Ag Policy

Diesel Prices Are Breaking Records Across Multiple States, And Relief May Not Come in 2026

Wed, 06 May 2026 12:53:39 GMT

On Tuesday, President Trump stated that high gasoline prices are a “very small price to pay” for the ongoing war with Iran, arguing they are necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. He predicted prices will “come crashing down” once the war ends. But for farmers and ranchers, diesel prices have risen more than gas, putting a further strain on already high input costs for 2026.

Trump on Oil Prices:

I looked today, it's like at 102 and that's a very small price to pay pic.twitter.com/2V8LC93wFj
— Acyn (@Acyn) May 5, 2026

To start the week, diesel prices went on another run with the national average diesel price is just 20 cents away from reaching a new all-time high. And across the country, a growing number of states aren’t waiting to get there. About six states are already seeing the national average price of diesel reach record highs.

From the Great Lakes to the West Coast, roughly a half dozen states have already smashed previous records, as a late-April dip in prices quickly faded and a fresh surge took hold.

“Diesel now averaging about $5.65 a gallon nationally. That is only about 20 cents away from a new all-time record high,” says Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy . “So even though we had that short-lived break, we’re right back knocking on the door of records again.”

That “break” didn’t last long. De Haan says even though diesel prices saw a bit of a respite for April, with even prices starting to trend down in mid-April, those prices re-accelerated in the last week.

New records for diesel in:
Michigan, $6.01
Illinois, $6.01
Wisconsin $5.67
(Indiana 0.2c/gal away), $6.03
(Ohio ~19c/gal away), $5.93 https://t.co/DV0387vvMR
— Patrick De Haan (@GasBuddyGuy) May 5, 2026

Now, the rally is showing up in state-by-state records, especially in the Midwest.

“Looking at it state by state, Great Lakes states have seen some tremendous refining issues that have really caused prices to rise dramatically,” he says. “Michigan has now set a new all-time record high for diesel over $6. Indiana is just a few tenths of a penny away from setting a new all-time record. Illinois has set a new all-time record. Wisconsin has set a new all-time record.”

And it’s not just a regional story. States in the West were some of the first to not just see the highest prices, but now also hit record levels.

“Out on the West Coast, Arizona set a record a couple of weeks ago, and Washington state is at an all-time record,” he adds. “So there are probably about a half dozen or so states that have set new all-time records, and again, the national average itself is just 20 cents away.”

Perhaps the most telling shift, though, is there’s no longer a low-price refuge.

“No states any longer have diesel averaging below $5 a gallon,” De Haan says. “Texas was the last holdout, and it now is above $5 per gallon. So across the board, $5 diesel is now essentially the floor, and in some areas, that’s actually the cheaper end of the spectrum.”

At the high end, prices are reaching extremes with California’s average diesel price now surpassing $8 per gallon.

Global Tensions Cloud Relief Outlook

With prices continuing to climb, farmers are looking for relief. What would it take to reverse course? That answer remains tied to global uncertainty.

“Relief may be a little bit elusive,” De Haan admits. “It really just depends on the daily developments in the situation between the U.S. and Iran—whether the Strait is open or not, or whether we’re in phases of escalation.”

The Strait of Hormuz remains a critical chokepoint for global energy supply, moving roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day.

“Nothing else matters to the oil market more than this waterway,” he emphasizes. “We’ve seen attacks that have pushed oil prices higher, which in turn pushes diesel wholesale prices up. You may get a little bit of day-to-day relief, but there really is no ‘coast is clear’ until there’s some sort of definitive resolution.”

And even then, he says a turnaround won’t happen overnight.

“If there is a definitive signal to the market, if the Strait reopens and both sides are aligned, prices could start falling within 48 hours,” De Haan explained. “But the rate of decline is likely to slow after that initial drop.”

Prices Likely to Remain Elevated Through 2026

Not only is the rate of decline projected to be slow, but De Haan says diesel prices aren’t likely to drop back to pre-war levels by the end of the year.

“Roughly half of the increase we’ve seen over the last couple of months could come down within the first few months of positive news,” he said. “But the other half could take many more months. We may not get back to pre-conflict diesel prices until late this year—or even into 2027.”

For agriculture, that prolonged stretch of elevated prices carries real consequences.

“When you look at what comes out of a barrel of oil, diesel only makes up about 25%,” De Haan explained. “Gasoline is a larger portion, so it’s been less impacted. Jet fuel, which is an even smaller share, has been hit the hardest. So it’s almost inverse to how much is produced.”

Why Diesel Is Climbing Faster Than Gasoline

If it feels like diesel prices are rising faster and hitting harder than gasoline, there’s a reason rooted in how a barrel of oil gets used.

“Diesel has seen more of the sticker shock compared to gasoline,” says De Haan. “And a lot of that comes down to what comes out of a barrel of oil.”

Not all fuels are created equally in supply. Gasoline makes up the largest share of a refined barrel, while diesel represents a smaller slice, making it more vulnerable when supply is disrupted.

“Gasoline is the top product flowing out of a barrel of oil, so it’s been the least impacted,” De Haan explains. “Diesel, on the other hand, only accounts for about 25% of a barrel, so it’s been more impacted when there are supply issues.”

That imbalance becomes even clearer when looking across the full spectrum of refined fuels.

“The most significant impact has actually been to jet fuel, which is only about 9% of a barrel,” he adds. “So if you look at it inversely—the smaller the share of the barrel, the bigger the impact we’re seeing right now.”

For agriculture, that dynamic matters more than most sectors.

Diesel isn’t optional on the farm. It’s essential. From planting to harvest, it powers tractors, trucks and the supply chain that moves commodities across the country.

“Diesel is the fuel that drives agriculture,” De Haan say. “And that’s why these price increases are so impactful, not just at the pump, but all the way through the economy.”

And while prices are already elevated, the full effect is still working its way downstream.

“Consumers really haven’t even seen the full onset of some of these higher prices yet,” he adds. “That’s going to continue to trickle through in the weeks ahead.”

Demand Holding...for Now

Even with these high prices, so far, demand hasn’t shown many signs of slowing.

“We have not seen much meaningful decrease in demand yet,” De Haan says. “We’ve seen very little, if any, diesel demand destruction so far, which tells you the economy is essentially preparing to pay these prices because it still needs the fuel.”

But there are warning signs ahead.

“If diesel nationally hits $6 a gallon, that’s likely when we start to see consumption slow,” he says. “For gasoline, that number is about $5 a gallon. We’re getting very close to those thresholds.”

Until then, the pressure continues to mount. And for farmers heading deeper into the growing season, that pressure is becoming harder to ignore.

House Passes 2026 Farm Bill: The Impact on U.S. Farmers

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 16:22:58 GMT

With a bipartisan vote of 224-200, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 7567 , the bipartisan Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, on April 30. In addition to extensive updates to food and agriculture programs in a budget-neutral package, this vote marks the farthest a farm bill has made it in Congress since the most recent reauthorization was signed into law in 2018.

After a series of floor debates and last-minute amendments, the bill now moves to the Senate with some notable changes, including:

Year-round E15 sales removed from bill to be voted on in two weeks
Late amendment includes language to strengthen the domestic supply of fertilizer
Pesticide liability protections were stripped from the bill

My amendment passed! Pesticide liability protections have been stripped from the farm bill. 🔥⚔️🔥
— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) April 30, 2026

“Working in Congress on behalf of our nation’s farmers, ranchers, and rural communities is an honor — even when the work requires debating the farm bill through the night,” says House Committee on Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (PA-15). “I can think of no more important work than championing the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, and I am extremely pleased to see this bill pass out of the House of Representatives with a strong bipartisan vote.”

With a vote of 14 Democrats in favor, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 obtained the highest number of votes from the minority party on a House farm bill since 2008. Similarly, with over 96% of the GOP Conference voting in favor, this is the highest level of Republican support for a House farm bill in history, affirming the commitment of House Republicans to rural America.

“I especially want to thank all parties who were involved in the negotiations that allowed the farm bill to proceed to the floor and secure a future vote on year-round E15,” Thompson says. “Members of the Biofuels Caucus are tireless champions for rural America, and I look forward to joining them May 13 in advancing that important legislation.”

Swift Senate Action Needed

As the bill heads to the Senate for debate, Thompson reinforces that “farm country needs updated policy” that reflects current challenges in U.S. agriculture.

“The 2026 farm bill fills that gap,” Thompson says. “I look forward to seeing Chairman Boozman and the Senate make progress on this important legislation so we can get the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 sent to President Trump’s desk as soon as possible.”

U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, along with all of the Democrats on the committee, says the committee looks forward to working with Senate Republicans on a bipartisan Farm Bill that can be successful on the Senate floor.

“We have been clear that the Farm Bill must address the needs of American farmers and families,” Klobuchar says. “With a five-year high in small farm bankruptcies, the Farm Bill must address rising input costs, provide new opportunities for domestic markets, and fight for a trade agenda that works for everyone. Senate Democrats are committed to ensuring all states are treated equally by delaying the new SNAP cost shifts and addressing the needs of farm country.”

Pesticide Amendment Passes

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s (R-Fla.) highly debated bill passed the House, stripping the farm bill of pesticide liability provisions. Before the amendment, the bill’s original language reaffirmed EPA as the sole agency capable of determining the information listed on a pesticide label. Critics, including Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) advocates, worried the language would shield pesticide manufacturers from liability claims.

D.C. consultant Callie Eideberg, with the Vogel Group, saysthe provision’s controversy means the bill will likely have an uncertain future moving forward.

“This means that pesticide companies, the chemical companies, are now still going to be dealing with the status quo, dealing with different requirements from different states,” Eideberg says.

In a post on X, Rep. Luna reaffirmed her disapproval of glyphosate and other pesticides.

“I do not support giving blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families. Pesticides are linked to a 30% increase in childhood cancer and over 170 studies corroborate the evidence,” Luna says.

In a press release following the bill’s approval in the lower chamber, the Modern Ag Alliance, a group backed by chemical company Bayer and over 100 agriculture companies wrote, “Today, the House turned its back on the farmers who feed, fuel and clothe this country. By gutting common-sense crop protection provisions from the farm bill, lawmakers caved to anti-science MAHA activists instead of standing with those who grow our food.”

Iowa farmer Mark Jackson says it is “unfortunate” Congress could not give farmers support for chemical weed control products. Jackson said farmers should be allowed the “freedom to farm” and said glyphosate’s scientific approval process, and the product’s 50-year registration history make it a credible product for farmers to use.

“I think we need to rally around science, follow the science,” he adds.

Eideberg says as the bill moves to the Senate, the MAHA movement could continue to influence debates. She believes the smaller body of the Senate will bring a different dynamic to the issue.

“I think we’re going to see those MAHA influencers feeling very emboldened by this win today and pushing even harder in the Senate to get more of what they’re looking for,” she says.

Farmers Praise Passage of Farm Bill
Ohio farmer and National Corn Growers Association President Jed Bower says USDA programs are important to the success of corn farmers and rural communities, particularly as growers face their fourth year of net losses and struggle with high input costs.

“We look forward to working with our allies in Congress over the next two weeks to secure passage of the E15 legislation,” Bower says. “Thanks to continued efforts on this issue from our biofuel champions, Speaker Johnson promised a vote on E15, and we refuse to allow a handful of multi-million and multi-billion-dollar energy companies to derail our efforts. Allowing the year-round sale of E15 would help our growers by expanding ethanol sales while also saving consumers money at the pump at a time when fuel prices are on the rise.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) is looking forward to the Senate taking up the farm bill without delay as farmers face unprecedented challenges.

“The House-passed 2026 Farm Bill supports the farm safety net, preserves existing conservation programs that include opportunities for dairy and livestock producers, bolsters trade promotion programs while protecting common food names, recognizes the important role of dairy in nutrition, and supports animal health programs,” said NMPF President & CEO Gregg Doud. “All of these are important priorities to dairy farmers and the broader industry, and we appreciate the leadership shown by House Agriculture Committee Chairman GT Thompson and other dairy champions to get this legislation through the House.”

U.S. pork producers are praising a very significant section that provides “much-needed relief from the misguided California Proposition 12 ” in addition to expanding the Animal Health Protection Act to include improving animal disease traceability and requiring thorough documentation on USDA’s ability to protect producers from significant economic losses due to a foreign animal disease outbreak.

Prop. 12 is creating uncertainty for pork producers and raising costs across the supply chain. Congress has a role to restore regulatory clarity.

It’s time for a fix. #FixProp12

🎥 Video credit: @HouseAgGOP pic.twitter.com/lkAmG1bmAw
— NPPC (@NPPC) April 30, 2026

“Today’s House farm bill passage is a testament to the power of rural America when we stand up for our farms and future generations with a unified voice,” said Rob Brenneman, National Pork Producers Council president and pork producer from Washington County, Iowa. “We wholeheartedly thank our champions—House Agriculture Committee Chairman GT Thompson, Rep. Ashley Hinson, and others—for not backing down from the fight for what is right for rural America. He and congressional supporters on both sides of the aisle heard our plea to help America’s pork producers.”

Eideburg points out that opposition to the farm bill pork provisions in the House are coming from several fronts.

“First, it’s coming from animal welfare groups that want to see those requirements in place,” she says. “We want to see minimum standard requirements for gestation rates. This other opposition is coming from companies and farmers who have already complied with Prop 12 and they don’t want that requirement removed because then they are going to be a) at a competitive disadvantage and b) out a ton of capital investment that they made on their to comply.”

The bill reflects many of wheat farmers’ top priorities from modernizing farm credit and safeguarding international food aid programs to enhancing export competitiveness, says National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) President Jamie Kres.

“These provisions will help ensure America’s wheat farmers can remain resilient and globally competitive,” Kres says.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Ethan Lane appreciates how Thompson and House leadership took the time to listen to real farmers and ranchers.

“Instead of caving to attacks on the livestock industry from shell activist groups that impersonate real producers, a bipartisan group of lawmakers advanced a bill that will provide certainty and important policy fixes for cattle country,” Lane says. “We look forward to engaging with the Senate to advance this farm bill to the president’s desk.”

Industry Says This Farm Bill is Needed Now

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) CEO Ted McKinney says this legislation supports farmers, ranchers and consumers while providing economic growth opportunities for rural communities. H.R. 7567 prioritizes provisions that strengthen local food purchasing programs, enhance international market opportunities, reauthorize the three-legged stool for foreign animal disease prevention and preserve the viability of the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program.

The American Veterinary Medical Association says the inclusion of the Healthy Dog Importation Act is just one of the many key veterinary provisions they applaud in the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026. This would improve importation standards to ensure a dog is healthy when imported into the U.S., which is especially important considering New World screwworm in Mexico continues to move closer to the U.S. border.

“The AVMA applauds the House for advancing a Farm Bill that will strengthen dog importation standards, fund and assess federal programs vital to veterinary medicine, and protect the country’s animal and public health,” says Dr. Michael Q. Bailey, AVMA president. “Enacting the Farm Bill is essential to advancing research into effective recruitment and retention strategies for veterinarians serving in rural and underserved communities. With the legislation now moving to the Senate for consideration, we look forward to working further with Congress and will continue to underscore the importance of including veterinary priorities in the final version of the Farm Bill.”

Now, Not Tomorrow

After voting in support of the bill, Congressman Rick W. Allen (GA-12) says, “Rural America needs a new Farm Bill now, not tomorrow. With today’s passage of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act, House Republicans have once again reaffirmed our commitment to American agriculture and delivered for hardworking growers and producers.”

Eideburg says funding for SNAP program will likely be a major fight in the Senate. The “One Big Beautiful Bill” shifted some costs within the program to state governments. She says the funding restructure and the combined potential vote to ban soda from SNAP could cause tension in the upper chamber.

She also says year-round E15 provisions, which were taken from the farm bill and punted for a vote in the House next week, could see as much opposition in the Senate.

“This really is a big hurdle to get E15, year-round E15 over the line.”

NPPC to USTR: Trade Policy Should Support, Not Stifle, American Ag

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:30:15 GMT

As the Trump administration imposes tariffs on countries in response to their unfair trade practices, the National Pork Producers (NPPC) urges a cautious approach. Negative consequences often follow such duties, in particular NPPC points out retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, including pork.

“NPPC is asking USTR to ‘carefully’ target trade remedies only at products where foreign government intervention has created excess capacity that is immune to market correction,” NPPC says. “NPPC also wants USTR to exclude agricultural equipment and components and inputs from tariffs to avoid inflating domestic production costs.”

The Impact of Section 301 Tariffs

The challenges caused by nations using forced labor and fostering overcapacity of products and subsequently subsidizing exports are undeniable, NPPC points out in comments submitted to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. NPPC also acknowledged the administration’s use of Section 301 tariffs as a way to protect domestic manufacturers of, for example, steel, aluminum, and semiconductors.

The U.S. pork industry historically has been the primary target in trade disputes involving manufacturing, NPPC says.

“Pork is a high-value commodity on which trading partners often impose retaliatory duties ‘to exert maximum political pressure on the U.S. government’ to back off its tariffs,” NPPC wrote.

Using Section 301 tariffs as a permanent trade architecture creates uncertainty, which stifles long-term business planning and investment, NPPC adds.

“Section 301 was designed to enforce U.S. rights under trade agreements and encourage negotiations, not to serve as a permanent tax on imports,” the oganization says.

Section 301 tariffs directly inflate input costs for a U.S. crop sector that is already struggling with high costs and low market returns, they shared in the comments.

“U.S. farmers rely heavily on modern pesticides to protect their crops from diseases, weeds, and insects, ensuring strong yields and a reliable supply of food, fiber, and fuel,” the comments say. “The manufacturing of these crop protection products relies on highly complex, global supply chains, with final formulated products often containing dozens of active and inert chemical ingredients. Although some specific pesticide ingredients have received tariff exemptions, many crucial active and inert ingredients remain subject to Section 301 tariffs, making it significantly more expensive for companies to manufacture and deliver vital products to American farmers.”

When grain prices rise, so do the costs to produce pork and pork products, NPPC explains. In the end, these increased costs threaten farmer incomes, crop quality and the economic health of rural communities.

Positive Investments Instead of Punitive Tariffs

Imposing of U.S. tariffs can prompt retaliatory duties on American goods, NPPC says.

For example, trade disputes with China in 2018-2019, saw that country respond to U.S. 301 tariffs (and Section 232 duties) with tariffs on U.S. pork of 62% to 70%. This resulted in an estimated annualized loss of nearly $646 million in exports.

It’s also difficult and costly to regain market share in a country once a trading partner responds to U.S. tariffs by sourcing pork from U.S. competitors such as Brazil or the European Union, even after the tariffs have been lifted, the organization says.

“If the U.S. government’s overarching goal is to strengthen domestic agricultural supply chains and manufacturing, it should replace punitive tariffs with positive investment strategies, “NPPC wrote. “These strategies should include tax credits, low-to-no-interest loans for capital investment, grant programs for workforce training to bring innovative, domestically manufactured products to the U.S. market.”

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

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 16:36:34 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 Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden Says High-Level Washington Meeting Puts Fertilizer Industry on the Spot

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:10:02 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 15:46:52 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.”

Rollins Promotes Product of USA Label, Announces Support of MCOOL

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:12:47 GMT

USDA is launching a national public awareness campaign to inform meat, poultry and egg producers of the “ Product of USA ” voluntary labeling standard, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, and increases consumer understanding of what the label means.

In a press release , Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins says, “Our great patriot ranchers and producers grow, raise, and harvest the world’s safest, most affordable, and abundant food supply. American consumers want to support America by buying American and this label will strengthen our food supply chain through transparency, fairness, and trust. This new standard policy ensures producers who invest in a fully American supply chain can compete fairly, and it gives consumers the confidence they deserve about the food they bring home.”

The “Product of USA” label is reserved exclusively for meat, poultry and egg products from animals that were born, raised, harvested and processed in the U.S. The claim is voluntary, but companies using it must meet this transparent and verifiable requirement. This ends the prior practice that allowed imported products to carry the claim after minimal processing and strengthens consumer confidence by aligning with what Americans expect and demand.

Friday’s announcement on enforcement and promotion of the strengthened “Product of USA” label is a key deliverable under this initiative, advancing the Trump administration’s priorities of fairness, competition and consumer trust.

Rollins: “Big Supporter” of MCOOL

Rollins says she is a “big supporter” of mandatory country-of-origin labeling (MCOOL) for U.S. meat products.

According to Agri-Pulse’s April 1 Daybreak , Rollins shared her support with reporters prior to a grazing roundtable discussing the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to modernize federal grazing management on Tuesday.

Verifying her comments were intended for MCOOL and not in reference to the voluntary labeling rule, a USDA spokesperson says, “Yes, we can confirm the Secretary’s comments yesterday in support of MCOOL.”

Rollins says she considers the issue one of consumer transparency rather than market intervention.

“It’s just a transparency question,” she explains.

According to the USDA website , COOL is a consumer labeling law that requires retailers (most grocery stores and supermarkets) to identify the country of origin on certain foods referred to as “covered commodities.” The 2002 and 2008 farm bills and the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act amended the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to require retailers to notify their customers of the country of origin of muscle cuts and ground lamb, chicken, goat, wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish, perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts.

While in place for some products, MCOOL for beef and pork was repealed in 2015 following World Trade Organization (WTO) disputes. Efforts like the American Beef Labeling Act are actively trying to bring it back.

Pork in the Crosshairs: NPPC Responds as Mexico Launches Double Trade Case Against U.S.

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 19:51:53 GMT

The relationship between the U.S. and Mexican pork industries is facing its most significant test in years. According to Maria Zieba, vice president of government affairs at the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), the Mexican market is unlike any other—and it is currently under threat.

In 2024, exports to Mexico were over $2.6 billion. In addition, Mexico’s geography creates the possibility of land exports, which is a unique export market condition for the U.S. pork industry. Mexico is a major consumer of pork, and the U.S. pork industry has decades-long partnerships with buyers there to satisfy demand for high quality, readily available pork products.

The Allegations: Dumping and Subsidies

The Mexican government accepted two petitions from the Mexican pork industry in December 2025. Mexico then initiated two cases on U.S. pork in December. The first case alleges that the U.S. was dumping product (selling below fair value) during a three-year time period (2022-2024) into Mexico on hams and shoulders specifically.

The second case alleges that the federal government and five state governments (Indiana, North Carolina, Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota) gave subsidies to grain producers and pork producers and processors. They claim this created an unfair advantage to the U.S. because producers may have received funds from the federal government and packers may have received some benefits to modernize a packing plant, which went on to lower the price of U.S. pork hams and shoulders exported to Mexico.

“We are compiling all the evidence to show that’s not what happened,” Zieba says. “The Mexican government will receive all of these responses we gather, and from there, they will review the responses and figure out whether there was harm done to their domestic industry on both the cases.”

If Mexico reaches an adverse determination, they could start putting tariffs on U.S. hams and shoulders.

A Bull’s Eye on U.S. Agriculture

It is unfortunate, Zieba says. The U.S.-Mexico market is highly integrated and shares several common interests such as animal health.

“It’s important that we come together and push back on these cases, not only from the industry side, but from the broader context of the U.S. government,” Zieba says. “If we don’t push back, then there’s a possibility that other countries will attempt to do these things not only to our industry, but also to other agricultural industries.”

She says it’s almost natural for foreign trading partners to put a bull’s eye on agriculture because the U.S. does such a great job of exporting.

“It’s certainly important to be on the record that this is not how the U.S. pork industry operates, but we also are not going to let other countries bully us around,” Zieba says.

Together with the U.S. Meat Export Federation, NPPC will be filing an industry petition in response to these allegations. They are working with the exporters listed in the petition, in addition to exporters in general and importers in Mexico, USTR and USDA.

A Complex Situation

It’s been years since the U.S. pork industry has had a trade case filed against it on its exports. She says it’s complex because there are now two cases, many players and political aspects as well.

“Domestic producers across the board in Mexico are the ones that went to the government asking for assistance in curbing the imports,” she adds.

The U.S. and Mexico are experiencing trade tensions, Zieba points out. Essentially, there are many issues geopolitically between the two countries outside of agriculture.

Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum wanted to have a resolution on the tomato suspension agreement , a separate agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that was terminated in 2025, Zieba says. Sheinbaum had said if it wasn’t resolved, then pork would be on the list to retaliate against. Zieba believes U.S. pork is being used as leverage.

“We are free traders through and through,” she adds. “That is our position and has continued to be our position the last 30 years. The industry believes that to lower all barriers, whether tariff barriers or nontariff barriers to trade, would be trade limiting. Our industry would not be supportive of something like that. It would go against our policy that we’ve had on the books for decades.”

How Does This Compare to Chicken Anti-Dumping?

The pork anti-dumping case is very similar to the poultry case that the Mexicans launched a number of years ago. The Mexican government, the arbitrator in both cases, found fault with U.S. poultry exports, but they never imposed duties.

“You can still export product from the U.S. to Mexico without having to pay that dumping duty,” Zieba says.

They aren’t imposing the duty because it would be negative for Mexico consumers.

“Mexico is dealing with some high food price inflation already, and it is not in the best interest for those consumers to be paying higher prices at the grocery store,” Zieba says. “That’s a pretty big argument for why this is quite silly to be initiating a case on U.S. pork at a time where the Mexican industry and Mexican consumers need a reliable source of U.S. pork.”

Unfortunate Timing with USMCA Review Ahead

With the review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) coming up this summer, the timing of these cases is challenging. If Mexico reaches an adverse determination, U.S. producers and/or the U.S. can appeal through the dispute settlement mechanisms of the USMCA and/or the World Trade Organization agreements.

“We have a very collaborative working system where we are highly integrated,” Zieba says. “This pushes against that work we’ve had. If you look at the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. pork industries and our producers, we’ve been growing. Our three industries are a great success because we are integrated. We help each other out, but we also are able to be competitive in the international market and domestically.”

NPPC filed initial comments earlier this month in what is an ongoing process. Pending outcome, Zieba says preliminary duties could be assessed as early as late spring or early summer. The final case will be determined in early 2027, but duties can be implemented in a preliminary phase.

“If the final decision goes against the U.S. pork industry, the worst-case scenario is facing two tariff rates on U.S. pork hams and shoulders as we go into the summer, and those temporary duties assessed,” she says. “We are doing everything we can at NPPC and with USMEF to prevent that from happening. But that’s certainly on the spectrum of possibilities.”

Sixth Circuit Reverses Ruling, Allowing Farmers to Defend Interests in Clean Water Act Case

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:06:30 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed a lower court ruling and agreed National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), the Ohio Pork Council, and several other agricultural associations are allowed to intervene as full parties in a case challenging Ohio’s regulation of nutrients in the Maumee River Watershed and western Lake Erie basin.

“This decision matters because it ensures agriculture can stand up and tell its own story,” says Cheryl Day, executive vice president of the Ohio Pork Council. “Our producers who raise livestock and grow crops are in the best position to defend agriculture and explain how these policies affect real farms — not federal regulators or government lawyers who don’t have any connection to agriculture.”

The Case Background

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency developed and the U.S. EPA approved a total maximum daily load (TMDL) – the amount of pollutants, including otherwise unregulated farm and agricultural storm water runoff, that can be in a water body and still meet federal water quality standards – for the river in northwest Ohio, NPPC shares in Capital Update.

The Environmental Law & Policy Center, among others, sued EPA in U.S. District Court in 2023, arguing that its approval of the Ohio EPA’s Maumee River TMDL “was arbitrary and capricious and the TMDL is not stringent enough.”

Even though the District Court allowed environmental activists, including Food & Water Watch and the Waterkeeper Alliance, to intervene in the case, the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the agricultural organizations’ request to enter the case, arguing that it would represent EPA and farm group interests.

The Right to Intervene

In granting NPPC and the other agriculture organizations the right to intervene, the Sixth Circuit unanimously found that while the EPA’s argument that “approval of the Maumee TMDL is consistent with its regulations interpreting and implementing the CWA” – a position supported by the farm groups – the agricultural associations have a different view of the regulations from EPA. NPPC explains the groups further argue that some of the regulatory requirements are inconsistent with or otherwise not required by the CWA and not applicable to farmers.

“With the case back at the U.S. District Court, the farm organizations will be able to argue that while EPA’s reasons for approving the Maumee River TMDL were adequate to support its decision, the legal threshold for such approval is lower than the environmental groups and even EPA contend,” NPPC says.

Although NPPC and the agricultural associations could have filed friend-of-the-court briefs in the case, being intervenors allows them to raise and prosecute their own arguments, argue at trial, weigh in on possible settlements, and appeal an adverse outcome.

“Overall, NPPC will have a much stronger platform for defending agriculture from baseless attacks by activist groups, both in this case and in future challenges,” the organization says.

USTR and Ag Groups Align on USMCA Importance Ahead of July Review

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:21:30 GMT

There’s no question the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is incredibly important to agriculture, acknowledged Ambassador Julie Callahan, who serves as the chief agricultural negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).

“The USTR published a Federal register notice to inform the USMCA review. One thing I love about ag stakeholders, no one is shy at all,” she said at the National Pork Industry Forum. “We received copious input from ag stakeholders across the board. What we learned from this exercise, which was not a surprise to us, is that stakeholders want the USMCA to be maintained.”

However, there are areas within the agreement that stakeholders thought they would get more benefits than they actually received in practice, she added.

“That is what we’re looking at — where are the sectors that require a tweak to the agreement itself?” Callahan said.

One of the USTR’s focuses right now is the trade deficit at USTR.

“The deficit with Canada in agriculture is also ballooning,” Callahan said. “In 2020, the U.S. had a $3 billion ag trade deficit with Canada. Last year, in 2025, it was $11 billion. We went from a $3-billion to an $11-billion deficit while the USMCA was enforced. We really want to look at which sectors are losing out.”

USMCA is Foundational to Economy

Nearly 70 U.S. agriculture and business organizations sent a letter on March 3 to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. In the letter, the groups—including the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC)—described Canada and Mexico as “foundational to our economic strength and resilience.” The push comes ahead of a high-stakes review scheduled for July, which will determine if the trade deal is renewed for a 16-year term.

The coalition is urging the USTR to maintain “sustained and meaningful engagement” with industry stakeholders throughout the review process.

“We strongly support concurrent efforts to resolve tariff and non-tariff barriers and to ensure existing,” the authors wrote. “USMCA commitments are fully implemented and adhered to. Maintaining duty-free treatment for USMCA-compliant goods throughout this process is an indispensable prerequisite for North American stability. To strengthen the U.S. manufacturing and industrial base, we urge the Administration to avoid imposing any new duties on Canada or Mexico and to restore duty-free trade.”

The organizations requested that the Trump administration focus on:

Full Implementation: Resolving pending disputes and ensuring all parties meet their commitments.
Market Predictability: Restoring certainty in North American trade flows.
Tariff Prevention: Maintaining duty-free treatment for USMCA-compliant goods and avoiding the imposition of new tariffs on Canadian and Mexican products.

Agriculture Needs Certainty of USMCA

“For U.S. farmers and businessowners, maintaining a rules-based agreement with binding commitments protects their industries,” NPPC said in Capital Update. “Without the economic might USMCA provides, incomes would be affected by additional, burdensome costs related to transportation and compliance measures. Without the certainty guaranteed by USMCA, U.S. entities would face unreliable markets, and their global competitiveness would be weakened.”

The pork industry, in particular, has a significant stake in the negotiations. According to the NPPC, USMCA has been instrumental to long-term success. In 2025, Mexico remained the No. 1 export market for U.S. pork with nearly $2.85 billion in sales, while Canada ranked as the No. 4 market at approximately $759 million.

“NPPC is one of the stakeholder groups that we are continually reaching out to as we move forward bilaterally or regionally,” Callahan shared in her comments. “NPPC calls us when there’s an issue and a concern with a trading partner. We also call them when there’s specific issues that may affect pork access and we need to know, at a granular level, what will be helpful and what is needed to address this issue.”

Callahan said USTR will be working with members of Congress and with stakeholder organizations as it moves forward.

“There won’t be surprises as we move forward, because we will be having these constant communications with stakeholders,” she said.

American Agriculture Deserves the Certainty of a Farm Bill

Wed, 11 Mar 2026 20:52:49 GMT

American agriculture deserves the certainty that comes with a farm bill, says National Pork Producers Council CEO Bryan Humphreys.

“It is not a request of American agriculture that we get a farm bill through the House and through the Senate, it is an expectation of American agriculture and the U.S. pork industry that we get a farm bill with the solutions we have asked for across the line,” Humphreys said at the National Pork Industry Forum in Kansas City.

He’s appreciative of the long hours put in by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) and the bipartisan support of both Republicans and Democrats to get the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 , or Farm Bill 2.0, through the House Agriculture Committee.

Affordable Food Should Not Be a Luxury

America’s pork producers want the same thing consumers want – an affordable, safe and delicious food supply. Pat Hord, an Ohio pig farmer, appreciates the Trump administration’s focus on food affordability and is optimistic about how Farm Bill 2.0 could help make that a reality.

Hord testified on behalf of America’s pork producers to the House Agriculture Committee last summer about the effects of Proposition 12.

“The Supreme Court said, ‘Hey, this is an issue for Congress to fix.’ We can argue whether the Supreme Court got it right or not on this, but the bottom line is they said it needs to go back to Congress to fix,” Hord says. “We’re doing what they’ve asked us to do because we know it’s not sustainable to have a patchwork of a bunch of states requiring different things.”

As a pig farmer, it makes him uneasy to think about what could happen if different production standards continue to be forced onto farmers. But he points out that in the end, consumers will suffer the most.

“We’ve documented the effects of Prop 12 and how it has lowered pork consumption in California and increased prices for consumers,” Hord says.

Food affordability is just one of the reasons why Thompson has worked so hard to find a fix for Prop 12 in the farm bill.

“In California today, I’m told there are grocery stores that now sell bacon by the slice and not the slab because people can’t afford it,” Thompson explains. “Consumption of pork products has dropped because affordability has been reduced significantly. The cost has gone up. People who are struggling financially probably aren’t eating pork products at all, and those middle class are making decisions and maybe choosing other proteins they’re able to get more for their money.”

Stop the Patchwork of Regulations

Beyond pork producers, Humphreys says everybody in the country needs to understand what a patchwork of 50 different state regulations would do to all of American agriculture, manufacturing, automotive and more.

“Everyone should be calling their members of Congress and demanding a solution to this, because it’s beyond just agriculture,” he says. “This is something if we don’t get fixed, will plague the entire U.S. economy.”

Humphreys urges people to call their members of Congress to remind them of the importance of the stability that will come from passing Farm Bill 2.0.

Reciprocity and Balance: The New Blueprint for U.S. Agricultural Trade Agreements

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 21:01:53 GMT

Ambassador Julie Callahan is the chief ag negotiator at the U.S. Trade Representative, and she reports positive momentum toward rebuilding trade agreements equating to a positive U.S. ag trade balance.

“We came into a situation in January 2025 where the US ag trade deficit was ballooning in a really unsustainable manner,” she says.

At the beginning of 2025, USDA forecasted a $50 billion deficit for U.S. agricultral trade.

“Compare that to an agricultural trade surplus in 2020 when President Trump left office, of a $6 billion surplus. So we were $56 billion in the hole, you might say, at the beginning of the administration, but through the efforts of the president ensuring trading partners understand they need to treat U.S. farmers and ranchers right, we are seeing real shifts in our trade balance and chipping away at the deficit toward a surplus.”

Trade Wins Highlighted by Government Officials

Callahan points to eight signed trade agreements with: Malaysia, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Argentina, Bangladesh, Taiwan and Indonesia. She says these are binding agreements, where the foreign governments are:

lowering tariffs for U.S. ag products
removing unfair trade practices
and lifting regulatory barriers

“These are serious binding trade agreements that will deliver real value for U.S. farmers and ranchers,” Callahan says. And when asked if Congressional action to codify agreements is necessary, Callahan says that action would be supported but should not be necessary.

“These foreign governments have made binding commitments in terms of adjusting tariff schedules, they are also making regulatory changes. USTR will be enforcing these agreements. They are enforceable.”

Examples of enforceable commitments include:

Indonesia removes its import licensing requirements
Malaysia accepts facilities on their registration list as long as FSIS has them on their list

The Future of the U.S./China Trade Relationship

At the 2026 Top Producer Summit, Lyu Jiang, minister for economic and commercial affairs at the Chinese Embassy in the U.S., characterized the U.S. and Chinese relationship being a phase of stabilization.

When prompted to react, Callahan agreed saying, “We very much want a stable, predictable, transactional relationship with our Chinese counterparts. We do want to normalize, bring reciprocity and balance back to our trade relationship and ensure that U.S. farmers, and ranchers can benefit from the Chinese market again.”

She says her office is balancing the agricultural stakeholders wanting access to the large-scale Chinese market with a strategy to also diversify trade partnerships as to not be too reliant on a single country.

“We are working through the agreement on reciprocal trade to diversify our markets so we don’t overly rely on China,” she says. “We are looking to address that very serious situation where China may see agriculture as a pain point for the United States.”

With the upcoming meeting of President Trump and President Xi in April, Callahan says her team and the larger U.S. trade team is working to prepare and set the stage for a positive outcome. Callahan points to specific issues to be worked through and market focuses spanning crops and livestock.

“Both sides want the meetings to be a success,” she says. “Certainly, in the meetings leading up to the president level discussion, we will be having open and frank conversations with China where we need to see areas of improvement. That’s not limited to soybeans to sorghum. Our beef producers don’t have access to China due to China’s unfortunate actions that are not renewing facility registrations.”

The Review of USMCA

With a goal of “reciprocity and balance across north America” the trade team is working on its review of the North American trade deal.

“We absolutely understand the importance of USMCA for U.S. farmers and ranchers,” Callahan says.

Describing this as a “comprehensive review” she says that spans:

Look at what is working
Maintain what is working
Improve on areas not be delivering the benefits U.S. farmers and ranchers expect

She brings up the overall trade balance with Canada and specifically, Canadian dairy.

“With Canada, we went from a $3 billion deficit in 2020 and now we have an $11 billion ag trade deficit. So there are certainly areas for improvement, and we’re taking all of our stakeholders’ comments into consideration,” Callahan says.

Farm Bill 2.0 Clears Bipartisan House Agriculture Committee

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 14:42:36 GMT

After a markup that lasted over 20 hours, the House Committee on Agriculture passed the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 out of committee. Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (PA-15) says the legislation reflects the will of the committee, and it is filled with bipartisan provisions that will move the needle for farmers, ranchers and rural Americans across the country.

“Throughout this markup, it became clearer than ever before that our country needs a new farm bill, and we don’t need it next year, or next Congress. We need it now,” Thompson says. “I look forward to working in good faith with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we move toward a final vote on the House floor.”

Pork Producers Urge Passage Through House

Commonly referred to as Farm Bill 2.0, the legislation boasts relief for pork producers facing an “imminent patchwork” of state animal housing laws spurred by California Proposition 12, a state law that puts small farmers on the chopping block, increases the risk of industry consolidation, and undermines states’ rights.

“Pork producers of all shapes and sizes need this regulatory relief and are grateful for Chairman Thompson’s steady commitment to providing relief from state laws outside our borders,” says Duane Stateler, National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) president and pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “Now, it is up to the full House of Representatives to finish the job: pass this farm bill and give agricultural producers across the country true freedom to farm.”

Along with a dozen national farm, agriculture and transportation groups, NPPC is calling on Congress to “fix this mess immediately.” The coalition’s ask is simple: one state law should not be forced on agricultural producers across the country.

In addition to providing regulatory relief from Prop 12, the Farm Bill 2.0 also acted on additional U.S. pork producer priorities, including:

Funding and converting the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program into a full program.
Increasing funding for critical agricultural trade promotion programs, including the Market Access Program, Foreign Market Development Program, E. Kika de la Garza Emerging Markets Program, Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops, and Priority Trade Fund.
Requiring USDA to report how changes to or expiration of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement will affect agriculture.
Establishing the Agricultural Trade Enforcement Task Force to better identify and overcome trade barriers.
Expanding the Animal Health Protection Act to include improving animal disease traceability.
Allowing the establishment of additional training centers and programs under the Beagle Brigade Act.
Requiring thorough documentation on USDA’s ability to protect producers from significant economic losses due to a foreign animal disease outbreak.
Capping administrative expenses for the National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Program and the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, allowing a higher percentage of funds to be used for research.
Requiring USDA to conduct research and development on a policy to insure pork producers against financial losses from a catastrophic disease.

State Departments of Agriculture Voice Support

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) commends the committee for prioritizing provisions that strengthen local food purchasing programs, enhance international market opportunities through a doubling of the Market Access Program, reauthorize the three-legged stool for foreign animal disease prevention, and reaffirm pesticide authorities. These measures reflect key priorities of state departments of agriculture and reinforce the importance of a unified farm bill that supports U.S. farmers, ranchers and consumers.

“NASDA supports this legislation and congratulates Chairman Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson and members of the House Agriculture Committee for moving the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 forward,” says NASDA CEO Ted McKinney. “Advancing this legislation out of committee with a bipartisan vote marks an important step toward delivering the certainty and support America’s farmers, ranchers and rural communities urgently need.”

From the Outside In: Why This Farm Bill is Different

Wed, 18 Feb 2026 18:57:40 GMT

U.S. farmers and ranchers are currently operating under 2018 policies, and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) says those 2018 policies are no match for 2026 challenges.

“There’s no better example than California’s Proposition 12 and the issue it is causing for the swine industry,” Thompson told pork producers at the Illinois Swine Mixer on Feb. 17. “Like the farm bill we passed out of committee in 2024, the Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2026 includes a fix to Prop 12. At the end of day, it’s not common sense to allow a small percentage of California voters to dictate how someone in Illinois or anywhere else in the country raises their animals.”

He says the House Agriculture Committee has been busy preparing the farm bill by “using what God has given us – that’s two ears and one mouth – with the dedication to listening at least twice as much as what we speak.”

They have traveled to 43 different states and one territory, holding more than 150 listening sessions.

“We’ve done this from the perspective of legislating from the outside in,” Thompson says. “Agriculture is anything but typical. We work on your behalf. That’s why we came out on farms and ranches, and we sat down and talked to people to find out, maybe not what you wanted, but what you needed.”

We Need a Farm Bill Now

As the House Agriculture Committee prepares to meet on Feb. 23 to review the 803-page document, Thompson says he’s hopeful they can get this passed through the House by Easter, April 5.

“I think the odds are pretty darn good, and the need is even greater when you look at the financial stresses on the American farmer and rancher today,” he says. “We have to get this done.”

Thompson says he wants farmers and ranchers to know that they recognize how bad things are right now. But most importantly, he wants them to know they care.

“Those are not just empty words,” Thompson says. “We’ve been working really hard, actually for a couple years, to prepare what will be one of the most effective farm bills. With 20% of it already approved with a $66 billion investment, we’re really putting our actions to where our words are. There are more good things to happen with what we’re going to mark up next week. We know how bad things are, we recognize that, but we’re working to do something about that.”

Prop 12 Is Causing More Problems

Despite these challenging times in agriculture, Thompson is proud of how many U.S. pork producers have adapted to capture the Prop 12 market, but he said some are finding they don’t have quite the market now because people are eating less pork in California, a state known for its pork consumption.

Food affordability is just one of the reasons why he has worked so hard to find a fix for Prop 12 in the farm bill.

“In California today, I’m told there are grocery stores that now sell bacon by the slice and not the slab because people can’t afford it,” he explains. “Consumption of pork products has dropped because affordability has been reduced significantly. The cost has gone up. People who are struggling financially probably aren’t eating pork products at all, and those middle class are making decisions and maybe choosing other proteins they’re able to get more for their money.”

Most importantly, Prop 12 is a slippery slope. One state should not impose agricultural practices on other states, he says.

“Constitutionally, it’s just wrong,” Thompson says. “The Supreme Court said this is something Congress should do, and so we’re doing it. If you allow this to stand, the question is, what will come next in terms of overriding agriculture or animal science with political science?”

Beyond the Farm Bill: Labor and USMCA

While the farm bill continues to be Thompson’s main focus right now, he is also focused on agricultural labor and the renegotiation of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) trade agreement. One of the most common requests he gets from farmers is about reforming the agricultural labor system.

“I organized an ag labor working group in the last Congress to have the hard conversations about what was working and what wasn’t,” he says. “We needed certainty. We needed reliability. Without workforce, we have food insecurity. With food insecurity, we have national insecurity. The implications of that are significant.”

The bipartisan group of eight Republicans and eight Democrats developed “practical solutions that work on both sides of the aisle.” In the end, the final report included 15 solutions recommended unanimously by the working group and informed by producers and processors who testified before the committee.

He says they are putting the finishing touches on the discussion draft, which looks very similar to the recommendations that came out of this working group. The three topics addressed regarding the H-2A visa program are expanding access to include year-round for the livestock industry, controlling costs and streamlining the overall process.

“The goal is to put out a discussion draft after we’re done with the victory celebration of at least passing the farm bill out of the House Committee,” he says. “I don’t want to let it hang out there long because it is critically important. We need to get moving, but we will probably give at least three weeks of opportunity for input in a discussion draft. We’ll take those comments back, make some final tweaks if needed or if indicated, and then we’ll get the bill introduced.”

On the trade front, he says USMCA has been a great benefit to American agriculture, resulting in over $60 billion in exports to Canada and Mexico since it was signed into law. For the pork industry alone, these exports represent a 66% increase in value since enactment, he adds.

“I know the agreement’s not perfect, and there are various things I’d like to see addressed during this negotiation,” Thompson says. “But more importantly, I’d like to know from you as we go forward what you would like to see in this renegotiation.”

Don’t Be Quiet Now

Farmer and rancher input is always of great value to legislators, but especially now.

“Your voice matters and you have a role to play in getting a new farm bill across the line,” Thompson says. “Find time in your busy schedules to stand up and speak out. Send emails, make phone calls, reach out to your congressional delegation. We’ve got a lot on our hands in 2026 in the ag committee, but I want you to know we are on your side and will keep fighting for you every day in Congress.”

Chairman Thompson’s Farm Bill 2.0 Includes Federal Fix for Prop 12

Fri, 13 Feb 2026 22:22:12 GMT

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson’s (R-PA) Farm Bill 2.0 includes a federal fix to the “massive issues caused by the impending and disastrous patchwork of state laws spurred by California Proposition 12,” National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) said.

The House Agriculture Committee released the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 on Feb. 13. The text includes clarification that states and local governments cannot impose, directly or indirectly, as a condition for sale or consumption, a condition or standard on the production of covered livestock unless the livestock is physically located within such state or local government. In addition, the text:

Provides clarity to national markets by ensuring producers must only comply with applicable production standards imposed by their own state or local government.
Protects producers from having to comply with a patchwork of state-by-state regulations.
Protects the rights of states and local governments to establish standards as they deem necessary, but only for those raising covered livestock within their own borders.
Only covers production (excluding domestic animals raised for the primary purpose of egg production), and does not include the movement, harvesting or further processing of covered livestock.

“America’s pork producers thank Chairman Thompson for continuing to take bold steps once again to protect our livelihoods from an unsustainable patchwork of state laws,” said NPPC President Duane Stateler, an Ohio pork producer. “We implore the full House Agriculture Committee to stand up for the American farmer, preserve states’ rights and help keep pork affordable for the American consumers.”

Prop 12 Problems

NPPC said Chairman Thompson and other leaders in D.C. remain dedicated to protecting producers’ freedom to farm by finding a solution to Prop 12. NPPC detailed the following problems that continue to plague Americans because of Prop 12:

Tramples on states’ rights
“Prop 12 sets a precedent that undermines the foundation of interstate commerce, allowing a single state to dictate how food is produced across the country—even when that food is produced outside its borders,” NPPC said. “Fixing Prop 12 protects the rights of states by allowing each the exclusive right to regulate how livestock are produced within their borders.”
- In passing Prop 12, California violated Congress’ exclusive constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. Congressional action to fix this is rooted in Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution: “The Congress shall have the power … To regulate commerce … among the several states” (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3).
A patchwork of regulations
“Prop 12 sets the stage for a patchwork of 50 state laws, dictating different versions of animal housing laws, which all producers—no matter the state they farm in— must comply with if they want to sell their pork to all consumers,” NPPC said.
- NPPC Vice President and Ohio pork producer Pat Hord, who has retrofitted his barns to be Prop 12-compliant, has told Congress that compliance does not future-proof farmers from more financial burdens if patchwork laws are not addressed.
  
  “Whatever I do today could need to be changed when a new state decides they want a different housing standard,” Hord said. “These are expensive changes, and some farmers may exit the business amid this uncertainty, which increases consolidation.”
Industry consolidation
“Prop 12 leads to industry consolidation, potentially crushing small and medium-sized farms,” NPPC said. “While even large farms cannot sustain ongoing changes to sow housing laws, they are more likely to be able to afford the initial changes mandated by Prop 12. Contrarily, smaller and independent producers often cannot. This means fewer family farms and reduced competition across the industry.”
- In the first quarter of 2025, NPPC reports that 12% of small pork operations ( less than 500 sows) exited the market or shifted production away from breeding due to compliance costs and uncertainty, according to USDA.
Ignores the experts
“Prop 12 ignores expert veterinary advice and chips away at sound veterinary options,” NPPC wrote. “The American Veterinary Medical Association says Prop 12 does ‘not objectively improve animal welfare and may unintentionally cause harm.’”
- The housing requirement established by Prop 12 is arbitrary, lacks a scientific or animal welfare foundation, and disregards the expertise of producers and veterinarians whose professional responsibility is to safeguard animal health, NPPC said.
Raises prices for consumers
“Prop 12 makes pork less affordable at the grocery store,” NPPC pointed out. “The latest data shows increased retail prices in California are still more than 20% higher than before Prop 12 took effect.”
Trade issues
“Prop 12 causes problems with trading partners,” NPPC explained. “Under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, for example, states are not permitted to create non-tariff barriers to trade.”

A Modern Bill for Modern Challenges

“This bill provides modern policies for modern challenges and is shaped by years of listening to the needs of farmers, ranchers, and rural Americans,” Thompson said. “The farm bill affects our entire country, regardless of whether you live on a farm, and I look forward to seeing my colleagues in Congress work together to get this critical legislation across the finish line.”

Thompson said a new farm bill is long overdue, and the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 is an important step forward in providing certainty to farmers, ranchers and rural communities.

“We made historic agricultural investments last summer in the Working Families Tax Cuts (H.R. 1), but there are many key policy components that remain to be addressed,” Thompson said. “With that in mind, the House Committee on Agriculture will begin marking up a new farm bill February 23.”

House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (MN-02) said review of the legislative text is ongoing.

“Based on what I know, the Republican farm bill fails to meet the moment facing farmers and working people,” Craig said. “Farmers need Congress to act swiftly to end inflationary tariffs, stabilize trade relationships, expand domestic market opportunities like year-round E15 and help lower input costs. The Republican majority instead chose to ignore Democratic priorities and focus on pushing a shell of a farm bill with poison pills that complicates if not derails chances of getting anything done.”

A fix for Prop 12 is backed by nearly 1,000 agriculture groups across more than 40 states, including the American Farm Bureau Federation.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) praised efforts by Thompson and the House Agriculture Committee to put together a farm bill that will bring greater certainty to producers at a difficult time.

“Dairy farmers look forward to working with House members and senators as this legislation makes its way through Congress, and we pledge our support in crafting the best legislation possible,” NMPF said.

The House Committee on Agriculture will begin marking up a new farm bill Feb. 23, Thompson said.

A Trade Win for Beef and Pork: U.S. and Taiwan Sign Agreement on Reciprocal Trade

Fri, 13 Feb 2026 15:31:21 GMT

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced the signing of an Agreement on Reciprocal Trade between the United States and Taiwan that includes significant market access gains for U.S. red meat.

“The Agreement on Reciprocal Trade with Taiwan will eliminate tariff and nontariff barriers facing U.S. exports to Taiwan, furthering opportunities for American farmers, ranchers, fishermen, workers, small businesses and manufacturers,” Ambassador Jamieson Greer said . “This agreement also builds on our longstanding economic and trade relationship with Taiwan and will significantly enhance the resilience of our supply chains, particularly in high-technology sectors.”

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins praised the agreement on X, saying this will open up real markets and boost opportunities for rural communities.

New trade deal with our partner, Taiwan!
🇺🇸🤝🇹🇼

THANK YOU @POTUS and @USTradeRep. Under the new U.S.–Taiwan Reciprocal Trade Agreement, Taiwan is cutting or eliminating tariffs on nearly all U.S. agricultural exports — from animal protein like beef, pork, and dairy to corn,… https://t.co/44xmlzP04o
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) February 13, 2026

U.S. Beef’s Potential to Grow Export Opportunities
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) says this will strengthen one of the most important and fastest-growing markets for U.S. beef. Taiwan is the fifth largest market for U.S. beef, with exports valued at about $650 million, and the U.S. is the largest supplier of beef to Taiwan.

“There is still potential for further growth with the increased access for all U.S. beef products, including those in high demand for yakiniku barbecue and trendy burger concepts,” U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) said. “The elimination of tariffs on U.S. beef will definitely improve our competitiveness.”

Foreign markets play a critical role in producer profitability with beef exports accounting for more than $415 per fed cattle processed in 2024, NCBA President Gene Copenhaver explained.

“Strong, science-based trade agreements are essential to adding value for U.S. cattle producers, and Taiwan has emerged as one of the strongest international markets for U.S. beef,” Copenhaver said. “Duty-free access improves competitiveness and provides long-term certainty for producers who depend on export markets to maximize the value of every animal. American cattle producers look forward to this expanded market access for years to come thanks to the work of President Trump and U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer.”

Securing Greater Market Access for U.S. Pork
It’s also a step forward for the U.S. pork industry as U.S. pork has been “widely disadvantaged in Taiwan,” USMEF said. The EU and Canada currently dominate Taiwan’s pork imports.

“USMEF is optimistic that reducing both tariffs and nontariff barriers will help enable larger U.S. pork exports to Taiwan, as USMEF remains focused on regaining Taiwanese consumer trust in U.S. pork,” USMEF said.

Organizations say this trade deal reinforces science-based standards consistent with the World Organization for Animal Health and Codex Alimentarius.

“I would like to thank President Trump and Ambassadors Greer and Callahan for their hard work,” said Lori Stevermer, a Minnesota pig farmer. “This agreement stands to boost U.S. pork exports by cutting tariffs in half. It also requires Taiwan to follow maximum residue levels (MRLs) set by Codex for ractopamine in pork fat, kidney, liver and muscle. While not always as obvious as a tariff reduction, by accepting USDA FSIS inspections, audits and export certificates, this agreement reduces the nontariff barriers we face and allows opportunities for more plants to export pork. Overall, U.S. pig farmers will have greater market access to a country that loves pork and that’s good for our farms and businesses.”

Additionally, within six months Taiwan must recognize the African swine fever protection zone established by the U.S.

“Our 15-plus year endeavor to break down trade barriers in the high-value market of Taiwan has paid off,” said NPPC president Duane Stateler, an Ohio pork producer. “This means more U.S. pork on international tables and more opportunities and prosperity for American producers.”

Read the Fact Sheet on U.S.-Taiwan Agreement on Reciprocal Trade

Trump, Zeldin Announce 'Largest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History'

Thu, 12 Feb 2026 21:45:13 GMT

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the “single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history” alongside President Trump in the White House today.

EPA is eliminating both the 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and all subsequent federal GHG emission standards for all vehicles and engines of model years 2012 to 2027 and beyond. The action also eliminates all off-cycle credits, including for the start-stop feature.

President Trump’s Day 1 Executive Order 14154 “Unleashing American Energy” tasked EPA with submitting recommendations on the legality and continuing applicability of this finding in the first 30 days of this term. On March 12, 2025, Zeldin announced that the agency was kicking off a formal reconsideration of the finding and resulting regulations. Zeldin formally announced the agency’s proposal to reconsider these actions on July 29, 2025.

“EPA’s historic move restores consumer choice, makes more affordable vehicles available for American families, and decreases the cost of living on all products by lowering the cost of trucks,” EPA said in a release .

Former President Barack Obama commented on X that because of the endangerment finding: “we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money.”

Today, the Trump administration repealed the endangerment finding: the ruling that served as the basis for limits on tailpipe emissions and power plant rules. Without it, we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can…
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) February 12, 2026

Saving Taxpayer Dollars
The administration says the final rule will save American taxpayers over $1.3 trillion in regulations, by removing the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify and comply with federal GHG emission standards for motor vehicles, and repeals associated compliance programs, credit provisions, and reporting obligations that exist solely to support the vehicle GHG regulatory regime.

“Lee is also working on cleaning up the horrible situation with regard to farm equipment,” President Trump said. “You could use John Deere as an example and other companies where tractors are unbelievably expensive and don’t work as well because of all of the environmental nonsense that was put on them. But the people are going to be a beneficiary because the equipment is going to be a lot less expensive and most importantly it’s going to work much better.”

This major deregulatory process included ‘substantial public input and robust analysis’ of the law following the Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and West Virginia v. EPA. The agency held an extended 52-day public comment period, which included four days of virtual public hearings where more than 600 individuals testified. EPA received about 572,000 public comments on the proposed rule and made substantial updates to the final rule in response to comments.

“The Endangerment Finding has been the source of 16 years of consumer choice restrictions and trillions of dollars in hidden costs for Americans,” Zeldin said in a release. “Referred to by some as the ‘Holy Grail’ of the ‘climate change religion,’ the Endangerment Finding is now eliminated. The Trump EPA is strictly following the letter of the law, returning commonsense to policy, delivering consumer choice to Americans and advancing the American Dream.”

Affordable vehicle ownership is essential to the American Dream and a primary driver of economic mobility out of poverty in the U.S., the Agency explained. This action will result in average cost savings of over $2,400 per vehicle.

“As EPA Administrator, I am proud to deliver the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history on behalf of American taxpayers and consumers,” Zeldin said. “As an added bonus, the off-cycle credit for the almost universally despised start-stop feature on vehicles has been removed.”

What Does This Mean for the Future?
Climate scientists say the overturning of the endangerment finding undermines decades of scientific progress and damages the credibility of U.S. institutions tasked with protecting the environment, the Associated Press reports. Scientists point out that rising global temperatures — the hottest years on record have all occurred since 2009 — cause more extreme weather that endangers people and causes billions of dollars in damage from more frequent and severe heat waves, wildfires, droughts and catastrophic flooding from more-intense storms.

The EPA action repeals all GHG emissions standards for cars and trucks, but experts believe it could trigger a broader undoing of climate regulations for stationary sources such as power plants and oil and gas facilities, AP reports.

David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told AP that this could prevent future administrations from proposing rules to address global warming because they would have to restart the scientific and legal process to establish a new endangerment finding, which could take years and face legal challenges.

More DEF Relief? EPA Takes New Action for Farmers and Truckers

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 16:14:39 GMT

On the heels of clarifying farmers’ right to repair their own equipment, EPA is escalating pressure on diesel engine manufacturers over ongoing Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system failures the administration claims continue to sideline farm machinery and trucks.

On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency is demanding detailed failure data from major diesel engine manufacturers as it considers additional rules aimed at reducing DEF-related shutdowns and derates that have plagued farmers, truckers and equipment operators for years.

The move builds directly on Monday’s EPA right-to-repair guidance announcement that clarified the Clean Air Act does not prohibit farmers from fixing their own non-road diesel equipment, which includes making temporary emissions overrides when necessary to complete repairs.

“As I traveled to all 50 states during my first year as EPA administrator, I heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others rightly complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix,” Zeldin said in a statement on Tuesday. “EPA understands this is a massive issue, which is why we have already established commonsense guidance for manufacturers to update DEF systems.

“Today, we are furthering that work and demanding detailed data to hold manufacturers accountable for the continued system failures,” he added.

While neither announcement fully rolls back DEF requirements on tractors, a step many farmers and truckers continue to push for, both signal movement in that direction.

With today’s news in the mix, here’s what farmers and truckers need to know:

1. Increased Operational Up-Time.

The most immediate benefit is the reduction of “forced downtime.” Under the clarified guidance announced on Feb. 2, farmers can now perform temporary emissions overrides to complete essential work, such as planting or harvesting, even if a DEF failure occurs. The extension of warning periods — specifically the 36-hour window for non-road equipment before a derate kicks in — provides a buffer to finish a job before seeking repairs.

2. Legal Empowerment for Repairs.

EPA has explicitly stated the Clean Air Act cannot be used by manufacturers as a shield to prevent farmers from fixing your own equipment. This clarification removes a major legal hurdle in the right-to-repair movement, potentially lowering repair costs by allowing farmers and independent mechanics to access the tools and software needed to address DEF-related faults.

3. Manufacturer Accountability.

Under Section 208(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is demanding warranty and failure data for Model Year 2016, 2019 and 2023 engines from 14 major on-road and non-road diesel manufacturers (covering 80% of the market). That shifts the burden of DEF reliability from the end-user to the manufacturer. EPA says the information will help determine whether persistent DEF problems are tied to specific product generations, system designs or materials, and will inform further regulatory steps in 2026. Manufacturers have 30 days to comply or face potential enforcement actions.

4. Impact on Machinery Values.

Auction data suggests farmers are already voting with their checkbooks. According to Machinery Pete , demand and values remain strongest for pre-DEF used equipment, while interest in DEF-equipped machinery has softened.

If these EPA actions lead to more reliable DEF systems or easier repairs, the high demand (and inflated prices) for older, less efficient equipment might eventually stabilize as newer models become less of a liability in the field.

5. More Changes are Coming.

When asked why EPA has not eliminated DEF requirements entirely,Zeldin said the agency said it is actively building on last summer’s guidance and actively moving toward “common-sense” adjustments that prioritize productivity alongside emissions standards.

EPA’s demand for warranty and failure data follows DEF guidance issued in August 2025 that significantly softened inducement rules. That guidance delayed severe derates, reduced sudden shutdowns and required manufacturers to update software so operators could continue safely working while addressing faults.

For heavy-duty trucks, warning periods were extended to up to 650 miles or 10 hours before derates begin, with weeks of normal operation allowed before speed is limited. Non-road equipment now sees no impact for the first 36 hours after a DEF fault.

EPA has also said that starting with Model Year 2027, new diesel trucks must be engineered to avoid sudden and severe power loss after running out of DEF.

EPA Backs Farmers, Affirms Right to Repair Equipment

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 17:42:10 GMT

EPA issued new right-to-repair guidance on Monday, clarifying how the Clean Air Act applies to non-road diesel equipment. It’s a move EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin says is intended to end years of confusion and misuse of the law that has limited farmers’ ability to fix their own machinery.

“Unfortunately, equipment manufacturers have misused the Clean Air Act by falsely claiming that environmental laws prevented them from making essential repair tools or software available to all Americans,” he says. “Because of this misinterpretation of the law, manufacturers have limited the ability of farmers and independent repair shops to repair equipment.”

How Much Will Right to Repair Save the Average Farm?

According to Kelly Loeffler, Small Business Administration (SBA) administrator, the savings could be $48 billion across agriculture. For an individual farm, that could mean:

$33,000 in savings per repair
$3,000 to $4,000 in potential yield losses avoided due to reduced downtime
10% reduction in annual operating costs
Up to 80% reduction in repair costs annually

Loeffler says savings come from avoiding dealer-only repairs, reducing downtime during critical fieldwork windows, and eliminating transportation and labor delays tied to authorized service requirements.

The news came as a joint announcement on Feb. 2 with Loeffler as well as USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins.

“Today we are issuing guidance out of the Trump EPA to make abundantly clear that if you own your farm and other non-road diesel equipment, you have the right to fix it,” Zeldin says. “This might seem like a no-brainer, but ask any American farmer and they will tell you about the headaches and costly hassles that they have been forced to endure at the hands of equipment manufacturers.”

Zeldin says manufacturers have relied on what he calls a false interpretation of the Clean Air Act to restrict access to repair tools, software and diagnostic systems. He says today’s announcement will make that new guidance clear.

What EPA’s Announcement Didn’t Include? A Complete Rollback of DEF

Following today’s right-to-repair announcement, Farm Journal asked EPA why the administration isn’t also removing Diesel Exhaust Fluid, or DEF, requirements for farm equipment. Farmers have long cited DEF as a major contributor to rising equipment costs, particularly compared with competitors in Brazil, for example. In summer 2025, EPA issued guidance relaxing DEF “inducement” requirements, and today’s announcement focuses on allowing farmers to temporarily override DEF when making repairs.

In response, EPA says the agency is actively building on last summer’s DEF guidance.

“As Administrator Zeldin mentioned on today’s press call, EPA is actively working to build upon the DEF guidance the agency issued this summer,” the press office wrote. “EPA understands DEF is a major issue facing farmers, truck drivers and equipment operators. The agency will be making an announcement on DEF in the near future.”

This indicates that while today’s right-to-repair guidance stops short of changing DEF rules, additional updates could be coming soon.

Downtime, Dealer Dependence and Lost Productivity

Zeldin says farmers are often forced to rely exclusively on authorized dealerships for repairs, even during critical times like during planting and harvest when downtime costs farmers time and money.

“Instead of a farmer being able to fix their own equipment in the field or bring it down the road to their local repair shop, farmers have been forced to rely solely on authorized dealers for essential repairs, which are not always close by,” he says. “For farmers, timing is everything. When equipment breaks down during planting or harvesting, delays can result in thousands of dollars in lost productivity.”

He adds that the financial burden goes beyond inconvenience.

“Being forced to haul machinery to a certified dealership, pay higher prices for repairs and wait in line; it’s not just inconvenient,” Zeldin says. “It can prove to be very economically damaging.”

The Future of DEF: Is an Emissions Rollback Coming?

This latest right-to-repair announcement builds on action taken by the Trump administration in August 2025, when EPA issued guidance addressing diesel exhaust fluid, or DEF, system failures in farm equipment. The 2025 guidance aimed to address widespread frustration among farmers with Tier 4 emissions technology, while maintaining long-term environmental protections.

Prior to that announcement, in early June, John Deere sent a letter to EPA, asking the agency to clarify that temporary emissions overrides are allowed. In response, EPA issued guidance on Aug. 12 and later urged DEF system software updates to prevent sudden shutdowns, helping farmers and equipment operators make repairs without losing productivity or safety.

The new right-to-repair guidance announced today by EPA, USDA and SBA aims to extend this administration’s approach by clarifying farmers’ ability to make essential repairs themselves, which they claim will further improve reliability, efficiency and cost savings on the farm.

If you go back to the Trump administration’s original announcement last summer, EPA said it would allow manufacturers to update DEF system software to prevent abrupt power loss in tractors, trucks and other diesel machinery. The goal was to reduce “red tape” and prevent equipment shutdowns during critical planting and harvest periods, while still maintaining emissions controls.

Key aspects of the 2025 DEF guidance included:

Reduced Derating: Instead of immediate, severe speed and power reductions when DEF levels are low or sensors fail, engines could now slow down more gradually, reducing disruption in the field.
“Soft” Power Loss for New Models: For 2027 and later models, engines were required not to shut down or lose power abruptly if DEF ran out.
Software Fixes for Existing Equipment: Manufacturers could issue software updates to ensure older machinery properly handled low-DEF scenarios.
No Deleting Permitted: Emissions equipment could not be removed, and the guidance did not legalize deleting any system.

EPA says the announcement meant tractors and machinery were less likely to experience sudden, catastrophic power loss, which would reduce downtime.

USDA: Right to Repair Is Important for Everyday Farm Operations

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins says the administration has been working on the guidance for months because of its importance to everyday farm operations.

“We have been working on today’s guidance now for a while because we know how much it means for the everyday farmer,” Rollins says. “The right to repair isn’t just a slogan. It’s a common-sense extension of the God-given right to private property.”

Rollins ties equipment downtime directly to food production and national security.

“Every single day our farmers feed us, they fuel us, they clothe us,” she says. “But when that equipment breaks down and remains out of operation, it means crops aren’t planted or harvested, mouths aren’t fed, and America’s economic growth and national security are put at risk.”

She says farmers overwhelmingly agree they should be able to repair their own equipment, an issue USDA has been hearing since President Trump took office more than a year ago.

“Farmers shouldn’t be forced to haul their equipment to specialized and costly repair shops when they could be making those repairs on their own,” Rollins says. “An overwhelming majority of farmers, north of 95%, agree with that statement.”

What Does the New EPA Right to Repair Guidance Allow?

Zeldin stresses the guidance does not weaken emissions standards or change the Clean Air Act.

“It does not change the law, and it does not reduce compliance obligations,” he says. “What it does do is stop the law from being misused to block common-sense repairs.”

The guidance clarifies that equipment owners may temporarily override emissions systems — including diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) systems — when necessary to complete a repair, as long as the equipment is returned to compliance.

“At times, a tractor might just stop working altogether in the middle of harvest because of a DEF issue,” Zeldin says. “This allows farmers to fix broken DEF systems right there at home or in the field.”

SBA: ‘Huge Relief’ with Measurable Savings

Small Business Administration Administrator Kelly Loeffler says the guidance delivers significant, quantifiable savings for farmers.

“I’m the product of one of the 1.9 million farms in this great nation that feed, fuel and clothe our country,” Loeffler says. “Diesel exhaust fluid and now right to repair — these are huge-relief, common-sense reforms.”

Loeffler says SBA economists worked to quantify the impact farm by farm.

“In the aggregate, this is about a $48 billion savings,” she says. “It’s about $33,000 per repair.”

She adds that downtime drives additional losses.

“The loss of yield could be up to $3,000 to $4,000 for the average farm,” Loeffler says. “That’s time spent leaving the field, missing a window of dry weather and dealing with delays in parts and labor.”

According to Loeffler, the guidance could reduce annual operating costs by roughly 10% and cut repair costs dramatically.

“This could potentially reach an 80% annual reduction in the cost of repairs,” she says. “And we know those repairs are getting even more expensive.”

John Deere Say’s EPA’s Guidance Responds to Formal Request

John Deere says the EPA’s right-to-repair guidance directly responds to a formal request the company made to the agency in June 2025 .

In a statement, John Deere says it sought updated guidance from EPA to expand repair options for customers and independent technicians while still ensuring compliance with federal emissions requirements.

“John Deere appreciates today’s action by EPA Administrator Zeldin, which responds directly to a formal request made by the company in June 2025,” the company says. “John Deere sought this updated guidance from the EPA with the intent to further increase customers’ and independent repair technicians’ repair capabilities while ensuring compliance with EPA requirements and guidance.”

The company says its request aligns with its long-standing position that customers should have flexibility in how their equipment is repaired.

“John Deere’s request to the EPA is consistent with the company’s longstanding commitment to supporting customer choice on how equipment is repaired — whether through their trusted John Deere dealer, with a local service provider, or by doing the work themselves,” the statement says.

John Deere adds that in light of the updated EPA guidance, it plans to roll out new repair functionality for customers.

“The temporary inducement override capability will soon be made available to John Deere customers through Operations Center™ PRO Service,” the company says, describing the platform as an enhanced digital repair tool that provides diagnostic, repair and reprogramming capabilities.

The company says additional information about the tool is available through its website.

Trump Administration Frames Announcement as Farmer Choice and Independence

All three officials frame the announcement as centered on farmer independence.

“This is about fairness, competition and independence,” Zeldin says. “Farmers should be able to choose where and how their equipment is repaired.”

“In America, the timely, affordable maintenance of agricultural equipment should not be a luxury,” Rollins says. “It should be a given.”

“And coming from a multigenerational farm family, this issue is very personal,” Loeffler says. “We’re going to continue to make sure farmers get the regulatory relief they deserve.”

Is The Death of DEF Coming Soon?

While today’s announcement is another step in reducing regulations and emissions standards, EPA didn’t go as far as to eliminate DEF requirements on farm equipment, but told Farm Journal an announcement on that is coming soon.

Industry analysts say a rollback of federal emissions requirements on machinery could send shockwaves through both the new and used equipment markets, though exactly how depends on how far any policy would go and how manufacturers respond.

Greg Peterson, widely known as “Machinery Pete,” says the biggest immediate impact would be on used equipment values, particularly older, pre-emissions models that farmers already favor.

Emissions Rollback Could Reshape Machinery Markets, Analysts Say

Peterson points to years of auction data showing strong demand, as well as rising prices for good-condition pre-DEF tractors and combines, even during tight grain markets. If emissions rules were suddenly relaxed, he says the industry would be entering uncharted territory.

“The wild card is what happens to that one-, two-, three-, four-, five- and six-year-old equipment that’s already out there,” Peterson says. “It would be unprecedented.”

Opportunity and Uncertainty for Dealers and OEMs

While that uncertainty could create short-term friction, Peterson also sees opportunity. If manufacturers were allowed to build simpler machines again, it could align more closely with what many farmers are already voting for with their checkbooks.

“That’s what farmers want,” Peterson says, noting the continued premium buyers are willing to pay for older machines without complex emissions systems.

He adds that such a shift could be “an unbelievable opportunity” for both manufacturers and dealers, depending on how quickly and cleanly changes could be implemented at the factory level.

Manufacturers Unlikely to Fully Abandon Emissions Systems

Casey Seymour, host of the ‘ Moving Iron ’ podcast, agrees the used equipment market could benefit, but he’s skeptical manufacturers would abandon emissions technology altogether.

Seymour says the bigger issue for OEMs is regulatory whiplash. Environmental rules can change dramatically from one administration to the next, making it risky to retool factories for non-emissions machines only to reverse course a few years later.

“I don’t see a manufacturer of any color completely stepping back and saying we’re not going to worry about this anymore,” Seymour says.

Flexibility Could Boost Used Equipment Values

Instead, if EPA would decide to roll back emissions standards, Seymour envisions machines leaving the factory “emissions-ready,” giving farmers flexibility down the road. If deleting emissions systems became legal, equipment could be modified and resold without violating regulations, opening new possibilities in the secondary market.

That shift, Seymour says, could actually strengthen used equipment values. Demand for legally modified machines could rise, and farmers would no longer need to remove emissions components illegally.

Both analysts agree the used market would likely react first to any regulatory change, while new equipment pricing may remain largely unchanged unless manufacturers gain long-term certainty on emissions policy.

Trump Confirms Support for Year-Round E-15 Deal

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 15:48:12 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.

USDA Announces New World Screwworm Grand Challenge

Wed, 21 Jan 2026 21:52:38 GMT

Today, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins announced the launch of the N ew World Screwworm (NWS) Grand Challenge. This funding opportunity marks a pivotal step in USDA’s comprehensive strategy to combat NWS and prevent its northward spread.

“This is a strategic investment in America’s farmers and ranchers and is an important action to ensure the safety and future success of our food supply, which is essential to our national security,” Rollins says. “These are the kinds of innovations that will help us stay ahead of this pest and protect our food supply and our economy, protecting the way of life of our ranchers and go towards rebuilding our cattle herd to lower consumer prices on grocery store shelves. We know we have tried-and-true tools and methods to defeat this pest, but we must constantly look for new and better methods and innovate our way to success. Together, through science, innovation, and collaboration, we can ensure we’re utilizing the latest tools and technology to combat NWS in Mexico and Central America and keep it out of the United States.”

As part of the Grand Challenge, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will make up to $100 million available to support innovative projects that enhance sterile NWS fly production, strengthen preparedness and response strategies, and safeguard U.S. agriculture, animal health, and trade.

Priority Areas for Funding

APHIS invites proposals that support one or more of the following objectives:

Enhance sterile NWS fly production
Develop novel NWS traps and lures
Develop and increase understanding of NWS therapeutics/treatments (i.e., products that could treat, prevent, or control NWS) for animals
Develop other tools to bolster preparedness or response to NWS

The notice of funding opportunity, including application instructions, eligibility, and program requirements, is available on the NWS Grand Challenge webpage . Applicants can also find information on the ezFedGrants website  or  Grants.gov  by searching USDA-APHIS-10025-OA000000-26-0001.  

Eligible applicants are invited to submit proposals that align with and support these priorities by the deadline on February 23, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. ET.

Entities interested in submitting a proposal should ensure they are registered with the  U.S. Government System for Award Management (SAM) . Learn more about the basics of the funding process and  how to get ready to apply .  

Your Next Reads:
New World Screwworm Found in Newborn Calf 197 Miles from U.S.-Mexico Border
USDA Launches Screwworm.gov
The Smell You’ll Never Forget: A Calf Infested with New World Screwworm

Protect Your Freedom to Operate: Waters Advocacy Coalition Supports New WOTUS Rule

Wed, 21 Jan 2026 16:45:25 GMT

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), as part of the Waters Advocacy Coalition (WAC), submitted comments to the U.S. EPA, voicing its support for the agency’s proposal to define what constitutes Waters of the United States (WOTUS).

“The proposed EPA regulation is a revision in the decades-long fight over defining WOTUS, which sets forth the jurisdiction of federal regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act,” NPPC explains. “These proposed revisions come following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA, which brought significant legal clarity to what is and isn’t WOTUS.”

WAC says the new rule “better aligns the regulatory definition of WOTUS with the CWA (Clean Water Act) and Supreme Court precedent - in particular, by defining critical terms such as ‘relatively permanent’ and ‘continuous surface connection.’”

In May 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court limited EPA’s authority over waterways, holding that CWA waters “refers only to geographical features that are described in ordinary parlance as streams, oceans, rivers and lakes and to adjacent wetlands that are indistinguishable from those bodies of water due to a continuous surface connection.”

“Despite that decision, the Biden administration wrote a WOTUS rule that had jurisdictional categories, including drains, ditches, stock ponds and low spots on farmlands, outside the high court’s definition, and included language that made the regulation overly broad,” the Waters Advocacy Coalition (WAC) said in comments submitted on that rule.

Pork Industry Applauds Definition

NPPC applauds the WOTUS rule for spelling out the limits of federal jurisdiction over waterways and wetlands under the CWA.

“For pork producers, an expansive definition of WOTUS that included farm fields and ditches would have led to significant increases in regulatory and activist pressure and taken away the freedom of farmers to operate,” NPPC says.

In the submitted comments, WAC says these new definitions provide much-needed clarity and transparency.

“They better preserve the states’ primary role in regulating water resources and land use within their boundaries, while still maintaining important protections for aquatic resources consistent with the law,” WAC says.

Uncertainty Imposes Substantial Cost, Delays Development

In its comments on the updated definition of WOTUS, WAC adds: “The Proposed Rule will provide regulatory certainty that WAC members desperately need and hopefully break the cycle of regulatory revisions with each change in administration. For decades, shifting WOTUS definitions have created a moving target for jurisdictional determinations, forcing landowners and operators to repeatedly modify plans, conduct redundant delineations and litigate disputed determinations. This uncertainty imposes substantial costs, delays development and discourages infrastructure investment.”

WAC points out that clear, stable, consistent jurisdictional rules allow for more efficient planning for projects and more effective environmental protection. At the same time, predictability benefits both the regulated community and the environment by “reducing unnecessary conflicts and enabling resources to be focused on genuine environmental protection.”

In the comments, WAC offered several recommendations to provide additional clarity, to further align the proposed definition with the CWA and Supreme Court precedent and aid implementation of the rule. Read the full comments here .

Congressional Agriculture Leaders Agree on Advancing Workforce, Farm Bill in 2026

Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:01:58 GMT

As the second half of the 119th Congress gets into full swing, lawmakers are looking to act on a number of priorities, including passage of a fiscal 2026 funding bill and a new farm bill.

The 2026 fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2025, and the government currently is operating through January under a continuing resolution.

Farm bills govern agricultural and food policy and are typically in place for five years. However, the 2018 Farm Bill expired in Sept. 2023 and subsequently has been extended several times.

Speaking recently at the American Farm Bureau Federation annual convention, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) said his committee likely will consider a new farm bill markup in late February. Likewise, Sen. John Boozman (R-AR), chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, indicated farm legislation will get done this year.

It is unclear whether the farm bill will include a fix to California Proposition 12, which bans the sale in that state of pork from hogs born to sows raised anywhere in housing that does not meet California’s arbitrary standards. Thompson said he supports inclusion of a fix, meanwhile Boozman highlighted concerns that inclusion would divide Senate lawmakers, making it harder to pass a bill.

Agriculture Committee leaders also agreed that agriculture’s workforce shortage should be addressed by reforming immigration laws. Current law allows such laborers only for temporary and seasonal farm work. Based on recommendations from the bipartisan Agriculture Labor Working Group, with which NPPC worked closely, Thompson is expected to introduce legislation that includes reform to the H-2A visa program for immigrant farmworkers in the first quarter of this year.

In related news, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court Eastern District of California Fresno Division following the U.S. Department of Labor’s publication of the interim final rule, which modified the methodology for calculating the hourly adverse effect wage rate for H-2A nonimmigrant workers. NPPC is monitoring the litigation and will keep members updated.

NPPC’s take:
NPPC supports quick passage of a new farm bill that fixes the problems caused by Proposition 12.

NPPC continues to advocate for the year-round needs for labor in the pork industry. Statutory reform to the H-2A program would allow producers to better utilize the program to continue to supply consumers with affordable and nutritious pork.

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

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:55:34 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.

Economists Forecast Farm Economy to Stabilize, But High Costs and Policy Uncertainty Block a 2026 Rebound

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 18:26:39 GMT

As 2026 ushers in a fresh start, agricultural economists say the U.S. farm economy has stopped sliding, but it’s far from fully healed.

The December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor shows month-to-month sentiment is improving, but deep structural strain remains — especially in row crops. Meanwhile, livestock markets continue to provide strength. Crop producers face another year of tight margins driven by high input costs, weak prices and unresolved trade and policy uncertainty.

“There’s cautious optimism,” the economists say, “but very little belief that 2026 will bring a meaningful rebound without cost relief or stronger demand.”

Those themes mirror the perspective of Seth Meyer, former USDA chief economist and now director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at the University of Missouri. In a recent interview, Meyer connected the dots between narrow margins, policy responses and what might actually move the dial for U.S. agriculture heading into 2026.

Stabilizing, Not Recovering

December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Economists see the ag economy holding its ground — but not gaining strength.

54% say the ag economy is somewhat better than one month ago.
Compared with a year ago:
- 42% say conditions are worse
- 33% say they are better
Looking ahead 12 months:
- 46% expect conditions unchanged
- 38% expect improvement
- 15% expect conditions to worsen

“Momentum has improved since mid-2025,” Meyer notes, “but tight margins have been with us for a long time. Turning that around requires demand growth, not just price stabilization.

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

Grant Gardner, assistant Extension professor at the University of Kentucky, tells AgriTalk’s Chip Flory: “I think as we move into kind of this next marketing year, you’re looking at what looks like a breakeven and not a loss, but breakeven still doesn’t look great after three years of breakeven or losses.”

He says even with the $11 billion in Farmer Bridge Program payments , it won’t drastically change the outlook for the farm economy.

“Purdue had a good survey about a month ago, where they looked at what were these payments going to go to, and research would show that a lot of these payments go into long-term assets, and so land tractors, but I think over 60% of producers right now are in such a tight cash crunch that you’re going to see a lot of these payments go into that short-term debt,” Gardner says.

Consolidation a Growing Threat

Economists are nearly unanimous that the crop sector remains under extreme financial stress. 83 percent say row crops are currently in a recession. That isn’t about production declines — acres and yields haven’t collapsed — but about persistently weak profitability.

“Negative returns for at least the third consecutive year across nearly all row crops,” one economist wrote in the survey.

Another said: “Margins remain below full costs of production for many producers.”

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

Meyer traces that back to how abruptly agriculture moved from the high prices of 2021 and 2022 into today’s tighter margins.

“We moved very quickly from a very high price environment and good profitability in 2022 to very tight margins,” he says. “That usually happens coming off price peaks, but this time it happened really rapidly.”

A minority of survey respondents argued farms are “treading water,” supported by strong land values and government aid rather than eroding further, which Meyer acknowledged aligns with how risk and safety nets have interacted this year.

But when you look at how the current stress in the farm economy could impact consolidation, the ag economists say it’s the economic pressure combined with demographic trends causing the acceleration. In fact, 92% of them say consolidation is underway and unavoidable.

“Markets go to the lowest-cost producers,” one economist wrote. “That sorting is consolidation on the production side.”

Aging producers exiting and rent-heavy operations under pressure only add fuel to that trend, with one economist saying: “Consolidation happens because producers have to exit, not because they want to.

What’s Driving the Farm Economy Right Now

When economists were asked to identify the two most important factors shaping agriculture’s economic health today, their responses clustered around a familiar, but increasingly sharp, divide: strong demand in livestock and the protein sector versus persistent oversupply and cost pressure in crops, all layered with trade and policy uncertainty.

Several economists pointed to continued strength in beef demand, both domestically and through export channels, as a key stabilizing force. While the dairy sector is an area that shows signs of weakness for 2026.

“Livestock revenues are a bright spot,” one respondent noted, underscoring why the livestock sector continues to outperform crops financially.

Looking to 2026, economists overwhelmingly point to input costs, not interest rates, as the biggest barrier to profitability. Nearly 70% cited input prices as the largest challenge as well, far ahead of trade concerns or capital availability.

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

“We have too much supply and not enough demand for row crops,” one economist wrote.

Another said: “Input costs are still too high.”

Trade remains a central wild card, especially relationships with China and uncertainty around global supply. Several respondents cited trade disputes and agreements as critical factors, along with questions about the size of South American crops and how that could shape global competition in the months ahead.

Policy uncertainty was also featured prominently, with economists pointing to domestic biofuels policy, government payments and broader market signals as factors influencing both short-term cash flow and longer-term demand growth.

Overall, economists say the ag economy is being pulled in opposite directions: strong livestock demand providing support, while crops struggle under high costs, oversupply and unresolved trade and policy questions — a dynamic that helps explain why the broader farm economy feels stable, but far from healthy, as 2026 approaches.

Livestock: A Continued Bright Spot

Livestock continues to stand out as the most financially healthy segment of the ag economy. Every economist surveyed rated beef as above average or excellent, supported by strong domestic demand and tight supplies. Dairy and pork were viewed as stable to moderately strong.

That success creates a stark contrast with row crops, where corn and cotton were cited by 38% each as the commodities most at risk financially in 2026.

What Could Move Crop Prices in the Next Six Months

Looking ahead to the first half of 2026, economists say crop prices will hinge less on domestic fundamentals and more on global supply, trade flows and policy clarity.

Across responses, South America emerged as the dominant influence, with economists repeatedly citing Brazilian weather, the size of the South American harvest and how those supplies compete with U.S. exports. Several noted that clarity around South American production will be critical in setting price direction for corn, soybeans and wheat.

Trade, particularly with China, remains another key swing factor. Economists emphasized not just the announcement of trade agreements, but whether purchases translate into actual shipments.

“China purchases of U.S. crops, but also if and when actual shipments occur,” one respondent noted, adding that details within any trade deal, including purchase commitments, will matter just as much as headlines.

Domestic factors still play a role, but economists see them as secondary in the near term. Input prices, early U.S. planting conditions and assumptions about 2026 acreage were all cited as important — especially as markets begin to trade expectations for next year’s crop mix.

Policy uncertainty also hangs over the outlook. Economists pointed to ongoing questions around trade policy, biofuels policy and broader economic conditions as variables that could amplify or mute price moves.

Economists say crop prices over the next six months are likely to be driven by how global supply unfolds, whether export demand materializes and how quickly policy uncertainty is resolved, rather than by any single domestic production shock.

Biofuels Policy: A Potential Turning Point?

One of the clearest themes Meyer highlights as a possible game changer for demand, and ultimately prices, is biofuels policy.

For economists, policy levers like year-round E15, Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volumes, 45Z investment tax credits and how small refinery exemptions are handled could meaningfully influence demand for corn and soybeans in 2026 and beyond.

“It’s one of the places where policymakers actually have levers to help with tight margins in the row crop sector,” Meyer says.

He emphasizes that final rules on RFS volumes and how biobased credits are implemented could impact feedstock demand.

“For the next couple of crop seasons, RVO (Renewable Volume Obligations) and how EPA reallocates small refinery exemptions are big factors,” Meyer says. “Should we raise the RVO to soak up that pool like a sponge? Should imported feedstocks get full 45Z credit? Those decisions could move demand.”

On year-round E15, a long-sought policy priority for corn growers, Meyer is cautiously optimistic.

“I do think it matters,” he says. “Maybe it’s not a huge swing this year, but offering certainty and building demand over multiple seasons is supportive. Other countries like Brazil are ramping up their biofuels production too, so this isn’t happening in a vacuum.”

Policy Uncertainty Still Looms

Economists also flagged top priorities for 2026 policy action:

Year-round E15 (row crops)
Trade policy clarity (row crops & livestock)
Labor reform and regulatory issues (livestock)

They also highlighted under-covered risks, which include pressure on land rents and values, labor shortages, biofuels policy details (such as 45Z credits) and slower population growth affecting long-term demand.

What Could Move Livestock and Dairy Prices in the Next Six Months

When economists look ahead to livestock and dairy markets in early 2026, they see a mix of strong demand signals, supply-side risks and policy uncertainty shaping price direction.

Consumer demand remains the cornerstone of the outlook, particularly for beef. Several economists pointed to continued buying interest from U.S. consumers as the primary support for cattle prices, even as affordability pressures rise. At the same time, some warned that a more “K-shaped” economy could begin to shift demand, pulling some consumers away from beef and toward pork.

Supply dynamics and herd trends are another major focus. Economists cited herd size, potential herd expansion and the availability of feeder cattle as critical variables. The expected resumption of feeder cattle imports from Mexico was highlighted as a key factor that could influence cattle supplies and pricing, depending on timing and volume.

Animal health risks also remain on the radar. Issues such as avian influenza, screwworm and other disease threats were mentioned as potential disruptors that could quickly alter supply conditions in both livestock and dairy markets.

Policy and trade uncertainty continues to hover over the sector. Economists pointed to ongoing questions around tariffs, restrictions on live animal trade with Mexico and the next steps under the USMCA as factors that could impact both imports and exports. Political uncertainty more broadly was also cited as a potential source of market volatility.

For dairy, economists noted that beef-on-dairy dynamics are likely to continue weighing on milk prices by increasing beef supplies while complicating dairy herd decisions.

Taken together, economists say livestock and dairy prices over the next six months will be driven by a delicate balance between strong consumer demand, evolving supply conditions and unresolved trade and policy questions, with any shift in one of those areas capable of moving markets quickly.

Acreage Expectations: Stress, Not Shock

Despite margin pressure, economists do not expect dramatic acreage pullbacks in 2026. Most expect:

Corn: 93 to 95 million acres
Soybeans: 84 to 86 million acres
Wheat: 44 to 45 million acres
Cotton: 9 to 10 million acres

Corn acreage expectations have edged lower since November, as economists backed away from another year above 95 million acres. At the same time, soybean acreage expectations have firmed, with 75% now targeting 84 to 86 million acres, suggesting stronger relative economics for beans.

“Export demand has helped keep corn acres supported,” Meyer says. “The question is whether that demand holds and whether policy supports it.”

As for acreage, the major impact on prices would be a large acreage reduction, which is unlikely.

“That’s what it comes down to, too. What I’ve been thinking about is what else can you use land for? And you’ve got the pushback on urban sprawl, you’ve got pushback on other uses for ag land. But right now, the simple fact is we’ve got way too much production. Without that slowing, or a drastic increase in demand, I don’t see prices improving to very lucrative levels,” Gardner says.

Overall, The Ag Economy Is a Grind, Not a Rebound

When you look at all the results from the December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, economists paint a picture of an industry that has stopped getting worse, but has not yet found a path to durable profitability.

Crops remain mired in margin compression; livestock continues to outperform but remains sensitive to policy decisions. Government aid is buying time but not addressing structural challenges, but it’s policy outcomes, especially around biofuels, trade and E15, that could be decisive in shaping 2026 outcomes.

For now, the farm economy has found a floor. The tougher question, economists say, is whether policy can help lift it, or if it will continue to grind forward without a genuine rebound.

Related News: As Screwworm Inches Closer, When Could the U.S. Reopen the Southern Border to Cattle Imports?

These Half-Dozen U.S. Ag Trade Missions Aim To Diversify Global Demand

Wed, 31 Dec 2025 16:46:10 GMT

Trump’s USDA team has announced its agribusiness trade missions for the year ahead.

“Our team certainly plays an important role in generating demand overseas for the products,” says Luke Lindberg, USDA undersecretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs.

Lindberg points to a three-point plan Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ team is deploying:

Get better trade agreements.
Build willing buyer and willing seller relationships.
Hold trading partners accountable.

According to Lindberg, the goal is it “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.”

So far, six agribusiness trade missions have been announced for 2026 with the goal of growing global markets, increasing exports and strengthening the agricultural economy.

The six mission destinations, and potential agricultural focus areas, include the following.

1. February 2026, Jakarta, Indonesia

Since 2020, annual U.S. ag exports to Indonesia have hovered between $2.75 billion and $3.25 billion. Overall, it’s the 11^th largest trade partner for U.S. ag goods.

Indonesia is the fourth-largest market for U.S. soybeans following China, the European Union and Mexico. According to U.S. Census Bureau trade data, in 2024 Indonesia imported from the U.S. $1.2 billion in soybeans, $198 million in wheat and $139 million in cotton. This past July, the Indonesia private sector and the U.S. wheat industry signed a memorandum committing to purchasing at least 1 million metric tons of U.S. wheat between 2026 and 2030 plus a minimum of 800,000 metric tons of wheat in 2025 (prorated).

The Trump administration has worked to address long-standing barriers to U.S. agricultural trade and expanding market access into Indonesia with a trade agreement eliminating tariffs on more than 99% of U.S. products.

2. April 2026, Manila, Philippines

U.S. ag exports to the Philippines have more than doubled since 2010. In 2024, the total value was $3.5 billion, making it the ninth-largest customer for U.S. ag trade.

With limited domestic production, the Philippines imports nearly all of its dairy products, and specifically $365 million comes from the U.S. Poultry exports to the Philippines totaled $187 million, with a majority of that in frozen chicken leg quarters.

The U.S. gained market share for ethanol imports into the Philippines, having doubled volumes in 2024 with a value of $138 million.

Beef and beef products are the sixth-largest group of ag products the Philippines imports from the U.S. This category has also experienced recent growth by increasing 58% from 2023 to 2024. The U.S. is second to Brazil in market share for beef imported into the Philippines.

In 2024, the Philippines imported $120 million of pork and pork products from the U.S. The country’s local supply has been declining because of African Swine Fever.

According to an announcement in July, the Trump administration said the Philippines will charge zero tariffs for U.S. exports into their market, while the Philippines will pay 19% tariffs to the U.S.

3. May 2026, Istanbul, Turkey

According to USDA analysis, Turkey has grown its strength as an importer of raw materials and then reexported finished products. This includes importing wheat for flour and cotton for apparel.

Because of its geographic location, Turkey has also grown as a strategic regional transshipment hub, connecting U.S. exporters with trade partners across the Caucasus region.

In September, Turkey lifted its retaliatory tariffs on some U.S. ag products: rice, tree nuts, distilled spirits and more. The Trump administration says a focus for the upcoming agribusiness trade mission will be to address nontariff barriers to trade, which includes import bans on U.S. animal protein.

4. August 2026, Australia and New Zealand

The Trump administration says its trade breakthroughs with Australia will give greater access to U.S. beef exporters. The U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement is structured to give comprehensive duty-free market access.

Other protein sectors have significant trade established with Australia. In 2024, $328 million worth of U.S. pork and pork products were imported. And $173 million of U.S. dairy products were brought into the country.

New Zealand imported $520 million worth of U.S. ag goods, including: soybean meal, dairy ingredients (lactose and whey), fresh fruit and distiller’s dried grains.

5. September 2026, Saudi Arabia

This agribusiness trade mission will focus on technical issues and nontariff barriers. Saudi Arabia is the 23^rd largest ag export market for the U.S., and it is a gateway to the $3 billion market for U.S. ag goods that is the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf.

Over the past 10 years, the country has increased its imports of U.S. hay by 540% to its recent total of $152 million in 2024.

Corn, tree nuts and rice are also key ag goods exported from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia, totaling $239 million, $169 million and $123 million, respectively.

6. November 2026, Vietnam

USDA says this trade mission will focus on preferential access for specialty cheese and meats as well as improved market access for U.S. peaches and nectarines.

U.S. ag exports to the country peaked in 2018 at $4 billion and in 2023 were around $3.1 billion. Ranked from highest value to smallest, the top five ag products exported from the U.S. into Vietnam in 2023 were: cotton, soybeans, distillers grains, soybean meal and tree nuts.

For meat and meat products, the key prospects include frozen/chilled beef (boneless and bone-in), frozen chicken (leg quarters, legs and paws), and turkey.

Dairy could be a growth market for U.S. exports into Vietnam as nonfat dried milk powder has led the segment to total $146 million of imports in 2023. Fresh cheese (for foodservice/restaurants) is in demand by younger generations despite not being part of a traditional diet in the country.

USDA also points to fresh fruit as a growth category for the country, namely apples, cherries and grapes.

'Tis the Season: Secretary Rollins Accepts Give-A-Ham Challenge

Wed, 24 Dec 2025 13:43:41 GMT

There’s nothing like sitting around the table enjoying a meal with your family and friends. For many families across the country, that will be possible this year because of the generosity of the Give-A-Ham challenge.

“‘Tis the season of generosity toward those in need, and there’s nothing like gifting the gift of American agriculture,” U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins shared on Instagram.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Secretary Brooke Rollins (@secrollins)

Rollins joined the Give-a-Ham challenge after her good friend and Oklahoma Secretary of Agriculture Blayne Arthur recently challenged her to #GiveAHam.

Rollins chose to donate a ham to the team led by Julie Butner at the Tarrant Area Food Bank in Fort Worth, Texas.

“To keep the challenge going, I am passing it on to @RepBrecheen, a loyal champion of the ag community in Oklahoma and beyond!” Rollins said.

The #GiveAHam campaign is full of great stories like this every year all across the country. For example, Seaboard donated a historic 40,000 lb. of pork to the Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma —yes, that’s a semi truckload full of pork!

“We are beyond grateful to Seaboard Foods and the Oklahoma Pork Council for their impact on fighting hunger in our state,” says Jeff Marlow, president and CEO of the Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma. “Food insecurity continues to impact over half a million Oklahomans each year. We are all better together and this tremendous donation helps us serve our community and make a significant and immediate difference in the lives of families and individuals in need.”

(OK Pork Council)

From Oklahoma to Washington, D.C., and everything in between, the 2025 Give-A-Ham campaign has spurred generosity in remarkable ways, says Tom Layne, board president of the Oklahoma Pork Council (pictured above).

“We are incredibly proud to see farmers, communities and leaders come together to ensure families in need have access to nutritious, delicious protein this holiday season,” Layne says.

How Can You Help?
1. Donate Pork: Buy and donate hams or other pork products to local food pantries, shelters or charities.

2. Share Online: Post a photo or video of your donation on social media (Instagram, Facebook, etc.).

3. Use #GiveAHam Hashtag.

4. Tag and nominate: Tag the organization you donated to, friends, or fellow industry members and challenge them to participate.

5. Help share other #GiveAHam posts to spread the joy.

Why Should You Participate?
Fight Food Insecurity: Provides high-quality protein for families needing holiday meals.

Community Support: A core value for hog farmers and the pork industry to give back.

Inspire Others: Social sharing builds momentum and encourages wider participation.

“We encourage everyone to follow their lead by joining the fun to feed local communities—and keep delicious pork and the spirit of the season in mind year-round,” the National Pork Producers Council said on social media.

Here are just a few of the fun ways people joined the challenge.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by SportsAnimal (@thesportsanimal)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Keith Carver (@kc4utia)

The challenge runs through the end of the year, but giving the gift of pork is always in style.