerals,” Hokanson says. “As a parent to young children, I see both the physical and cognitive benefits of prioritizing protein in the diet at all ages, and I’m excited to see what the short- and long-term effects of this recommendation will be.”

Three Servings of Veggies and Two Servings of Fruit

Dairy and meat weren’t the only items at the top of the new dietary pyramid. Fresh fruits and vegetables were also given top billing.

“Diets rich in vegetables and fruits reduce disease risk more effectively than many drugs,” says Robert F Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health.

The new dietary guidelines recommend three servings of vegetables and two servings of fruit per day. Like past editions of the dietary guidelines , the new guidelines recommend Americans eat “a variety of colorful, nutrient-dense vegetables and fruits” and advises whole produce items be eaten “in their original form.” Though not explicitly stated, the updated guidelines also call out “frozen, dried, or canned vegetables or fruits with no or very limited added sugars” as good options.

“Today’s dietary guidelines reinforce the critical role fruits and vegetables play in overall health,” says Mollie Van Lieu, International Fresh Produce Association vice president of nutrition and health, in the group’s response. “Scientific evidence consistently shows that fruits and vegetables should make up the majority of what people eat. The Administration’s focus on whole foods is an opportunity to increase fruit and vegetable intake, as they are the most nutrient-dense foods available.”

Rollins Teases Plan to Expand Real Food Retail Accessibility

There was more than the new dietary guidelines announced at the press event. Rollins mentioned upcoming changes at retail she says would increase the accessibility of whole, healthy foods to those in food deserts.

“Soon, USDA will finalize our stocking standards,” she says, explaining retailers that take SNAP benefits are bound by the stocking standards. “Very soon we will be finalizing that rule that will mandate all 250,000 retailers in America to double the type of staple foods they provide for America’s SNAP households. This means healthier options will be in reach for all American families, regardless of circumstance, at levels never seen before in our country.”

Grains and Oilseed Industry Focuses on Positives

In terms of grains, in its guidance USDA recommends Americans “focus on whole grains, while sharply reducing refined carbohydrates.” The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) shared mixed reactions to the changes.

“We appreciate the continued recognition of whole grains as an essential part of Americans’ diets,” said a spokesperson with NAWG in a statement to Farm Journal. “However, we are concerned that some portions of the new guidelines around grains and wheat are unintentionally confusing. Wheat, wheat flour, and foods made from wheat have been nutrient-rich, life-sustaining staples for tens of thousands of years and deserve clear, continued support as a central part of our nation’s diet.”

The American Soybean Association (ASA) focuses on the positives saying it highlights the importance of increased protein consumption, including plant-based proteins, such as soy-based foods. They also emphasize prioritizing healthy fats, including oils rich in essential fatty acids like soybean oil.

ASA says an addendum continues to call into question the process of soybean oil extraction, which it says is scientifically proven to be safe for human health.

“Soybean oil and soy protein play a critical role in the health and nutrition of Americans,” says Scott Metzger, ASA president and Ohio farmer, in a press release. “We remain deeply concerned by the rhetoric and selectively cited studies regarding the health and safety of soybean oil in DGA supporting material.”

Metzger says soybean growers will continue to work with the administration and educate MAHA commission leadership on the health benefits of soy-based foods and soybean oil.

The National Oilseed Processors Association (NOPA) echoed those concern: “Vegetable oils, or “seed oils” as they’re sometimes referred to, are a significant provider of essential fatty acids and remain a safe and cost-effective source of dietary fats in the American diet, as they are globally,” said a NOPA press release. “However, some appendices rely on a narrow evidence base with limited citations, which is concerning given the administration’s rhetoric questioning the safety of certain vegetable oils despite an established scientific consensus.”

NOPA also argues oilseeds support the production of affordable meat, dairy and eggs as meal produced from oilseeds are a key component of livestock diets.

Where Could Farmers Spend Bridge Assistance Payment Dollars?

Tue, 06 Jan 2026 20:18:57 GMT

With USDA’s and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ Dec. 31 announcement detailing rates for Farmer Bridge Assistance Program payments , set to be distributed by Feb. 28, there’s the matter of how farmers will spend the funds.

“If we look at it as a share of revenue, it looks around 5% to 20% for different farms. So, it’s meaningful, it’s something, but it might not necessarily change the picture for all of the farmers,” says Wes Davis, chief ag economist at Meridian Agribusiness Advisors.

Davis estimates the payment rate per acre for corn is about $0.25 per bushel and $0.62 per bushel for soybeans.

Per the Purdue/CME Group Ag Economy Barometer earlier this fall, when asked how they’d spend potential government payments, 53% of farmers said they would use the money to pay down debt.

(Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture)

“Farmers are getting that debt off their books and concentrating on reducing their payment rates,” Davis says.

This, he adds, is supported by data from the Kansas City Federal Reserve indicating a growing segment of farmers selling mid-to-long-term assets to improve working capital or pay down debt.

(KC Federal Reserve Bank)

One-quarter said the money would go toward improving working capital.

“So, farmers may have more funding available to spend on inputs as the spring buying season starts,” Davis says.

From Farm Journal research, 75% to 80% of farmers have input decisions made by the end of February, when farmers expect to receive bridge program payments. Davis says this means the program won’t have substantial changes in seed or fertilizer purchases but will most likely have an effect on crop protection purchases.

From the Purdue research 12% and 11% of farmers, respectively, said it could be used to invest in machinery and cover family expenses.

Respondents in the latest Farm Journal Ag Economist Monthly Monitor warn the payments may help with short-term cash flow, but could delay market adjustments.

“Payments will prolong high input costs and land values,” one respondent said.

When economists in the Farm Journal Monitor were asked if they expect the Farmer Bridge Payments to sufficiently cover financial losses experienced by farmers in 2025:

54% said the payments are “partially suﬃcient , the aid will cover some but not all losses.”
38% said, “The aid will be insuﬃcient to cover losses.”

When followed-up with, “What impact, if any, do you expect the bridge payments to have,” economists said:

May help pay down current operating loans for some and for others, help get a start on 2026 inputs
All players in the farm supply chain know about the payments and will know the exact payment rates. The payments will prolong high input costs and land values/rental rates. Any adjustments that should occur from an economic perspective are delayed because of the cash influx.
Support cash rent and land values
The payments will help producers with short-run cash flow issues. They will not help encourage needed adjustments in rental rates and other production expenses.
They will help pay down debt for most producers, providing a much needed boost the the agricultural lending sector.
It will help the younger producers that don’t have the capacity to roll operating loans, but many of the dollars will flow-through to input suppliers. That delays what should be a downside correction in input prices.

“A lot of this money — half of it — is just going to be a simple pass-through,” Davis says. “So, farmers have already spent it on that debt; they’re going to use it to pay down those balances. It might actually reduce the amount of interest payments that farmers have over the next season, but for it to pass through and increase the spending on some of their inputs or equipment or potentially land, that’s not really showing up in the data that we’re seeing, and farmers are not telling us that’s what they’re going to go and use the funding for.”

The bridge program is an economic assistance program, not a tariff relief program.

Seth Meyer, the former USDA chief economist and now director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at the University of Missouri. explains the intent behind the $11 billion in farmer bridge payments that were announced late in 2025: they weren’t designed to offset trade losses, but to bridge producers to the point where long-standing safety nets take effect.

“These were calculated based on shortfalls in cost of production, not trade impacts,” he tells Farm Journal. “If this is going to be a bridge payment, it needs to be quick. That’s why an ECAP-style approach made sense, it could be administered fast.”

Davis says is an important distinction.

“If you look at the last trade war that we had, there were payments, and they were directly tied to the price impact and the actual damage that was done to farm prices,” he says. “Potentially, it leaves some options open for the administration to add funding that does supplement those prices. We’ve heard chatter over time that there may be another round of payments or funding available over the next year. I think that leaves the window open for trade relief if this is positioned as economic relief, with inputs staying well above the level that they were even five years ago.”

One big question remains.

It’s how the program will support specialty growers. USDA announced an additional $1 billion for specialty crop growers, but further details on timing and eligibility have not been released.

“Analysis from the American Farm Bureau showed almost every single major specialty crop is in the red by 1x to 2x what they have been historically,” Davis says. “Figuring out how that payment will be distributed to those growers will be really important.”

AFBF notes specialty crops account for more than one-third of U.S. crop sales: $75 billion.

Meyer also acknowledges a smaller $1 billion pool for specialty crops and sugar poses challenges: “With the diversity in specialty crop areas, it’s much more complicated to implement, how do you cover all of that efficiently?”

5 Key Ag Policy Changes Farmers Should Watch in 2026

Tue, 23 Dec 2025 21:03:30 GMT

Jim Wiesemeyer, a Washington, D.C.-based policy analyst, says this past year has brought renewed turbulence in trade and farm support, and for the year ahead, farmers can expect more of the same in terms of how policies interact within disciplines and in an accelerated fashion.

“You can’t just look at ‘ag’ or ‘farm policy’ any longer,” he says. “It’s interrelated.”

He points to examples in animal health and border policy, as well as biofuels and tax credits.

That’s one big takeaway from the past year in how agricultural policy (and politics) have evolved. Here are a handful more from Wiesemeyer’s recent appearance on “AgriTalk” with Chip Flory:

1. Domestic Ag Policy Expands Into Geopolitical Issues

“Look at when Treasury Secretary [Scott] Bessent announced the bond swap with Argentina. It zapped soybeans and affected the timing of Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans,” Wiesemeyer says. “That was almost an off-the-cuff statement, and it had major implications.”

Regarding trade, he says while international outreach has to continue, the disconnect in U.S.-China trade relations will continue to unfold with repercussions.

“With U.S. and China trade, it’s a truce. I tell farmers don’t think this won’t linger for multiple years. We are in a geopolitical war with China,” he says.

The impact will be twofold:

First, U.S. officials need to continue to do market development to expand market share in other countries, and this includes ag goods beyond soybeans.
Second, it increases even more in the need for domestic utilization. That includes food policy and ag energy policy, but Wiesemeyer adds he doesn’t expect to see renewable fuels mandates announced until late next year.

2. There Are Question Marks Around Additional Farmer Aid

Wiesemeyer says legislators have said they are talking about more financial assistance programs for farmers, however, he doesn’t see a frictionless discussion surrounding the topic.

“Because not only of Republicans, but also a number of Democrats who say there are other issues to resolve before we sign off on this. But the verdict is out if they’ll succeed,” he says.

3. Consumer Pricing Directs a Lot of Dialogue

From the president’s comments about beef prices being too high to the repetitive use of “affordability” around food prices, Wiesemeyer sees the subject of consumer pricing continuing to garner attention.

4. The Brouhaha About MAHA

Wiesemeyer has a bit of a warning about the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement. While the latest report showed a more “practical” approach to the use of pesticides and modern ag technologies, he says there is more to come from a policy standpoint.

“We’re going to get the first serious definition of ultra-processed food. We’ve had legal cases in California, where some companies are being challenged on the impacts of ultra-processed food in children. The next commission report will be important,” he says.

5. Will Government Deregulation Equal Economic Growth?

“Federal government deregulation will hit overdrive in 2026,” Wiesemeyer says.

He says Trump’s approach to simplifying permitting processes, led by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, could bring lower energy prices — a continuation of the trend in gasoline prices plus the promise of lowering or tempering the run-up in electricity prices.

“That combination plus the One Big Beautiful Bill being implemented in ’26, I think we’re going to have a good economy and GDP,” he says.

FarmDoc Releases Farmer Bridge Assistance Payment Estimates

Fri, 19 Dec 2025 21:04:38 GMT

USDA is scheduled to release the Farmer Bridge Assistance (FBA) program payment rates next week. In anticipation of the official numbers, University of Illinois’s farmdoc Daily rolled out its estimates with payments ranging from $21 per acre for barley to a high of $134 per acre for rice.

The FBA program will provide $12 billion in support to offset losses associated with unfair trade practices. The majority of those dollars, $11 billion, will be used for payments to eligible row crop producers while the remaining $1 billion will go toward specialty crops. Payments will be made to farmers by the end of February 2026.

The formula for figuring payments will be similar to ECAP, says CPA Paul Neiffer. He calculated payments using the mid-year average price. For example, the soybean price last year was $10.20, and this year it’s $10.50. Soybeans might see a reduced rate, but all the other crops, especially wheat and rice, are seeing a 10% to 15% increase, he adds.

“Then I took that difference in the price. So I took the old ECAP number, multiplied it by 110% because we have an extra 10% and then multiplied it by that difference in price,” Neiffer says. “If the price went down, that payment went up a little bit, and if the price went up like it did for soybeans, that price went down.”

Corn farmers will receive the largest share of payments at more than $4.5 billion as farmdoc estimates bridge payments for corn at $46 an acre. However, that still won’t make up for four-year lows in prices and near-record-high input prices, says Matt Frostic, vice president of the National Corn Growers Association.

“We’re looking at $170 [per acre] negative margins in corn this year, which is pretty dramatic. When you couple that with some of the peripheral states where they’ve had disaster the last couple of years due to drought, the grower is in pretty tough shape right now to endure some of this.”

For soybeans, farmdoc shows losses of $83 per acre and an estimated bridge payment of $25 per acre. All told, soybean farmers will receive over $2 billion of the $11 billion allocated to row crop farmers in the program.

Caleb Ragland , president, American Soybean Association, says these payments can’t make up for losing their top export customer, China, due to tariffs and the trade war. He says China accounted for 25% of all soybeans grown in the U.S. in 2024, so these payments leave a gap.

“It would help some, but I think the losses and the pain is much deeper than that, quite frankly,” he says. “We’re in a pretty tough spot on many of our operations.”

(FarmDoc)

Highest Payment Per Acre Goes to Rice Farmers
farmdoc estimates the highest bridge payment for rice farmers at $134 per acre based on losses of $446 per acre. That exceeds estimated losses for rice calculated by the University of Arkansas at $259 an acre. Arkansas farmer Nathan Reed said on a recent episode of “Unscripted” the reason for the discrepancy is because that projection was made in October and rice prices have dropped since then.

“The rice price is over 50¢ less than when that projection was made. The rice price is closer to $300 an acre, and yes, that’s very close, especially when they take every number into account, equipment payments, things such as that, land rent, etc.,” Reed says.

While the assistance is welcome, it can’t stop the systematic bleeding from three or four years of accumulated losses on the farm, he adds.

“As things kind of settle and these bridge payments come in, I think that’s when the pain is going to come. For some people that’s when the banks will look at it and say, well, we can get most of our money back, we might need to just cut them off,” Reed explains.

Big losses continue in the South with cotton at a negative $383 per acre, with a bridge payment of $115. Payments for other crops include peanuts at an estimated $64 per acre, wheat at $39, sorghum at $48 per acre and oats at $92.

Moment of Truth: The Louisiana Farmer Who Captured Trump's Ear, Put Human Face on Ag Crisis

Fri, 19 Dec 2025 19:29:01 GMT

Rice country is hurting, badly.

Prices have collapsed to levels not seen in four decades, while production costs climb beyond $1,000 an acre. According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, rice farmers are projected to lose more than $360 per acre this year. For many operations, that kind of math pushes losses deeper into the red and pushes tough decisions closer to reality.

That financial pressure was front and center at the White House last week as President Donald Trump unveiled his Farmer Bridge Payments, but what captured national attention wasn’t just policy — it was a farmer.

Her words, delivered candidly and unscripted on live television, put a human face on the crisis gripping America’s rice farms and mills.

That producer is Meryl Kennedy.

A Family Business Rooted in Rice

Kennedy is the youngest of four daughters, carrying forward a family operation that stretches back nearly six decades. Her father began farming rice in the late 1960s, and over time the family expanded beyond production into milling and value-added markets. That vertical integration gives Kennedy a front-row view of how price volatility affects not just growers, but entire supply chains.

“So I’m actually second generation,” Kennedy says. “My father started as a farmer back in the late 1960s, and we continue to take rice from the farm to a finished product today.”

After returning home from college, Kennedy helped oversee the startup of the family’s rice mill in 2012. The mill steadily grew, sourcing rice from roughly 60 farm families who relied on the operation as a stable market outlet. For those growers, the health of the mill is closely tied to the health of the farm economy.

“We actually mill rice, distribute it to many large companies throughout the U.S. and internationally,” Kennedy says. “But then my sisters and I have our own brand called Four Sisters that we launch about five years ago.”

As president and CEO of Kennedy Rice Mill and co-founder of Four Sisters Rice, Kennedy balances brand development, export logistics and farmer relationships. That role places her at the intersection of domestic agriculture and global trade, a perspective that proved pivotal when she was invited to Washington.

An Unexpected Moment in the Spotlight

Kennedy was one of eight farmers invited to participate in the White House roundtable on Dec. 8. Like many producers attending policy discussions, she expected a private conversation focused on data and feedback. What she did not know until moments before entering the room is that the discussion will be broadcast live.

“And my sisters and I, because there are four of us — I’m the youngest of four daughters — started our own rice brand a few years ago to just tell the story of American agriculture that hadn’t really been told before,” Kennedy told Trump and the White House Cabinet members who attended the farmer roundtable that day. “But I wish I was here under better terms.”

As the conversation turned to the financial outlook for rice, Kennedy did not sugarcoat the situation. Her remarks reflect what growers have been telling lenders and suppliers for months: Margins are gone, and losses are mounting.

“I know that prices right now are the lowest they’ve been in over 40 years, so we’re going to struggle,” she continued. “We’re going to max out on our payments probably, so that’s something that I know those in Congress can potentially help us with to change.”

Kennedy says the magnitude of the moment did not fully register until after the cameras are rolling. Sitting beside the president, she realized she was speaking not just for her own operation, but for growers across the country.

“In fact, it still seems like it is a dream, I’m going to be honest with you,” she says. “At the beginning of this year, I had a feeling that it was going to be a very difficult year. But it really wasn’t until midway through the year that we just saw a drastic drop in prices that has continued month after month.”

Farmers Asked Her to Speak Up

Kennedy says her decision to engage directly with the administration was driven by the growers who supply her mill. As conditions worsen, those farmers began urging her to use her industry position to push for action.

“And so it really is my farmers urging me a month ago to write a letter to the president,” she says. “To explain the situation to him, to urge him to help our farmers.”

That outreach, Kennedy says, marked a turning point. What began as a letter quickly became a national conversation.

“We wrote that letter, and look what the president does,” she says. “He responded.”

Kennedy explains the collapse in rice prices cannot be understood without looking beyond U.S. borders. Rice, she notes, is not just another commodity; it is a staple food for much of the world, making global market dynamics especially complex.

“Rice is a global commodity. It is the means of survival for most of the planet on a daily basis,” she says. “I truly mean it that rice is more of a currency than it is a commodity.”

While the U.S. ranks fifth in the world for rice exports, Kennedy says heavy subsidization and overproduction by major exporting nations distort markets and undermine U.S. competitiveness.

“And what has been happening is that really since COVID, there’s been truly an overproduction,” she says. “Then we over-subsidize in these nations and then dump rice globally across the world.”

A Candid Exchange With a Call to Action

That backdrop set the stage for one of the most striking moments of the roundtable, as Kennedy directly addressed concerns about dumping and unfair trade practices. The exchange unfolded live, capturing the attention of producers watching from home.

“And we do believe that countries are dumping rice into this country today,” Kennedy said during the roundtable at the White House. “We’ve never seen imports this great.”

When pressed for specifics, she named the countries she believes are contributing to the problem.

“India, Thailand, even China into Puerto Rico,” she said. “Puerto Rico used to be one of the largest markets for U.S. rice. We haven’t shipped rice into Puerto Rico in years.”

As Kennedy listed off the countries, Trump turned to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and asked him to write the countries down. Kennedy said the moment was monumental.

“None of it is scripted,” she says. “He really called me to action, and I responded.”

“When he turns to Secretary Bessent and asks him to write these countries down, it really is a powerful moment,” she adds. “It’s a moment I’ll never forget.”

Aid Helps — But It’s Not Enough

The roundtable featuring farmers on Dec. 8 was intended to announce Farmer Bridge Assistance Payment Program, for which USDA is expected to release payment rates next week. Ahead of that official announcement, University of Arkansas economists estimate rice payments could approach $115 per acre, though statutory payment caps will limit the amount many farmers actually receive.

“You know, I’ve seen some other figures kind of siding more like $50, considering that $155,000 payment cap,” says Mollie Buckler, CEO of U.S. Rice Producers. “While I think it will help some farmers, this is not putting huge profits in their pockets.”

Buckler says the assistance might keep some producers afloat short-term, but it does not address the underlying market imbalance. Without structural changes, she warns, the industry will continue to contract.

“Absolutely,” Buckler says when asked if farmers could be forced out of business. “Possibly even up to a quarter of farmers having to make tough decisions.”

Pressing Trump to Love Rice

Despite the seriousness of the discussion, Kennedy’s exchange with Trump also included a lighter moment that resonated with viewers. The humor underscores a broader effort to build demand for U.S.-grown rice.

“And you love rice, right?” the president asked.

“I love rice,” Kennedy replied. “I’m going to get you to love rice too. The next time, you’re not going to have a button for a Coke, you’re going to have a button for rice.”

It was another moment that stole the spotlight, as Kennedy’s quick-witted response garnered laughs. Kennedy says she even surprised herself in that moment.

“It just came out,” she says. “I encourage everyone that doesn’t eat rice on a daily basis to think about making rice part of your diet.”

A Voice for Farmers

For Kennedy, the experience reinforces the importance of connecting consumers with the people behind their food. She says telling that story is now more crucial than ever as farm families navigate financial uncertainty.

“This has given me a voice to encourage people to think about where their food comes from,” she says. “To think about supporting American farmers.”

As rice producers confront one of the toughest years in decades, Kennedy’s message reflects a broader industry plea for fair trade, market transparency and a future where family farms can continue growing a crop that feeds the world.

If Bridge Payments Are Temporary, What’s the Path to Long-Term Certainty for Farmers?

Wed, 17 Dec 2025 22:16:40 GMT

“I think we are putting wins on the board,” says USDA under secretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs Luke Lindberg.

In a recent one-on-one interview, he highlights the three-point plan and the three-step process Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and the team at USDA are deploying to create what they are calling “the new golden age for American agriculture.”

Lindberg says this holistic approach alongside the administration’s trade agreements is leading to expanding export opportunities.

Their three-point plan is:
1. Bring new dollars to the table.
“This includes the America First Trade Promotion Program, which helps support our cooperator groups, like the U.S. Soybean Export Council, the U.S. Dairy Export Council, U.S. Meat Export Federation, to get our producers in those markets and effectively brand and market their products,” he says.

2. Trade Reciprocity for U.S. Manufacturers and Producers (TRUMP) missions
“These rapid response trade missions are a little different than our traditional agribusiness trade missions that USDA has been known for a long time,” he says. “These are really hyper-focused and targeted on rapid response opportunities in new markets where President Trump has delivered on new trade agreements. So in President Biden’s administration, there were zero trade agreements in four years. Under President Trump, we have 15 new agreements out there already, and more coming along.”

3. Revitalize GSM 102 financing program
Linberg says this is an important tool to give countries to buy American products.

“It’s a financing program that works typically in low- to medium-income countries,” he says. “When they can’t get a loan from the private sector to buy American, our team steps in and helps increase the credit profile of that country to be able to buy American.”

To strengthen trade partnerships and correct the ag trade deficit, Lindberg points to a three-point plan which includes:

Get better trade agreements.
Build willing buyer and willing seller relationships.
Hold trading partners accountable.

“This is where these TRUMP missions are really important, because what they do is get our folks on the ground to build relationships in a market where they may not have in the past had relationships, or maybe they’ve been gone for a few years, or maybe they just needed some refresh,” he says. “But when we get a lower tariff in that country, or we get new access, or better access, we want to get in there quickly and begin to explore and take advantage of that. I say that the agreement kind of opens the door, and we’re driving a truck through it.”

The Year’s Trade Wins
“The president signed a new agreement with the United Kingdom, and they were our second-largest ethanol market after Canada globally,” Lindberg says. “We have already seen significant increases in our ethanol exports, which are having a banner year, up 11% over last year–best year ever for ethanol exports. And by first quarter of next year, we’re anticipating a 50% increase in ethanol exports to the UK over what we experienced last year. It is making a big difference.”

When asked about the announced buys of American soybeans by China, and what U.S. farmers can expect regarding China upholding those commitments, Lindberg points to the recent sales being just the beginning of more activity between to the two countries.

“The President has also made it clear that the China soybean purchases are a floor. We’re expecting more than that. He even mentioned that last week, when he had a group of farmers come in to talk about these bridge payments and also talk about the farm economy, and said he anticipates and expects that China may do even more yet than what was agreed upon,” Lindberg says. “That floor is a great place to start, gives our soybean farmers enough of the ability to plan for the future. But also be hopeful and optimistic that there’s a brighter future out there as well.”

Bridge Payments Are a Short-Term Solution
With farmer economic support announced at the beginning of the month, Lindberg says that’s a short-term solution, and the goal moving forward is to provide long-term certainty.

“We don’t want band-aid programs. We want fundamental shifts to the farm economy that allow our producers to be profitable for the long run, bring rural prosperity back to rural America,” he says, noting how trade is imperative to the economic success of the American farmer.

He continues: “Our team certainly plays an important role in generating demand overseas for the products. So part of the calculus that goes into a profitable farm is, do you have the markets and the demand to sell your products into? So all these initiatives we’re working on, the three-point plan that all helps to cultivate, it helps to diversify, so we’re not solely focused on one or two key buyers. I think if you go to many business owners and ask them, would you rather have one buyer that buys 80% of your products, or would you rather have some diversification to lots of buyers who have ups and downs of their own, I think many of them would say they prefer the diversification model.”

Outlook For 2026
Lindberg points to tax provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill as an example of the administration’s strategy to help farmers economically.

“The president had a big win in the One Big Beautiful Bill, which helps with the farm economy in a number of key ways, and the bridge payments that came out are really designed to get folks from today, which is an economy that was largely driven by Biden-era policies into that new golden age of American agriculture. A lot of those One Big Beautiful Bill provisions, like some of the taxing, tax expenses and things, all start next year,” he says. “We’re bridging the gap from today to what that better future will look like next year.”

As Corn Farmers Face Tight Margins, One Policy Solution Gains Urgency

Mon, 15 Dec 2025 20:53:16 GMT

Harvest 2025 has wrapped up on Drew DeSutter’s Knox County, Ill., farm, but the work is far from finished. Attention has shifted from yield maps to balance sheets. Like many farmers across the Midwest, DeSutter is now focused on marketing grain in an environment defined by volatile prices, stubbornly high input costs and uncertainty about what comes next.

That unknown is shaping decisions not only for the current crop year, but also for planting intentions in 2026 — at a time when farmers are closely watching Washington policy moves and global markets.

DeSutter says yield variability, particularly in corn, was a key harvest theme in 2025. While overall production was solid, uneven results across fields complicate profitability calculations and marketing strategies. However, many farmers saw record soybean yields, which might have tilted the balance sheets in favor of soybeans.

“I think the jury’s still out, and we’ll see what prices do from this point on,” he says. “But I think if you look at your input prices and the price of corn this fall, versus the price of beans, maybe beans were a little bit more profitable, but it’s just a tight margin environment in both corn [and] soybeans right now.”

White House Announces $12 Billion in One-Time Farm Relief

As farmers work through those margin calculations, a major announcement from the White House is shaping the broader conversation about farm income and risk management. On Dec. 8, President Donald Trump unveiled what the administration describes as one-time bridge payment relief to help farmers facing trade disruptions and rising production costs. The per-acre payment rates are expected to be announced the week of Dec. 22.

Many farmers acknowledge the relief payments could provide short-term stability when disbursed early next year, but others question whether the assistance addresses the deeper structural issues facing agriculture, including high fertilizer prices, rising interest rates and trade uncertainty.

“It definitely feels like that it’s the new norm,” DeSutter says about the current tight margin environment. “Agriculture is cyclical. When I got out of college it was pretty good, then you go through some years that are a little tougher and we seem to always bounce back.”

Still, he says the current downturn feels longer and more persistent than previous cycles.

“Heading into 2026, I think it’s going to be another tight year from a profitability standpoint,” he adds.

Corn Growers Focus on Domestic Demand

For corn farmers, the conversation increasingly centers on demand and how to create new outlets for a crop facing heavy supplies. Corn exports are currently at record levels, according to the latest USDA report, yet prices don’t reflect that monumental demand.

That concern is echoed by national corn grower leaders, who say price pressure is intensifying at the same time production costs remain elevated.

“There’s been a lot of talk lately about soybeans, but corn prices have been down about 10% since the beginning of 2025. It’s a pretty significant drop, especially when you consider how high input prices are,” says Lesly Weber McNitt, vice president of public policy for the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA).

With USDA projecting more than 2 billion bushels of corn carryover, Weber McNitt says farmers are increasingly focused on how that grain will move.

“Export demand has been great, but that value isn’t there,” she says. “Even though our export volumes are record-setting this year, values are down about $1 billion year over year.”

That reality has sharpened NCGA’s focus on boosting domestic demand, particularly through expanded ethanol use.

Year-Round E15 Could Be What The Market is Searching For

One policy solution gaining renewed attention is year-round nationwide E15, which would allow gasoline blended with 15% ethanol to be sold throughout the year. The issue surfaces repeatedly during conversations with farmers and policymakers, including during the White House roundtable last week as the president rolled out the farmer bridge payments.

“Ethanol, you’re working for ethanol trying to get E15 year-round. I think we can have a lot of domestic product used here in the country, and we can keep America first, and you’re good at that, that is who you are,” said Iowa farmer Cordt Holub to the president.

“So E15 is a big deal?” Trump asked.

“E15 is a great deal year-round. Farmers would love you more than anything if we could continue to use domestic product, use the byproducts,” Holub added during the roundtable discussion.

Weber McNitt says it’s no secret E15 offers multiple benefits, extending beyond farm income alone, which is why it aligns strongly with the Trump administration’s agenda.

“It helps farmers. It helps achieve American energy dominance,” she says. “It helps tackle affordability because year-round E15 could help consumers pay about 25¢ less a gallon at the pump.”

Despite bipartisan support, Weber McNitt stresses that action ultimately rests with Congress.

Legislative Hurdles Remain

NCGA supports the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, which would permanently allow year-round E15 sales. While the bill has backing in both chambers, Weber McNitt says progress has stalled.

“Individual bills aren’t really moving, and there isn’t a lot of time left on the legislative calendar,” she says. “We need to find other bills that are likely to pass so that we can hitch a ride on them.”

Asked whether E15 could still be finalized in 2025, Weber McNitt says she remains cautiously optimistic.

“I would like to achieve it in 2025 still,” she says. “My hope is that we can get the E15 bill passed by the end of January.”

Geoff Cooper, president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association, shares that optimism.

“We think there are still decent odds we can get it passed here in 2025,” Cooper says. “This period between now and early 2026 is really our best shot at getting this legislation done.”

What E15 Could Mean for Corn Demand

According to NCGA data, growth in corn use for ethanol has largely stagnated since 2011. Weber McNitt says removing regulatory barriers to E15 could dramatically change that trajectory.

“For every 1% you raise the national fuel blending rate, you’d grind an additional 470 million or 490 million bushels of corn,” she says. “Once you scale up to that full 15%, we could be looking at additional demand of 2.4 billion bushels, which is just about what USDA is estimating we’ll have left over.”

She says demand growth would happen over time but the potential impact is significant for a sector searching for new outlets.

Looking Ahead to 2026

Back in Knox County, DeSutter says early signs suggest corn acres could remain strong again next year. Favorable harvest conditions allowed for extensive fall fieldwork, which could influence planting decisions.

Despite the financial pressure, DeSutter’s optimism remains intact. He says at some point agriculture will get back to profitability. Until then, he says incremental policy wins could make a meaningful difference.

“If you can get some small victories, whether it’s year-round E15 or less regulations, every dollar per acre helps when you’re in a tight margin environment,” he says.

ARA Supports Federal Economic Relief for Farmers

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 22:42:25 GMT

The Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) released the below statement after the Trump Administration announced the Farmer Bridge Assistance (FBA) Program, which is providing over $12 billion in support to American farmers impacted by trade disruptions and declining crop prices.

“ARA strongly supports President Trump’s Farmer Bridge Assistance payments as a critical step to help farmers navigate an increasingly uncertain ag landscape. Agricultural retailers provide their farmer customers timely access to essential crop inputs, and with purchases being made now, these payments provide important assurance they can continue operating,” said Richard Gupton, ARA’s SVP of Public Policy and Counsel. “Retailers don’t set prices and cannot control factors like trade conditions, weather, or product availability, which is why greater certainty around tariffs—especially with our closest trading partners—and a modernized USMCA are urgently needed. We encourage the administration to explore practical credit and lending tools that help farmers access inputs today and pay over time, so retailers can continue serving as trusted advisors while operating on slim margins.”

How Trump’s Bridge Payments Could Affect Farmland Prices

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 18:11:56 GMT

Farmers National Company president Paul Schadegg sees the recently announced $12 billion in bridge payments to farmers having a variety of effects on the ag economy.

“They think it’ll be a shot of adrenaline to the ag economy,” he says on “AgriTalk.” “There are some people who say they’ll use it to pay down debt or use for operating cash. Some need a new combine or tractor, and it might go toward that. And subsequently, it could add to the cash a buyer has in their pocket that they can deploy toward a land purchase, so it’s going to cover a broad spectrum.”

The bridge payment announcement coincides with the busiest time of year with higher volumes of land sales.

“It’s really active this time of year. We see a lot of land sales between October and March. We’re in the thick of it now,” Schadegg says. “The pipeline is full as we get into January and February for land sales.”

Steve Breuere from Peoples Company tells Paul Neiffer on the “Top Producer Podcast” about 40% of their land sales volume happens in the fourth quarter of the year.

Before the bridge payment announcement, Farmers National released their 2026 Farm Input Outlook. According to that report, input costs are projected to increase slightly compared to last year. Fertilizer prices are the biggest driver, most notably nitrogen. There will be modest increases in chemicals, financing costs, equipment and labor. Categories showing flat to small increases include seed, fuel and land.

Specific to cash rent, Schadegg calls out farmland in Colorado, western Nebraska and southwestern Kansas for illustrating elevated pressure on those rates because of increased input costs. However, more central areas of the country Iowa, the Dakotas and Minnesota aren’t as pressured.

Can China Live Up to Its 12 MMT Soybean Promise?

Mon, 01 Dec 2025 21:14:40 GMT

As year-end approaches, soybean markets are entering what is normally a quiet stretch, but this year, the calm might be deceptive. Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist at StoneX, says two uncertainties could spark volatility: the EPA’s final biofuel regulations and China’s ability to follow through on its promise to purchase 12 million metric tons (MMT) of new U.S. soybean sales.

And as USDA weighs market loss payments due to tariffs and trade disruptions, which are reportedly coming this week , ag economists cast doubt on if China will buy 12 MMT yet this year, Suderman says the market might have have already priced in a lower amount.

Markets in a Holding Pattern But Not for Long

Suderman describes the current market tone as typical for late November and December, saying: “We’re in a holding pattern right now, and typically between Thanksgiving and Christmas, you get kind of sluggish markets as we’re waiting for new direction after the first of the year.”

But he immediately adds that this year could carve its own path.

“I think this year we have more potential for volatility, perhaps in both directions, because over the next few weeks, we anticipate getting direction from the EPA on the final regulations for the biofuel program,” he adds. “That could be very bullish, it could be bearish. Our bias is to the positive side, but until we know, that’s an unknown that the market’s really not pricing in yet at this point.”

The Million-Dollar Question: Can China Really Buy 12 MMT?

A major focus remains China’s pledge to buy 12 MMT of soybeans in 2025, but even the timing of those purchases is unclear.

“The White House says it’s new purchases for the calendar ’25. China hasn’t given their side of it. That’s why we need to see the agreement, and we hope to get that this week. That should detail it out in addition to details on the other commodities,” Suderman explains.

Beyond the calendar debate, he says there are real logistical limitations.

“What we hear from our cash sources on the ground in China is they don’t have enough storage space if their state grain buyers are going to buy all these because it’s not economical for the private crushers,” he says. “So the only way they could do it would be to wash out some purchases from Brazil. Now that would be bearish for Brazil, cause their basis to collapse, and then some customers who normally buy from us might go to Brazil instead, kind of rearranging the deck chairs, so to speak.”

Suderman says the core issue is straightforward and there are two looming questions that only China can answer.

“How it all plays out is a big question mark. But I think the big key is: Does China make the full 12 million metric tons of new purchases by the end of the year? And when do they take shipment? They can make the purchases and not take shipment till the next marketing year, or they could take shipment in the next few months. That’ll have a big impact on the dynamics of this market,” says Suderman.

Economists Cast Doubt

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and the White House have said China will live up to its promise to buy 12 MMT of soybeans this year, but ag economists aren’t so sure.

Farm Journal’s November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor , an anonymous survey, found more than three-quarters (76%) of economists surveyed say China won’t purchase that amount of soybeans this year; 24% of economists think China will.

(Farm Journal)

Those same economists are also divided on whether additional trade aid is needed. Exactly half of economists say yes, trade aid is still necessary, while the other half say no.

But economists overwhelmingly agree on two key risks:

U.S. agriculture has become too reliant on ad hoc payments. A striking 94% say the industry has become “too addicted” to emergency programs. And it’s not just farmers, but also industry and input suppliers who have become reliant upon these payments. Many economists say repeated aid packages distort land values, cash rents, equipment purchases and overall decision-making.
One hundred percent of economists argue tariff-aid payments will keep fertilizer prices high. Every economist surveyed says tariff aid would keep input prices elevated, particularly fertilizer.

November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

But this also leads to a bigger issue: Is there enough competition in the fertilizer market? Two-thirds (67%) of economists surveyed say there is not enough competition in fertilizer markets.

Fertilizer prices track crop prices, not energy costs — a sign of market power.
The market is concentrated and driven by a handful of global producers.

“The fertilizer market appears to be very concentrated, limiting competition,” said one economist in the anonymous survey. “In a competitive fertilizer market, fertilizer prices should track more closely with energy costs as the primary input cost in fertilizer production (supply) instead of tracking more closely with crop prices as the primary demand for fertilizer. Prices correlating more closely to production costs suggest a competitive supply-driven market. Prices correlating more closely with crop prices suggest a demand-driven market with some market power.”

“More competition is always better, but closing out competition with trade barriers right now is a bad idea,” one economist said.

“While we only have a few suppliers, there is not competition to offer lower prices. Fixing this is a whole other issue,” said another economist in the monthly survey.

“Economies of scale are so large that firms will be few in number. Breaking them up may lead to more competition but also higher prices as economies of scale are lost,” was another comment in the November survey.

What Traders Are Actually Pricing in

Right now, Suderman says the market is assuming something less than the full 12 MMT pledge.

“I think the market has priced in expectations that maybe they’ll take 8 to 10 million metric tons, and they’ll take it during the marketing year between now and the end of August,” he says.

He adds that traders expect the 25 MMT earmarked for 2026 could be purchased sooner but shipped later.

U.S. Soybeans Still Too Expensive for Private Buyers

Even if China lifts its 10% retaliatory tariff, as many expect, it still won’t make U.S. soybeans the cheaper option for commercial crushers.

“For the private crushers, what they would have to pay if there were no additional tariff—and there still is a 10% retaliatory tariff—we expect that to come off soon. But even if it comes off, our U.S. soybeans are priced 70 to 80 cents above Brazilian soybeans landed at the port in China,” he says. “And so we’re still not competitive from that standpoint. And with new crop harvest just weeks away in Brazil now, we’re probably not going to get competitive. So it’s going to have to be state purchases.”

Livestock Margins, Not Disease, Are the Real Drag on Feed Demand

While there are recurring late-year rumors of disease in China’s hog herd, Suderman doesn’t see unusual issues at the moment.

“Every year we hear this time of year about disease in China,” he says. “We don’t see anything at this point that’s out of the ordinary.”

Instead, he points to weak margins across all major protein sectors.

Instead, he says the real challenge is weak livestock economics.

“The bigger problem is the poor returns, the poor margins for livestock feeding—be it pork, be it poultry, be it all forms of protein right now. Demand for protein is simply not there,” Suderman explains. “So they’re shrinking the size of their herds, their flocks, etc. And that’s reducing demand for corn consumption. They actually expect to see corn consumption go down next year versus prior year. That’s a reversal of the normal trend for soymeal demand as well.”

He adds that China is still buying soybeans for a strategic reason and one that agriculture needs to prepare for now.

“Soybean demand is only being held up right now by China building its reserves so that when President Trump’s no longer in office, they can never buy another soybean from us again.”

If the U.S. Must Rely Less on China, What’s the Quickest Way to Do So?

Rollins recently warned that reducing reliance on China will be difficult. Suderman agrees but insists it’s necessary and will take not only striking new trade deals and finding new markets, but building domestic demand.
That includes:

A strong biofuel program
New trade agreements
Expanded global access
Domestic demand growth

“I’ve been saying that for four or five years, that we were going to lose China. Let’s go to all of the above,” he says.

He believes some recent trade pacts signed by Trump are “very good for demand,” though he cautions nothing can fully replace China’s market size.

Still, Suderman says there is reason for optimism as biofuel infrastructure.

“With the all-of-the-above approach, we do have a bright picture down the road,” he says.

What to Watch Through the End of the Year

China’s ability to follow through on its 12 MMT soybean promise remains highly uncertain. Storage constraints, price disadvantages, and weak domestic protein margins are all complicating factors.

Suderman says the market is prepared for 8 MMT to 10 MMT but not the full pledge.

What China does, or doesn’t do, over the next few weeks could shape the soybean market well into 2026.

“Some of these trade packs that President Trump has signed are very good for demand. It’s not going to replace China by any means. You can’t do that, it’s not the same size market. But I think with the all-of-the-above approach, we do have a bright picture down the road as we get the biofuel infrastructure built up,” says Suderman.

USDA Signals Possible Trade Aid Soon, Economists Warn It Could Keep Input Prices High

Tue, 25 Nov 2025 21:20:47 GMT

As financial pressure continues to grip agriculture, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins says trade aid could come as soon as next week. But with ongoing discussions about potential tariff-related assistance, the November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor found economists are mixed about the possible impact on the farm economy and whether the payments will keep input prices high.

Before the government shutdown, the situation looked bleak. Hope of a trade deal with China seemed slim. But in October, China committed to buying 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of 2025, followed by at least 25 million tons annually for the next three years. That news buoyed soybean prices, and while sales were slow, a string of purchases the past two weeks further fueled prices, with soybean prices up more than $1 since the beginning of October.

Rollins was on CNBC this week talking about those recent sales, as well as possible tariff aid.

“Just a couple of weeks ago, the announcement was that China is back on to buy soybeans, 12 million metric tons this year, 25 million metric tons over the next few years. They’ve already put in a purchase order. We’ve already started shipping soybeans their way, almost a million and a half metric tons. We have every indication they will continue to buy soybeans, sorghum, etc.,” Rollins said during the interview. “But it goes to the larger effort of President [Donald] Trump. We can’t be so reliant as Americans producing American products on one country, our foreign adversary.”

Is Tariff Aid Still Needed?

At the center of the most recent debate is whether USDA should issue new tariff-related aid payments to offset market disruptions that began years ago and continue to depress cash prices, even though China and the U.S. seem to have a deal. Rollins gave a more specific timeline about when producers impacted by lower crop prices, along with trade disputes, can expect some financial help.

“We are looking at the aid right now. We have always said it is to solve for, to mitigate, anything under these new trade negotiations. Every day that changes, and that’s what we’re working on. So we’ll have an announcement probably in the next week or two on what that’s going to look like,” Rollins said on CNBC.

Reuters reports that aid package could total more than $15 billion, which is higher than the $12 billion Politico reported.

November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

Rollins and the White House have said China will live up to its promise to buy 12 million metric tons of soybeans this year. But ag economists aren’t so sure. Farm Journal’s November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, an anonymous survey, found more than three-quarters (76%) of economists surveyed say China won’t purchase that amount of soybeans this year, while 24% of economists think China will.

But there’s also some confusion. While some reports say China made this purchase commitment for the calendar year, there’s talk it’s for the marketing year, which would give China until Aug. 31, 2026, to make good on its promise.

Under Secretary Richard Fordyce Says USDA is Still Working on Possible Tariff Aid

Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation Richard Fordyce sat down with “U.S. Farm Report” for a one-on-one interview last week. During that interview he said USDA is working daily to understand the severity of the situation across multiple commodities and regions — pressure that economists and farm groups say is reaching crisis levels for some commodities, including cotton and rice.

“We’re having conversations almost on a daily basis with the secretary’s office, the chief economist’s office, the White House,” Fordyce says. “When and if we do something, we want it to be well-informed through the data we have available. We want it to be representative of where we are today but also representative of where we were.”

He also says they are taking into consideration many farmers were forced to sell at harvest for much lower prices than they’re seeing today.

New Monthly Monitor data shows the Mid-South, Midwest and parts of the Southwest are experiencing the most severe financial stress.

Cotton growers might be among those facing the most immediate hardship, and Fordyce says their situation is not lost on the department.

“There are multiple commodities that are part of the conversation,” he says. “Cotton is absolutely one of them. When we make a decision, it’s going to be informed, it’s going to be representative of where we are, and it’s going to use the data we have access to.”

Economists Say Aid Alone Won’t Fix Structural Problems and Could Keep Input Prices High

Farm Journal’s November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor reflects a divided view on whether additional trade aid is needed. Exactly half of economists say yes, trade aid is still necessary, while the other half say no.

November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

But economists overwhelmingly agree on two key risks:

U.S. agriculture has become too reliant on ad hoc payments. A striking 94% say the industry has become “too addicted” to emergency programs. And it’s not just farmers, but also industry and input suppliers who have become reliant upon these payments. Many economists say repeated aid packages distort land values, cash rents, equipment purchases and overall decision-making.
One hundred percent of economists argue tariff-aid payments will keep fertilizer prices high. Every economist surveyed says tariff aid would keep input prices elevated, particularly fertilizer.

November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

But this also leads to a bigger issue: Is there enough competition in the fertilizer market? Two-thirds (67%) of economists surveyed say there is not enough competition in fertilizer markets.

Fertilizer prices track crop prices, not energy costs — a sign of market power.
The market is concentrated and driven by a handful of global producers.

“The fertilizer market appears to be very concentrated, limiting competition,” said one economist in the anonymous survey. “In a competitive fertilizer market, fertilizer prices should track more closely with energy costs as the primary input cost in fertilizer production (supply) instead of tracking more closely with crop prices as the primary demand for fertilizer. Prices correlating more closely to production costs suggest a competitive supply-driven market. Prices correlating more closely with crop prices suggest a demand-driven market with some market power.”

“More competition is always better, but closing out competition with trade barriers right now is a bad idea,” said one economist.

“While we only have a few suppliers, there is not competition to offer lower prices. Fixing this is a whole other issue,” said another economist in the monthly survey.

“Economies of scale are so large that firms will be few in number. Breaking them up may lead to more competition but also higher prices as economies of scale are lost,” was another comment in the November survey.

AFBF: Farmer Assistance Urgently Needed as Trade Deals Came “Too Late”

AFBF says for farmers who had to sell at harvest price lows due to the lack of storage, the benefits of recently announced trade frameworks will come too late.

(American Farm Bureau Federation)

A new analysis from the American Farm Bureau Federation underscores the severity of the financial downturn. The group cites USDA’s most recent Commodity Costs and Returns, WASDE, and Farm Sector Income and Finances reports, saying they “confirm what those in agriculture have known for several years: U.S. farm income is under immense pressure as input costs have increased dramatically while crop prices have fallen sharply.”

AFBF says even with an expected record yield of 186 bushels per acre and a $4 per bushel national average price, the return over total cost is estimated at a loss of over $150 per acre, with total losses nationwide eclipsing $15 billion.

(American Farm Bureau Federation )

The result, according to AFBF, is that margins for row crops and specialty crops have been at or below breakeven for several consecutive years.

AFBF outlines three urgent warnings:

Farm financial stress is severe and persistent.
Margins remain below breakeven, working capital has eroded, and Chapter 12 bankruptcies are rising. Lenders expect profitability to remain elusive heading into 2026.
Trade losses have compounded economic pressures.
Farmers have suffered multibillion-dollar export declines in major markets, including China. While new trade frameworks have been announced, export volumes have not increased and cash prices remain at or below early-2025 levels.
Without action, long-term viability is at risk.

According to AFBF, the math is the same for every major crop — as well as specialty crops — and it’s been that way for several consecutive years, with combined annual returns below total costs (for nine principal crops) from the 2023/24 to 2025/26 crop years at -$20.2 billion, -$34.8 billion and -$34.6 billion, respectively, and before crop insurance indemnities and other support.

(American Farm Bureau Federation )

AFBF says additional financial support is critical to offset trade losses and provide a bridge until new farm bill enhancements take effect. It also notes that while recent trade discussions offer some optimism, many benefits might come too late, especially for farmers who were forced to sell grain at harvest price lows because they lacked storage.

November Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor Reflects that Strain

Even though economists fear more ad hoc aid will keep input prices inflated for longer, economists still say the ag economy is strained.

70% of economists say the crop sector is currently in a recession.
88% say the current margin squeeze will accelerate consolidation.
Working capital is deteriorating, and many economists believe cash rents are not adjusting to economic reality.

The latest survey also showed modest month-over-month improvement, largely due to improved crop prices, but year-over-year conditions are still weaker.

47% say conditions are somewhat better than a month ago.
21% say things are worse; none say “much worse.”
68% say the ag economy is worse than a year ago; 16% say “much worse.”
Only 5% see year-over-year improvement.

Economists describe the outlook as ongoing strain, not a 1980s-style collapse, but with little relief in sight.

USDA to Farmers: We Understand the Strain

Fordyce says USDA leadership is not detached from the reality on the ground.

“My first operating loan was in 1983. It was 18%, and I still wanted to farm,” he says. “There are people up and down the hallways within USDA leadership who have farmed, who are farming or who have direct ties to a farm. There’s absolutely a 100% understanding of what’s happening — big picture, commodity specific and geography specific.”

While USDA weighs whether tariff-related assistance is appropriate — and whether it would help or worsen long-term challenges — farmers, economists and lenders agree on one point: The financial pressure in agriculture is real, widespread and growing.

AFBF warns that without action, the long-term viability of many farms is at risk. Economists caution that too much ad hoc aid could distort markets even further, and USDA says it wants any decision to be grounded firmly in data.

As Fordyce puts it: “We want it to be informed, we want it to be representative and we want it to use the data we have access to.”

USDA Launches New Round of Disaster Aid: What Producers Need to Know to Sign Up

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 17:35:13 GMT

USDA is launching the next phase of its Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) , aimed at farmers who suffered losses from natural disasters in 2023 and 2024 . This new round — Stage 2 — was unveiled on Monday and is expected to be significantly more complex than earlier programs and will likely include a surge in enrollment from specialty crop growers.

Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation Richard Fordyce says this latest stage fills major gaps for producers who either lacked crop insurance altogether or whose losses didn’t quite trigger an indemnity payment. He also says this round of disaster aid is complex, and there are a few things producers can do in advance to make the sign-up process a little easier.

Stage 2 Designed for “Shallow Losses” and Quality Loss

Fordyce explains the scope of eligible disasters is much wider than many producers realize.

He says the qualifying events including everything from drought and wildfires to a derecho. He adds that the program is specifically geared toward losses that fell through the cracks of traditional programs.

“This supplemental disaster relief program is going to assist producers that either did not have crop insurance or their crop insurance didn’t trigger an indemnity, but it was close,” he says. “We call those shallow losses. And there’s also a quality loss component we haven’t really been able to address in previous programs.”

Fordyce says with this stage being more complex, there are two things he wants producers to know:

“I think I think number one, if you are in an area that had a weather disaster in 2023 and 2024, if you’re a producer, you think back, did I have a severe weather event, right? Hurricane, wildfire, derecho, freeze, drought, whatever, and it impacted my crop, then you’re probably eligible,” says Fordyce. “So just think back to 23 and 24. And then, contact that local FSA county office, go to the website. There’s resources on that website as well, and then just be thinking about documentation that could prove that loss. And I mean, I think depending on the crop, depending on the geography, you know, that documentation’s gonna be different.”

Specialty Crops Expected to Be a Major Share of Applicants

What crops will be covered? Fordyce emphasizes many specialty crop operations will find Stage 2 particularly valuable.

“What we think will be crops that will probably have a higher subscription rate through this program are gonna be specialty crops. So it’ll be again what you think of as conventional specialty crops, you know, grapes, so it’s trees, vines, bushes would be you know, probably more more of those crops that would be included,” he says.

He notes that Stage 1 was largely focused on crops with well-established crop insurance data streams, such as major row crops.

“This one’s going to be harder, more complicated, because the data isn’t as uniform and the crop mix is so diverse,” he says.

Producers MUST Enroll in Person, Fordyce Urges Them to Prepare Now

One of the biggest changes in Stage 2 is how growers must apply. Unlike Stage 1, USDA is not mailing pre-filled applications. Producers must go to their FSA county office and work through the application with staff.

Fordyce says with this round being more complicated, preparation is key, but USDA has created a clear and concise checklist to help .

“We’re asking folks to call the local county office to set up an appointment,” he says. “We want to use the producer’s time in the best way we can. This is not something where you just walk in and hope to get it done quickly. There are documents we need, and the more a producer gets ahead of that, the smoother the process will be.”

USDA has published a detailed checklist at FSA.usda.gov/SDRP , and Fordyce encourages producers not to wait.

“It’s a list of documents you really should start getting your hands on, and if you don’t have documentation for something, the checklist also lays out acceptable ways you can substantiate the loss,” he says. “Depending on the crop and the geography, what counts as documentation is going to be different. That’s why we want folks to look at it now, not when they’re sitting in the county office.”

He stresses early preparation will matter because demand will be high.

“This one’s more complicated than Stage 1, no question, and it’s going to take more work from producers and from our county offices,” he says.

Billions Already Distributed And Billions More to Come

SDRP Stage 2 is part of the $30 billion disaster and economic assistance package Congress authorized.

Fordyce explains: “SDRP Stage 2 is part of the $30 billion Congress appropriated back in December. The first $10 billion was the economic aid program, then $6 billion for SDRP Stage 1. When we wrap up SDRP Stage 2, we will have administered all $30 billion in disaster and economic relief.”

What Farmers Need to Know

1. You must enroll in person at your FSA county office.

No prefilled applications will be mailed.
Call ahead to schedule an appointment.
Expect longer processing due to program complexity.

2. Stage 2 covers 2023 through 2024 weather-related losses.

Includes “too hot, too cold, too wet, too dry, too windy” and other major events.
Eligibility includes shallow losses and quality losses.

3. Specialty crops likely benefit most.

Trees, vines, bushes, grapes and other specialty crops are expected to represent the majority of applicants.

4. Prepare documents in advance.

Use the SDRP checklist at FSA.usda.gov/SDRP .
Documentation varies by crop and region.

Market Loss Payments Still Being Debated, Prices at Harvest Are a Concern

Producers are still asking about potential market loss payments tied to tariff impacts and trade disruptions. While some hope an announcement will come before year-end, Fordyce cautions nothing is final.

“We’re having conversations almost daily with the Secretary’s office, the chief economist’s office, the White House,” he says. “When and if we do something, we want it to be well informed through the data we have. We want it to reflect where we are today, but also, it has to reflect where we were because many producers sold crops at harvest when prices were low. We know that.”

He stresses any decision must accurately reflect the full picture.

“There’s nothing decided yet, no imminent announcement I’m aware of, but the points producers are raising are the same ones we’re discussing internally,” Fordyce says.

Cotton Farmers and Other Struggling Commodities Are Part of the Conversation

Fordyce says USDA is closely tracking severe distress in cotton country.

“There are multiple commodities that are part of the conversation,” he says. “China is the big name because of soybean and sorghum exports, but there are other factors affecting other commodities too. When we make a decision, it’s going to be informed, it’s going to be representative of where we are, and it’s going to rely on the data we have access to.”

Borrower Limits Remain a Roadblock

As lenders warn of widespread stress, many producers want USDA to raise loan limits for beginning farmers and other borrowers. Fordyce says USDA cannot make that change without congressional action.

“Loan limits are statutory,” he explains. “We had a significant increase in 2018, but prices, land values and equipment costs have all shifted since then. We have champions in Congress who understand the inadequacies of our loan limits, and they want to increase them. We’ll see where that goes.”

USDA Leadership Knows the Stakes

Fordyce says USDA leaders understand, personally, the financial strain farmers face.

“My first operating loan was in 1983 at about 18% interest,” he says. “And I still wanted to farm. There are people up and down the hallways of USDA leadership who have farmed, who are farming or who have direct ties to a farm. There’s absolutely a 100% understanding of what’s happening both broadly and commodity by commodity, region by region.”

AgriTalk’s Chip Flory also talked to Farm CPA Paul Nieffer about the latest round of disaster aid. You can listen to that conversation as he outlines what farmers need to know.