Environmental Policy

Trump Signals More DEF Rollbacks, Pushes Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Costs

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 20:12:45 GMT

In front of a gathering of farmers, ranchers and growers at the White House, President Trump and EPA announced new guidance that will remove the DEF sensor requirements, which the Small Business Administration (SBA) estimates will save farmers $4.4 billion a year and translate into $13.79 billion for Americans. Administrator Lee Zeldin says the move impacts farmers, truckers, motor coach operators and other diesel equipment operators.

“I have heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix in all 50 states I visited during my first year as EPA administrator,” Zeldin says. “Americans are justified in being fed up with failing DEF system issues. EPA understands this is a massive issue and has been doing everything in our statutory power to address this. Today, we take another step in furthering our work by removing DEF sensors. Farmers and truckers should not be losing billions of dollars because of repair costs or days lost on the job.”

Every farmer now has the Right to Repair their own equipment thanks to President Trump. It’s crazy that our talented farmers were being prevented from doing this previously. This announcement is about common sense. Farmers will be able to spend more time in the field and less… pic.twitter.com/4hROUN45EU
— Lee Zeldin (@epaleezeldin) March 27, 2026

New Guidelines Focus on DEF Sensors

EPA says that sudden speed losses and shutdowns caused by DEF system failures compromise safety and productivity. It calls the issue unacceptable and problematic. In a release, EPA says it plans to continue to pursue all legal avenues to address Americans’ complaints. On Feb. 3, 2026, EPA demanded critical data on DEF system failures from the manufacturers that account for over 80% of all products used in DEF systems. This information will arm EPA with what it needs to permanently address DEF system failures. Thus far, the agency has received data from 11 of the 14 manufacturers, and in less than a month, EPA has turned around preliminary findings to issue today’s guidance, demonstrating Administrator Zeldin’s commitment to fixing this issue.

“Today, by eliminating DEF mandates, the Trump Administration is taking yet another step to free up hardworking Americans to focus on the vital work of feeding, clothing, building, and fueling our nation,” says SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler. “I applaud Administrator Zeldin for his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to our continued collaboration to cut red tape for small businesses across the U.S. food supply chain.”

Several ag equipment manufacturers were highlighted during the event at the White House, including John Deere. The company weighed in EPA’s latest announcement about DEF.

“John Deere applauds the EPA’s leadership to provide as much flexibility through agency guidance as possible to limit the frequency of false DEF-quality inducements,” says Kyle Gilley, vice president for global government affairs at John Deere. “Today’s announcement builds upon EPA guidance from February 2026, requested by John Deere, to provide farmers additional tools to complete emissions-related repairs. These announcements are a win for farmers and their ability to keep modern equipment operating in the field.”

EPA says the preliminary review of the warranty data suggests that DEF sensor failures are a significant source of warranty claims and DEF-related inducements. The agency’s new guidance makes clear that under existing regulations, manufacturers can stop inaccurate DEF system failures by removing traditional emission sensors, known as Urea Quality Sensors, and switching to nitrous oxide (NOx) sensors.

EPA also affirms that approved NOx sensor-based software updates can be installed on existing engines without being treated as illegal tampering under the Clean Air Act. This is in line with EPA’s February 2026 Right to Repair clarification guidance , which removed a major barrier keeping farmers from fixing their faulty DEF systems in the field. EPA anticipates the switch will greatly curb errors that traditional sensor technologies have been prone to and reduce the issues Americans face with inaccurate DEF failures.

For more information, see EPA’s Diesel Exhaust Fluid .

Trump Calls on Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Prices If DEF Rolled Back

During Friday’s event, Trump also spoke about the rising complexity and cost of modern farm equipment.

“When you buy a tractor today, you spend 50 percent of your time fixing the environmental — I say environmental impact statement garbage that’s on the tractor,” he says.

He adds that equipment often includes computerized systems that can shut down tractors unnecessarily, increasing repair costs.

“I said to the head of John Deere, ‘Is this a good thing or a bad thing?’ He said, sir, you have no idea how bad it is. It’s made our tractors so complicated. … We want to go back to the old ways, sir. And I said, I agree with you 100 percent.”

During remarks at the event at the White House today, President Trump said EPA is working to further roll back DEF-related requirements and pushed manufacturers to cut equipment costs:

“You’re going to lower the cost of a tractor… they’re going to be able to very shortly…
— Tyne Morgan (@Tyne_Ag) March 27, 2026

The president says the administration is looking into further rolling back DEF requirements, but as he does, he is also urging manufacturers to reduce equipment prices for farmers if the added environmental regulation costs are no longer there.

“Lee (Zeldin), I think we can say, I know you’re in the process of cutting out massive amounts of nonsense that are mandated to be put on your tractors, that all of your trucks that cost your fortune…and I know that they’re going to do this. And I asked one thing, you got to promise me one thing. You’re not going to take any profits. You’re going lower the cost of a tractor. I want you to lower the costs. And if they don’t lower the course, you’ll let me know. And I’ll have to do a big number of those companies. Okay? They’re going to be able to, very shortly, produce a bigger, better tractor and substantially less money. It’s going to be better. It’s gonna be a better tractor at substantially less,” Trump says.

He adds that future tractors will be simpler, more reliable and less expensive.

“I want John Deere and Case and all of the great companies … to give it to you in the form of lower tractor and equipment costs. And I think it’s going to have a huge impact,” he says.

President Trump then directed EPA Administrator Zeldin to explore ways to require, or mandate, manufacturers to lower the cost of farm equipment.

EPA’s guidance issued on Friday is part of a broader effort to address complaints from farmers, truckers and other diesel equipment operators about DEF system failures that cause equipment shutdowns, but Trump says more action on DEF is currently underway.

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.

$280,000? 18-Year-Old Semi Sells for Record Price, Signaling Pre-DEF Equipment Demand Is Surging

Thu, 18 Dec 2025 17:56:03 GMT

An 18-year-old semi just set a record at auction, offering one of the clearest signals yet of where demand is flowing in today’s machinery market — and where it isn’t.

A 2007 Peterbilt 379, built before diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) systems were required, sold for $280,000 during a late-year consignment auction in North Dakota. The truck was a rare example: one owner, always shedded, and showing just 20,817 miles. Still, the price stunned even seasoned auction watchers.

Greg Peterson — better known as Machinery Pete — says the sale eclipses every previous result he has tracked for the iconic model.

“I’ve seen about 2,800 Pete 379s over the last 25 years,” Peterson says. “The previous high was $262,000, and that was back in July 2022 when the whole market was absolutely on fire. To come along now and just smoke that number, with an 18-year-old truck, that tells you something.”

That “something,” Peterson says, is demand not just for trucks, but for pre-emissions equipment across agriculture and transportation. Auctions, he notes, are brutally honest. They don’t care about model-year labels or marketing cycles. They simply reflect what buyers want — and what they are willing to pay for.

“That Peterbilt is an 18-year-old truck,” Peterson says. “And it brings $280,000. Auctions don’t lie. They tell you exactly what people want — and right now, that’s used, pre-DEF equipment.”

‘07 Peterbilt 379 w/ only 20,817 miles, 1 owner, always shedded, sold $280,000 today on @UlmerAuction sale. I’ve compiled 2800+ auction sale prices on 379’s past 25 Yrs. $280,000 is new record high auction price. Was $262K on 7/28/22 Villa Grove, IL salehttps://t.co/S6yC5PLDvR pic.twitter.com/TxdTN67GIH
— Greg Peterson (@MachineryPete) December 17, 2025

Used Equipment Values Gain Momentum

The Peterbilt sale is not an isolated case. Peterson says used equipment values, broadly speaking, have been strengthening for much of the year — a trend that runs counter to what the machinery market has historically done during periods of soft farm income.

“Used values started to solidify in the third week of February,” Peterson says. “They held, held, held. Then we got into November and December and it was like, ‘Katie, bar the door.’ I’ve never seen this in my 36 years.”

What makes the current cycle unusual, he says, is not just that used values are strong — it’s that they’re strengthening at a time when new equipment sales are clearly contracting.

“In the past, when I’ve seen auction prices take off like this, it’s always been equivalent to optimal conditions for new equipment sales,” Peterson says. “That ain’t the case this time.”

Recent auction data reinforces the point. A 2011 Case IH 6088 combine, pre-DEF and with low hours, sold for $178,000, the highest auction price for that model in nearly 11 years. A 2009 John Deere 8295R tractor with just over 1,000 hours brought $230,000, the strongest result in more than 30 months.

“I’ve never seen used values going up while new sales are going down,” Peterson says. “Never.”

Price of New Forces a Rethink

Peterson says the underlying force behind this shift is impossible to ignore: the cost of new equipment.

“I don’t know how tall the ceiling is, but that’s the price of new,” he says. “We understand why prices went up — labor, materials, everything through the pandemic — but at some point you have to ask, ‘Just because you can raise the price, should you?’”

As the grain downturn stretches on, Peterson says farmers have had time to pause and reassess their operations — and their machinery lineups.

“What it’s done is it’s given farmers time to catch their breath,” he says. “They’re saying, ‘We’ve got a lot of iron on this farm. We’ve got more equipment than my dad had and more than my grandpa had. Do we really need all this going forward?’”

That mindset shift doesn’t necessarily mean farmers will stop buying equipment forever. But Peterson says it has changed buying behavior — especially in the short term — and it’s pushed many operators toward well-kept used machines rather than six- or seven-figure new purchases.

“When the money’s not flowing, people think differently,” he says. “That’s just the reality.”

Dealers, Manufacturers Pull Back on New

At the same time farmers are stepping back, Peterson says the supply side of the market has also changed in ways that amplify used-equipment demand.

Manufacturers have dramatically reduced production, closing plants and laying off workers at levels Peterson says he has never seen before. While painful, those moves have eliminated excess new inventory sitting on dealer lots — and the interest expense that comes with it.

“What manufacturers have achieved is basically no backlog of new equipment,” Peterson says.

He says dealer consolidation over the past decade has played a major role. Larger dealer groups now carry more leverage with manufacturers, and when the slowdown hit, dealers acted quickly.

“They were paying 8% interest on all this stuff sitting on their lots,” Peterson says. “Their No. 1 mission wasn’t selling new equipment. Their No. 1 mission was, ‘We are going to move this one-, two-, three-year-old stuff.’”

Manufacturers responded with incentives to help dealers clear late-model used inventory — a level of cooperation Peterson says he has not seen in more than three decades of tracking the market.

“I’ve never seen that level of coordination before,” he says. “And the focus clearly shifted away from new.”

Pre-DEF Machines Command a Premium

Layered on top of price and supply issues is deep frustration with emissions systems. Peterson says pre-DEF equipment — whether trucks, tractors or combines — now stands out immediately to buyers.

“The good pre-emission stuff jumps forward like a neon sign,” he says.

That demand is no longer subtle. Practices that once happened quietly, such as emissions deletions, are now openly acknowledged — and reflected in sale prices.

“It used to be hush-hush,” Peterson says. “It’s not anymore. People say it right on the auction bill because it sells for more money. It just flat does.”

He says recent political discussion around environmental regulations has only amplified that sentiment, particularly among farmers who feel reliability and repair costs have been compromised.

“When he talked about it, I honestly thought it was an AI clip at first,” Peterson says. “He sounded like every farmer I’ve talked to for the last 15 years.”

New Equipment Demand Remains Weak

While used values climb, new equipment sales continue to struggle. November data show four-wheel-drive tractor sales down 19%, with self-propelled combine sales down 35% for the month and nearly 40% year-to-date. Livestock producers remain a bright spot, but on the grain side, Peterson says demand is clearly subdued.

Looking ahead, he says today’s production cuts could have major consequences when farm income eventually improves.

“When corn and beans finally move higher and stay there, we’re going to see exactly what we saw in 2021,” Peterson says. “Farmers are going to want to update, and dealers are going to say, ‘I can only sell you eight — that’s all we get.’”

Until then, he says the auction market continues to speak clearly.

Will Trump Roll Back DEF?

During a roundtable at the White House last week when the Trump administration rolled out $12 billion in farmer aid , President Trump also revealed other actions the Trump administration is working on to reduce regulations. Trump told farmers Monday his administration plans to scale back environmental requirements on tractors and other farm equipment, framing the move as a way to bring down machinery costs that have climbed in recent years.

“The other thing I’d like to add … we’re going to also give the tractor companies, John Deere and all of the companies that make the equipment, we’re going to take off a lot of the environmental restrictions that they have on machinery,” Trump said. “It’s ridiculous.”

While Trump didn’t provide specifics on how the details of that plan will come together, Trump said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin would be involved in carrying out the effort. There’s speculation on if that will be removing diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) requirements on tractors or also addressing the long-standing right-to-repair issue.

Farm Journal reached out to EPA, and the agency confirmed it was DEF to which the president was referring.

“EPA has heard loud and clear from truckers and farmers across the United States that the Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system was unacceptable and cost millions of dollars in lost productivity,” Brigit Hirsch, EPA press secretary, told Farm Journal. “This summer, Administrator Zeldin issued clear guidance urging engine and equipment manufacturers to revise DEF system software in existing vehicles and equipment to prevent sudden shutdowns. It is essential manufacturers give operators more time to repair faults without impacting their livelihoods or safety. EPA will continue to evaluate ways to expand the work the agency has already done on DEF and looks forward to working across the administration to do so.”

Trump argued added systems meant to meet environmental rules have driven up price tags and made equipment harder to operate and repair.

“You buy it, it’s got so much equipment on it for the environmental, it doesn’t do anything except it makes the equipment much more expensive and much more complicated to work,” he said, adding, “it’s not as good as the old days.”

Trump said the administration’s goal is to remove what he called “nonsense” and require manufacturers to pass savings along to farmers.

Read more about what President Trump may do with DEF in the coming months.

The Death of DEF? Trump Says He’ll Roll Back Environmental Requirements to Cut Farm Equipment Costs

Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:41:03 GMT

During a White House roundtable on Monday tied to a new $12 billion “bridge payment” plan , President Donald Trump said his administration will move quickly to ease environmental requirements affecting tractors and other farm machinery, arguing the changes will lower sticker prices and simplify repairs.

While the headline of the event was to announce the payments, which Trump says will be funded by tariff revenue, the roundtable discussion with farmers also revealed other actions the Trump administration is working on to reduce regulations. Trump told farmers Monday his administration plans to scale back environmental requirements on tractors and other farm equipment, framing the move as a way to bring down machinery costs that have climbed in recent years.

President Trump said that farming equipment has gotten too expensive and his administration would help tractor companies by removing some environmental rules that affect them https://t.co/nKzE5ACyBp pic.twitter.com/oexiZnfxgf
— Reuters (@Reuters) December 9, 2025

“The other thing I’d like to add … we’re going to also give the tractor companies, John Deere and all of the companies that make the equipment … we’re going to take off a lot of the environmental restrictions that they have on machinery,” Trump said. “It’s ridiculous.”

While Trump didn’t provide specifics on how the details of that plan will come together, Trump said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin would be involved in carrying out the effort. There’s speculation on if that will be removing diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) requirements on tractors or also addressing the long-standing right-to-repair issue.

Earlier this year, EPA announced guidance to change, not eliminate, DEF requirements, allowing for softer power loss in new trucks (from model year 2027) when DEF runs low, preventing sudden shutdowns and enabling software fixes for existing vehicles, easing burdens on truckers and farmers. This guidance removed what EPA called “red tape,” allowing manufacturers to develop less disruptive fixes for performance issues caused by emissions systems, though it doesn’t legalize “deleting” emissions equipment.

EPA Says DEF Is “Unacceptable”

While Trump didn’t outline exactly what EPA plans to roll back, he hinted toward DEF being the target. Farm Journal reached out to EPA for clarification and comment, and EPA’s press secretary confirmed rolling back DEF requirements is the target for this administration.

“EPA has heard loud and clear from truckers and farmers across the United States that the Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system was unacceptable and cost millions of dollars in lost productivity,” Brigit Hirsch, EPA press secretary, told Farm Journal. “This summer, Administrator Zeldin issued clear guidance urging engine and equipment manufacturers to revise DEF system software in existing vehicles and equipment to prevent sudden shutdowns. It is essential manufacturers give operators more time to repair faults without impacting their livelihoods or safety. EPA will continue to evaluate ways to expand the work the agency has already done on DEF and looks forward to working across the administration to do so.”

She also pointed farmers toward EPA’s website dedicated to actions on Diesel Exhaust Fluid .

Trump Says “It Makes the Equipment Much More Expensive”

Trump argued added systems meant to meet environmental rules have driven up price tags and made equipment harder to operate and repair.

“You buy it, it’s got so much equipment on it for the environmental, it doesn’t do anything except it makes the equipment much more expensive and much more complicated to work,” he said, adding, “it’s not as good as the old days.”

Trump said the administration’s goal is to remove what he called “nonsense” and require manufacturers to pass savings along to farmers.

“And we’re going to do it, and we’re going to say: ‘You’re going to reduce the prices.’ We’re not going to do it, and they’re not going to reduce. They’re going to have to reduce their prices because farming equipment has gotten too expensive,” Trump said during the roundtable. “A lot of the reason is because they put these environmental excesses on the equipment which don’t do a damn thing except make it complicated, make it impractical.”

Trump Claims Modern Equipment is Overly Complex and Difficult to Service

Trump also described modern equipment as overly complex and more difficult for farmers to service themselves.

“For you really have to be, in many cases, you need about 185 IQ to turn on a lawn mower,” he said. “So we’re going to take that … off … that they put on Biden mostly.”

Trump claimed the changes would quickly impact costs, bringing down equipment prices and saying: “We’re going to do that immediately.”

“The machines, they’re always under repair because they’re so complicated that you can’t fix them,” “he said. The old days you used to fix it yourself. Now you can’t do that. You have to be a Ph.D. from, let’s say, MIT.”

Comments Came During Event Announcing $12 Billion in Bridge Payments

Trump made the remarks during a roundtable discussion with farmers at the White House that coincided with an announcement by the White House and USDA of $12 billion in bridge payments for farmers.

Up to $11 billion will go toward a newly designed Farmer Bridge Assistance (FBA) program targeted toward row crop farmers hit hardest by trade disruptions. Those payments will be sent by the end of February, according to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. The remaining $1 billion will be set aside and is designated for other crops affected by the ongoing disputes.

USDA says the bulk of the funding will run through the new FBA program, administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and funded under the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC). Rollins framed the package as near-term help while trade and farm-safety-net updates ramp up.

John Deere Reacts

In a post on X following the announcement, John Deere commended the Trump administration’s announcement of relief and bridge payments for farmers saying: “The timely assistance will protect this essential industry, help rural communities and support critical long-term investments in the future of U.S. agriculture and manufacturing.”

Hat’s off to those who feed and fuel America pic.twitter.com/UWBvmAus20
— John Deere USA (@JohnDeere) December 8, 2025

John Deere also said it shares the administration’s focus on reducing costs for both producers and consumers.

“We are doing all we can to help U.S. farmers reduce input costs,” according to the post. “The equipment and technologies Deere makes here in the U.S. are giving American farmers new tools and technologies that can substantially reduce their input costs and labor costs while increasing yields, boosting margins.”

Those comments are drawing backlash from farmers and others online. Some argue if John Deere truly wants to help farmers, then they can start by lowering the price of their equipment. While others Deere will be one of the beneficiaries of farmers receiving these payments.

https://cms.farmjournal.com/cms/content/edit.jsp?id=0000019b-0351-d956-a5ff-8bdf58620000&typeId=c2a98712-61fa-35ef-bd5d-e0bfe394c8b6

Of course you commend relief and bridge payments, you make more financing tractors than you do selling them 🤣
— Drake (@silvopasturist) December 9, 2025

New WOTUS Proposal Could Reduce Red Tape for Farmers and Ranchers

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 18:01:43 GMT

Farmers and ranchers could soon face fewer regulatory hurdles when working near waterways, as EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers released a new proposal on Nov. 17 to redefine “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS). The agencies say the proposed rule is designed to bring long-requested clarity to what features fall under federal jurisdiction potentially reducing permitting uncertainty for agriculture, landowners and rural businesses.

The proposed rule can be found on the Federal Register . The public can submit comments online there or via Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. During the announcement event on Nov. 17, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin urged the public to submit comments.

The definition of WOTUS determines when producers must secure permits for projects that could affect surface water quality, including common activities such as building terraces, installing drainage or expanding livestock operations. EPA officials say the new proposal aims to align fully with the Supreme Court’s Sackett decision and prevent farmers from needing lawyers or consultants simply to determine whether a water feature on their land is federally regulated.

The proposal follows Zeldin’s promise in March to launch the biggest deregulatory action in history and a series of listening sessions in April and May that asked states, tribes, industry and agriculture to weigh in on WOTUS needs.

Clearer Definition After Years of Confusion

Zeldin and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Adam Telle emphasize the rule is designed to be clear, durable and commonsense.

Key elements include:

Defined terms such as relatively permanent, continuous surface connection, and tributary to outline which waters qualify under the Clean Water Act.
A requirement that jurisdictional tributaries must have predictable, consistent flow to traditional navigable waters.
Wetlands protections are limited to wetlands that physically touch and are indistinguishable from regulated waters for a consistent duration each year.
Reaffirmed exclusions important to agriculture, including prior converted cropland, certain ditches and waste treatment systems.
A new exclusion for groundwater.
Locally-familiar terminology, such as “wet season,” to help determine whether water features meet regulatory thresholds.

EPA says these changes are intended to reduce uncertainty that has stemmed from years of shifting definitions across administrations.

Impact of WOTUS Proposal on Agriculture

For producers, the proposal could simplify compliance by narrowing which water features fall under federal oversight and confirming exclusions that many farm groups have long advocated.

Zeldin says the aim is “protecting the nation’s navigable waters from pollution” while preventing unnecessary burdens on farmers and ranchers. He criticizes past Democratic administrations for broad interpretations that, in his view, extended federal reach to features that did not warrant regulation.

Farm groups have argued for years that unclear or overly broad definitions can lead to significant costs, delays and legal risks when planning conservation work, drainage projects or infrastructure improvements. A more consistent rule could reduce project backlogs and limit case-by-case determinations that often slow progress during planting, construction or livestock expansion.

“We’ve seen WOTUS definitions, guidance and legal arguments change with each administration,” said Garrett Hawkins, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, during the May 1 EPA listening session for agriculture . He adds: “farmers, land owners and small businesses are the ones who suffer the most when we don’t have clear rules.”

Several of those who gave testimony and public comment during the ag listening session argued that farmers and ranchers, who already struggle with unpredictable markets and tight margins, shouldn’t have to hire experts to identify elements of their own land.

“A practical WOTUS definition will allow the average landowner — not an engineer, not an attorney, not a wetland specialist — to walk out on their property, see a water feature and make, at minimum, a preliminary determination about whether a feature is federally jurisdictional,” says Kim Brackett, vice president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, who also gave testimony in May.

Alignment With the Sackett Decision

After the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA ruling , which restricted federal authority over many wetlands, the agencies say the previous WOTUS definition no longer aligned with the law. EPA already issued a memo earlier this year clarifying limits on jurisdiction over adjacent wetlands. The newly proposed rule is the next step in that process.

The proposed rule focuses on relatively permanent bodies of water — streams, rivers, lakes and oceans — and wetlands that are physically connected to those waters. Seasonal and regional variations are incorporated, including waters that flow consistently during the wetter months.

The current situation is a regulatory patchwork. Due to litigation that followed the January 2023 WOTUS rule, which was considered in the Sackett decision, different states are following different rules. Currently, 24 states, mostly the coastal and Great Lakes states, are operating on the 2023 rule, while the other 26 states, mostly those in center and in the Southeast, are operating on pre-2015 WOTUS rule.

Oversight Rests With State and Tribes

A major theme of the proposal is cooperative federalism, giving more authority to states and tribes to manage local land and water resources. EPA says the rule preserves necessary federal protections while recognizing states and tribal governments are best positioned to oversee many smaller or isolated water features.

Sections 101b and 510 of the CWA are key structural examples of the concept of cooperative federalism. The sections give states and tribes the right to set standards and issue permits for federal activities that could discharge pollutants into a water of the U.S. within the state or territory. The most common example of this are 404 dredge and fill permits.

This focus on cooperative federalism was the main chorus of the EPA’s listening session for states , held April 29, especially as it concerns wetlands.

“If more wetlands are excluded from WOTUS, then certain federal projects would not require a section 401 water quality certification by the states,” noted Jennifer Congdon, director of federal affairs for New York Department of Environmental Conservation, during the states’ listening session. She argues that such a situation could impair water quality within a state, thus violating states’ rights under the CWA.

What Happens Next

The proposed rule is available online for public comment on the Federal Register and Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers will hold two hybrid public meetings, and details for submitting comments or registering to speak will be available on EPA’s website .

After the comment period, the agencies plan to move quickly toward a final rule.

“Once the rule is finalized, it typically takes effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register pursuant to Congressional Review Act requirements,” the EPA press office told The Packer earlier this summer .

Based on these potential timelines, a new — potentially final — WOTUS rule could take effect as early as early March.

EPA Updates A/C Rules: What Farmers Need to Know

Tue, 30 Sep 2025 13:53:51 GMT

EPA has again revised standards for refrigerant used in vehicles.

R-12 refrigerant (aka “Freon”) was the go-to coolant for more than 50 years. Then it was discovered that chlorine atoms in escaped R-12 molecules accumulated in the atmosphere and damaged the ozone layer.

A new refrigerant, R-134a, came out in 1991 and replaced R-12’s miscreant chlorine atom with a fluorine atom — which breaks down in 10 to 12 years.

To further minimize damage to the environment, another new refrigerant, R-1234yf, was developed and replaced R-134a’s fluorine atom with a propylene atom — which breaks down in one day.

A transition to R-1234yf is underway. Professional mechanics who use refrigerant recovery and recycling (R&R) machines must have special training and EPA Section 609 certification to buy more than 2 lb. of R-1234yf.

Necessary Adjustments
Cans of R-1234yf are at auto parts stores and have Schrader-type valves, which need a matching fitting on R&R machines or sets of pressure gauges.

Older R-134a refrigerant and new R-1234yf refrigerant are not interchangeable. The propylene atoms in R-1234yf make it mildly flammable. For that reason, newer systems are designed with spark-free compressors and other components.

If farmers have on-farm R&R machines, they can be carefully flushed between exposures to R-134a and R-1234yf, but the newer refrigerant is slightly caustic. Long-term exposure to R-1234yf can damage internal components in machines designed for R-134a.

Farmers who own a set of air conditioning gauges have a similar situation.

“You can buy adapters to hook up an R-134a set of gauges to a R-1234yf system,” says Jeff Weidecke, trainer for MasterCool refrigerant handling systems. “If a guy has an R-134a set of gauges and uses adapter fittings, he’s going to start the vehicle up, disconnect from whatever keg or 1 lb. can they’re using and turn on the machine’s air conditioning system so the clutch and compressor engage. Any R-134a refrigerant left in the hoses will be boiled off and pulled into the vehicle’s R-134a system. Then you can run R-1234yf through those gauges to check or fill a system.”

Weidecke notes that because R-1234yf is a more efficient than R-134a, compressors and other air conditioning system components are smaller, and less refrigerant is used.

“The factory-fill for a lot of new cars is only 12 to 14 ounces,” he says.

Breaking News: EPA Backs Existing Wastewater Regulations, Prevents Catastrophe for Processors and Producers

Sat, 30 Aug 2025 20:37:08 GMT

The longstanding Meat and Poultry (MPP) Effluent Guidelines and Standards will stand, announced Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin on Aug. 30. He says the proposed changes to the regulation are unnecessary.

EPA determined existing federal wastewater regulations under the Clean Water Act are effective and the burdens proposed changes would inflict on meat and poultry processors are unwarranted.

“The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) applauds the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking a common sense approach on the Meat & Poultry Processing Rule,” says Duane Stateler, NPPC president and pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “As proposed by the previous administration, this rule—which provides no environmental benefits—would have been devastating to small- and medium-sized meat processors across the country and the livestock farmers who rely on them as markets for their animals.”

EPA’s action will save not only the nearly 100 local meat processors that EPA itself identified would have to close down but also the thousands of family farmers who rely on them to stay in livestock production, Stateler points out.

“It will help ensure affordable, nutritious American-grown pork can continue to be served on dinner tables across the country,” Stateler says.

Moving Forward
The decision closes the book on a nearly two-year comment and consideration process in which NPPC and other stakeholders have worked with EPA to better inform the agency’s decision and preempt unnecessary harm.

“Under the prior proposal, if it were finalized, major pork processors would have faced significant costs to install new waste water management systems,” explains Michael Formica, NPPC chief legal strategist. “During that period of construction, some plants would likely have needed to temporarily shut down. Others might have had to cut back on how many shifts they run.”

EPA’s internal analysis showed that dozens of facilities, likely small and medium-sized, would be forced to shut down because they would be unable to afford the cost of the technology required to comply, Formica says. Overall, the industry would have realized additional costs estimated at greater than $1 billion a year.

“Producers who rely on those processors would have then been without a market for their livestock,” Formica adds.

Unnecessary Expansions
The Meat and Poultry Products Effluent Guidelines and Standards was enacted in 1974 by the EPA and amended in 2004 to cover wastewater directly discharged by processing facilities. NPPC says the proposed amendment would have established more stringent technological requirements for controlling discharges from processors and significantly increased the scope of plants that were covered by the rules.

While the agricultural industry and the meat and poultry processing sectors support clean water efforts, EPA found these expansions were unnecessary.

NPPC says it appreciates EPA taking no action on the proposal, which would have disrupted packing capacity and livestock markets, in turn inflicting additional financial harm on producers and leading to further industry concentration and the loss of independent farmers.

The Meat Institute says the proposed rule would have also harmed the relationship between meat and poultry processing (MPP) facilities and publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).

“Indirect discharging MPP facilities often make significant financial investments in maintaining and upgrading the POTW or shouldering major surcharges for the POTW’s continued operation and maintenance, which reduce public treatment costs for residential ratepayers and improve the quality of local and downstream waters,” the Meat Institute wrote in a statement.

MAHA Policy Announcement Delayed, Agriculture Waits For Any Implications From Earlier Report

Tue, 12 Aug 2025 14:57:58 GMT

In late May, farmers and the agricultural industry were bracing for the release of the Make America Healthy Again report, which was to focus on children’s health and chronic diseases. Then came the 68-page report, which was responded to by farmers and  more than 300 agriculture organizations  sharing their concerns. Per the President’s executive order establishing the timeline for the MAHA report, policy recommendations were to be given to the president by Aug. 12.

Today, the White House said to not expect MAHA policy recommendations to be announced tomorrow. The Commission will deliver its recommendations by the deadline, per the executive order, however, per White House spokesman Kush Desai schedules of the President and cabinet members need to be coordinated for the public announcement.

Particularly in focus for the agricultural groups in their response to the MAHA movement has been any references to three crop protection active ingredients: glyphosate, atrazine and chloripyrifos. These three were included in the MAHA report as a list of products that can contribute to chronic disease in children.

In its response to the MAHA report, National Corn Growers Association said its findings show that if the three pesticides were to disappear completely, crop yields could decrease by more than 70% due to pests, weeds and disease.

Politico reported on unnamed sources saying the White House has been meeting with stakeholder groups leading up to the policy announcements.

Could EPA Decision Signal The Beginning Of The End For DEF?

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 16:26:25 GMT

Mike Berdo has strong words to describe his ongoing experiences using machinery requiring DEF ( Diesel Exhaust Fluid ) on his southeast Iowa farm.

“It has been an absolute nightmare, at least for us. Mechanics make trip after trip to do little stuff that’s very expensive to fix,” said Berdo, who produces grain and beef cattle near Washington. “We had planting delays last spring … little stuff that came from it and just seemed like [an issue to deal with] day after day.”

The ongoing mechanical issues and costs are why Berdo said he is “all for” EPA rescinding the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding. The Finding has enabled the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act and, in recent years, and launch requirements such as the use of DEF systems in diesel-powered engines.

EPA Draws A Line In The Sand
On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin released a proposal to rescind the 2009 Finding.

If finalized, the proposal would remove all greenhouse gas standards for light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines, EPA said in a follow-up press release .

The move would start with EPA’s first greenhouse gas standard set in 2010 for light-duty vehicles and those set in 2011 for medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles and engines.

EPA said the proposal is expected to “save Americans $54 billion in costs annually through the repeal of all greenhouse gas standards, including the Biden EPA’s electric vehicle mandate, under conservative economic forecasts.”

Zeldin made the announcement to rescind the Finding in Indiana, alongside Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and called it the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history.

What The Decision Could Mean To Farmers
Specific to U.S. farmers, the proposal could potentially result in DEF systems no longer being included on new tractors and other heavy equipment using diesel-powered engines, said Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk, during a Farmer Forum discussion on Wednesday.

South Dakota farmer Ryan Wagner told Flory he has a wait-and-see perspective on how or whether the EPA proposal goes into effect. He anticipates that reversing the Finding will take considerable time and effort for EPA to implement.

“It took a long time with the interim engines and things to get into full DEF in the first place,” Wagner said. “I don’t know how long it would take to unwind all that and how quickly manufacturing will just take those systems right off, but it’ll be interesting to see what happens.”

To Wagner’s point, here’s a brief look back at some timing showing when DEF rolled out in agriculture and nonroad equipment and became mandatory . The regulations were phased in over several years based on the type of equipment and engine size:

2008: DEF became required for all new diesel engines with engine sizes over 750 horsepower.

2011: the regulations expanded to include equipment with engine sizes between 175-750 horsepower.

By 2015, all new nonroad diesel engines were required to be Tier 4 compliant and utilize DEF, regardless of equipment type or engine size.

As Wagner considers DEF, he noted its use in diesel engines has provided him with one benefit: “On the plus side, I do like that they don’t make the walls of my shop black. That’s been nice,” he said. “You can run them inside for a short time and not not feel like you’re breathing in a bunch of soot and making everything black.”

Expect Legal Challenges To EPA Decision
A number of environmental groups have already blasted the move by EPA, saying it spells the end of the road for U.S. action against climate change, according to an online article by Reuters .

Legal challenges from various environmental groups, states and lawyers are likely ahead.

That fact wasn’t lost on Flory and the Farmer Forum participants during the AgriTalk discussion on Wednesday.

“If this proposal is finalized, it’s going to start a lot of conversations … and the dominoes are going to start to fall, something that we need to keep track of, no doubt,” Flory said. You can hear the complete Farmer Forum discussion on AgriTalk here:

EPA will initiate a public comment period to solicit input. Further information on the public comment process and instructions for participation will be published in the Federal Register and on the EPA website .

Your next read: Right To Repair Granted? John Deere Launches Digital Self-Repair Tool for $195 Per Tractor

EPA To Address ‘Government Overreach’ on Defining WOTUS

Thu, 13 Mar 2025 20:49:01 GMT

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Wednesday the agency will undertake 31 historic actions “to advance President Trump’s day one executive orders and power the great American comeback.”

Among the announcements, Zeldin said EPA will work with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to deliver on President Donald Trump’s promise to review the definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS).

“The agencies will move quickly to ensure that a revised definition follows the law, reduces red tape, cuts overall permitting costs, and lowers the cost of doing business in communities across the country while protecting the nation’s navigable waters from pollution,” Zeldin said in a prepared statement.

“Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s watershed decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, it is time for EPA to finally address this issue once and for all in a way that provides American farmers, landowners, businesses, and states with clear and simplified direction,” he added.

Zeldin’s announcement was an important step forward in correcting what the Supreme Court had ruled in 2023 as EPA’s overreach in defining WOTUS. At the time, the agency had charged ahead ignoring concerns raised by the Supreme Court, 26 states, and farmers and ranchers across the country, according to American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) President Zippy Duvall.

“The Supreme Court clearly ruled, almost two years ago, that the government overreached in its interpretation of what waters fell under federal jurisdiction, but inaction and vague implementation guidelines by EPA led to permitting delays, litigation and uncertainty,” Duvall said in a prepared statement on Wednesday.

Listening Sessions Are Being Scheduled By EPA
Mary-Thomas Hart, chief counsel for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Thursday the Supreme Court had ruled EPA’s overreach on WOTUS in 2023 amounted to a violation of a landowners’ constitutional rights.

“Because there are criminal liabilities that attach to violation of the Clean Water Act, a landowner has to be able to know when they look at their land or when they look at a water feature, what is or isn’t WOTUS,” Hart said.

A priority for the Trump Administration moving forward will be working cooperatively with state partners, empowering them and local officials to protect water bodies while accelerating economic opportunity. As a result, “decisions will be made efficiently and effectively while benefiting from local knowledge and expertise,” EPA’s Zeldin said.

To inform those decisions, EPA has issued a request for information from stakeholders about how they’re impacted by WOTUS and will host a series of listening sessions from late March through April 2025, according to information on the agency’s website.

EPA will hold at least six listening sessions, with two open to all stakeholders, one open to States, one open to Tribes, one open to industry and agricultural stakeholders, and one open to environmental and conservational stakeholders.

The agency said registration instructions and dates will be forthcoming at the following website: https://www.epa.gov/wotus/public-outreach-and-stakeholder-engagement-activities.

Persons or organizations wishing to provide verbal recommendations during the listening sessions will be selected on a first-come, first-serve basis. Due to the expected number of participants, EPA said individuals will be asked to limit their spoken presentation to three minutes. Once the speaking slots are filled, participants may be placed on a standby list to speak or continue to register to listen to the recommendations.

Listen to the AgriTalk discussion on WOTUS with NCBA’s Mary-Thomas Hart here:

USDA Releases Approximately $20 Million of Paused Inflation Reduction Act Funding That Had Been Under Review

Fri, 21 Feb 2025 02:36:00 GMT

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced today that USDA will release the first tranche of funding that had been paused due to a review of Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) allocations.

Following White House directives, USDA is honoring existing contracts with farmers, releasing approximately $20 million for the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), and the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP).

“American farmers and ranchers are the backbone of our nation,” said Rollins, citing regulatory burdens, environmental policies, and inflation as major challenges. She criticized the Biden administration’s handling of IRA funding but affirmed commitments to farmers who had already made investments.

.@SecRollins announced that @USDA will honor contracts that were already made directly to farmers and release the first tranche of funding that was paused due to the review of funding in the so-called Inflation Reduction Act.https://t.co/xQdmZFzkwp
— House Committee on Agriculture (@HouseAgGOP) February 21, 2025

This marks the initial phase of released funding, with further announcements expected as USDA continues its review to ensure taxpayer dollars support farmers and ranchers rather than unrelated initiatives.

Earlier this week, while speaking at the Top Producer Summit in Kansas City, Rollins told AgriTalk’s Chip Flory asked about the paused IRA funding earlier this week, specifically the status of EQIP.

“Any commitments that were made previously, we will, of course, fulfill those commitments,” Rollins told Flory. “That’s the only way to do it. Everything that is forward leaning, that’s what we’re really focusing on reevaluating in the current environment.”

You can hear the full interview between Rollins and Flory below.

Your Next Read:
30 Minutes With Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins In Her First Week On the Job

RFK Jr. and Zeldin Comment on How They Would Implement Trump Policy

Thu, 30 Jan 2025 22:46:07 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation hearing for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Wednesday (Jan. 29) before the Senate Finance Committee lasted over three hours, revealing key points:

Vaccine stance: Kennedy attempted to soften his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, stating support for vaccines but struggling to explain previous controversial statements.
Health policy priorities: He emphasized addressing chronic diseases, promoting safe food, removing conflicts of interest in health agencies, and using “gold-standard science.” Kennedy said that federal dollars spent on SNAP and school lunch programs could be one place to start, “helping kids” avoid obesity and chronic illness by cutting out sugary drinks and “ultra-processed foods.” He would also fund federal research into the link between food additives and chronic illnesses, though he didn’t specify which ingredients sparked the most concern. “I don’t want to take food away from anybody,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy emphasized his support for American farmers, stating:
- “American farms are the bedrock of our culture, of our politics, [and] of our national security.”
- He was a “4-H kid” and spent summers working on ranches.
- He wants to work with farmers and food producers to remove burdensome regulations and unleash American ingenuity.
Agricultural practices and health. Kennedy expressed concerns about current agricultural practices:
- He criticized the use of certain chemicals in farming, stating they destroy soil microbiomes and cause erosion.
- He linked chemical-intensive agriculture to health problems, mentioning clusters of cancers, autoimmune diseases, and obesity in farming communities.
- He called for incentivizing transitions to regenerative agriculture and less chemically intensive practices.Kennedy told Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) that farmers are affected by cancers and autoimmune illnesses that he believes are caused by ingredients like food dyes. “We need to fix our food supply,” Kennedy said, noting that “seeds and chemicals” used by U.S. farmers are “destroying our soil” in the long term. When asked about Kennedy’s “seeds and chemicals” comment, Grassley told Politico: “I’ll have someone from Iowa State University talk to him.”
Collaboration with USDA. Kennedy emphasized his intention to work closely with the Department of Agriculture:
- He stated that MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) “simply cannot succeed without a partnership a full Partnership of American farmers.”
- He committed to working collaboratively with USDA and other federal agencies before implementing policies affecting food supplies.
- Kennedy mentioned that President Trump instructed him to work with Brooke Rollins at USDA to ensure policies support farmers. Rollins told reporters last week that she was supportive of Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” movement. “But what is important and, if confirmed, what my role will be, will be to strike a balance between defending our farmers and our ranchers but also working with Bobby Kennedy, who I adore, to effectuate the president’s vision on all of the above,” Rollins said
Regulatory approach. Kennedy outlined his approach to agricultural regulations:
- He promised to work with farmers to remove burdensome regulations.
- Kennedy acknowledged the “very thin margins” farmers operate on and stated he doesn’t want any farmer to leave their farm for economic or regulatory reasons.
- He agreed that agricultural practice regulations should primarily be left to USDA and EPA.
- “I expect you to leave agricultural practice and regulation to the proper agencies,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told Kennedy. That means, for the most part, leaving policies that impact farmers to USDA and EPA, Grassley clarified.
Future of agriculture. Kennedy shared his vision for the future of American agriculture:
- He called for fixing the food supply as a top priority. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told Kennedy that he was happy the nominee addressed the “social media rumors” about agriculture.
- “You made it very very clear you’re not going to tell Americans what to eat, but you do want Americans to know what they’re eating,” Lankford said, calling that a “pretty fair perspective” on food policy.
- Kennedy advocated for supporting the transition to regenerative and sustainable farming practices.
- He mentioned plans to rewrite regulations to give smaller operators “a break.”
- Throughout the hearing, Kennedy attempted to position himself as an ally to farmers while also advocating for changes in agricultural practices to address health and environmental concerns.
Controversial past: Democrats challenged his history of health misinformation and grasp of Medicare and Medicaid.
Republican support: Some GOP senators backed Kennedy, with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) calling him “awesome,” though the final vote remains uncertain.
Financial concerns: His financial ties to lawsuits against Merck raised conflict-of-interest questions.
Abortion stance: Kennedy sidestepped direct answers but aligned with Trump’s anti-abortion policies, shifting from his previous pro-choice stance.

Bottom line: With strong opposition and divided support, Kennedy’s confirmation vote is expected to be closely contested. Today he attends another confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. The Senate Finance Committee expects to hold its RFK Jr. vote next week.

Zeldin Confirmed as EPA Administrator

On Wednesday (Jan. 29), the Republican-led Senate confirmed former Congressman Lee Zeldin as the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a 56-42 vote. A staunch Trump ally, Zeldin is expected to steer the agency in alignment with the former president’s environmental policies.

Vote breakdown: All 53 Republicans backed Zeldin, joined by three Democrats — Sens. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), and John Fetterman (Pa.).
Policy direction: Zeldin is expected to roll back environmental regulations, emphasizing economic growth and private-sector collaboration.
Biofuel policy. Zeldin has raised concerns among ethanol and biofuel advocates due to his past opposition to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and ethanol. However, during his confirmation process, Zeldin made some commitments that suggest a potential shift in his stance. As a congressman, Zeldin had a history of opposing biofuels and the RFS. He signed letters expressing concern about proposed RFS volume increases, citing issues with the “E10 blend wall.” In 2017, Zeldin cosponsored an unsuccessful bill to repeal the RFS. He raised concerns about the validity and practicality of higher ethanol blends like E15 and E85. But during his confirmation process, Zeldin made several statements that indicate a potential change in his approach:
- He committed to giving producers and the industry certainty in the marketplace regarding Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs).
- Zeldin acknowledged the importance of the RFS issue to President Trump and certain senators.
- He stated that no person or industry has any special influence over his decision-making, addressing concerns about his past connections to the oil industry.
Biofuel industry representatives have expressed cautious optimism:
- The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) looks forward to working with Zeldin on keeping the RFS on track and addressing other priorities like E15 availability.
- The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) encouraged Zeldin to pursue the role biofuels can play in U.S. energy dominance.
- The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) appreciated Zeldin’s commitments to follow the law regarding RVO rulemakings and supporting year-round E15 nationwide.

Of note: While Zeldin’s past positions raised initial concerns, his recent statements during the confirmation process suggest he may be open to working with the biofuels industry in his new role as EPA Administrator.

Climate stance: Critics warn his leadership could weaken climate initiatives, favoring fossil fuel interests.
Reactions: Republicans praise his “common-sense regulation” approach, while environmental groups call his confirmation a serious setback for public health and environmental justice.

Bottom line. As Zeldin assumes leadership, his tenure is likely to reshape the EPA’s role in U.S. environmental policy for years to come.

Cassidy Casts Doubt on RFK Jr.’s HHS Nomination

Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.) delivered a blunt message to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during Thursday’s hearing, signaling serious concerns about his nomination for Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary.

“I’ve been struggling with your nomination,” Cassidy stated in his closing remarks, a potential roadblock for Kennedy, given Cassidy’s influential position on the Senate Finance Committee. If Cassidy votes against Kennedy in the panel’s decision, the nomination may not advance.

The Louisiana senator expressed deep skepticism about Kennedy’s stance on vaccines, questioning whether he could be trusted to uphold sound public health policy. Cassidy specifically criticized Kennedy’s history of vaccine skepticism, warning that such views could erode trust in essential immunizations.

“A worthy movement, called MAHA, to improve the health of Americans?” Cassidy asked. “Or will it undermine it, always asking for more evidence and never accepting the evidence that is there?”

He also recounted a recent case of two children dying in a Baton Rouge ICU from vaccine-preventable diseases. “My concern is that if there’s any false note, any undermining of a mama’s trust in vaccines, another person will die from a vaccine-preventable disease,” Cassidy warned.

Beyond his own reservations, Cassidy’s remarks signal broader challenges for Kennedy’s nomination. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a childhood polio survivor, is unlikely to back a nominee with anti-vaccine ties. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also remain key votes to watch, with both urging Kennedy to support vaccinations.

Cassidy, up for re-election in 2026, has already drawn a Trump-aligned challenger, State Treasurer John Fleming. Though Cassidy emphasized his desire for Trump’s policies to succeed, he warned that anti-vaccine rhetoric could tarnish Trump’s legacy.

“I want President Trump’s policies to succeed,” Cassidy said. “But if there’s someone that is not vaccinated because of policies, of attitudes we bring to the department, and there’s another 18-year-old who dies of a vaccine-preventable disease… The greatest tragedy will be her death. I can also tell you an associated tragedy will be that it will cast a shadow over President Trump’s legacy, which I want to be the absolute best legacy.”

Bottom line: With Cassidy’s support in doubt and broader Senate skepticism, Kennedy’s path to confirmation remains steep.

90% of Ag Economists Say RFK Jr. Wouldn't Be Positive for U.S. Agriculture

Tue, 28 Jan 2025 12:46:43 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation hearings for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) are scheduled for this week.

President Trump’s pick to lead the HHS Department is scheduled to appear twice this week:

Senate Committee on Finance: Wednesday, Jan. 29, at 10 a.m. ET.
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP): Thursday, Jan. 30, at 10 a.m. ET.

Kennedy’s nomination has generated significant attention and controversy, primarily due to his past statements and positions on various health-related issues:

Vaccine concerns: Kennedy’s views on vaccines have been scrutinized by both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. He has been accused of promoting doubts about vaccine efficacy, particularly during a 2019 measles outbreak in Samoa.
Abortion stance: Some Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns about Kennedy’s pro-abortion views.
Agricultural impact: There are worries about Kennedy’s potential impact on the agriculture sector, including calling glyphosate “a poison.”

Ag Economists Weigh In

Farm Journal’s Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey asked in January if Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, positive for U.S. agriculture? 90% of the economists surveyed said no.

One economist said, “His disrespect for science is troubling.” Another economist weighed in by saying, “His positions on crop protection will be an interesting storyline to watch early in 2025.”

Another economist has concerns about the division it will create within agriculture, saying, “I fear there will be policy to limit/restrict crop protection tools currently available to producers and his advocacy will continue to foster division between organic/regenerative producers and more commercial producers.

However, not all economists think RFK Jr. would be bad for agriculture. In fact, one economist thinks it could actually restore confidence in agriculture.

“Improving health outcomes, even if over a longer time period, should improve the consumer opinion of agriculture and be a net gain overall,” said one economist in the anonymous survey.

U.S. Farmers Express Concern Over Potential Role in Trump Administration

Farmers across the United States are voicing alarm about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s potential influence on agriculture and food policy in a Trump administration. Key concerns include:

Policy Positions” Advocacy for banning widely used chemicals like glyphosate, shifting to organic and regenerative farming, and opposing genetically modified crops could disrupt large-scale farming practices.
Regulatory Changes: Potential regulatory overhauls, such as “weaponizing” agencies, may create uncertainty for genetic technologies and USDA guidelines.
Economic Impact: Farmers fear decreased productivity, increased costs, and potential rises in food prices due to a move away from conventional farming methods.
Contrast with Trump’s First Term: Kennedy’s vision contradicts Trump’s earlier deregulatory efforts, causing confusion among farmers who supported his pro-agribusiness policies.

“Make America Healthy Again”

Kennedy’s push to “Make America Healthy Again” could come with some benefits for certain segments of U.S. agriculture. That includes pushing for American food providers to start using more animal fats versus seed oils.

“People who enjoy a burger with fries on a night out aren’t to blame, and Americans should have every right to eat out at a restaurant without being unknowingly poisoned by heavily subsidized seed oils. It’s time to Make Frying Oil Tallow Again,” he said in an Instagram post in October.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by RFK Jr. (@robertfkennedyjr)

Looking Ahead: Possible Challenges in Confirmation

Kennedy’s confirmation process could face a number of challenges, including:

Kennedy can only afford to lose three Republican votes if the Democratic caucus remains united in opposition.
Some Republicans, including incoming HELP Committee chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.), have expressed concerns about Kennedy’s views.
Hawaii Governor Josh Green has traveled to Washington to lobby against Kennedy’s confirmation.

Upcoming Meeting with Senators

Kennedy has been meeting with senators from both parties to make his case. He met with dozens of Republican senators and plans to meet with key committee members last week. Meetings with Democratic senators, including Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) were also scheduled.

Economists Say Brooke Rollins Would Be Positive for Agriculture

Just last week, Brooke Rollins, President Trump’s nominee for Agriculture Secretary , powered through her confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Ag Committee . The Senate still needs to vote on her confirmation, but no timeline has been given on when that vote will happen yet.

During her testimony last week, she addressed several issues during her confirmation hearing on Jan. 23 in an attempt to position herself as a supporter of diverse agricultural interests and commit to protecting producers.

In her opening statement, Rollins outlined several key priorities for USDA if confirmed, as is expected:

Rapid deployment of disaster and economic assistance authorized by Congress.
Addressing current animal disease outbreaks.
Modernizing and realigning USDA.
Ensuring long-term prosperity for rural communities.

80% of economists in the January Ag Economists’ Monthly say if confirmed, Rollins is a positive pick for U.S. agriculture.

“Rollins knows ag and has Trump’s ear,” said one economist.

“Her close connection the President and reasons outlined in the letter sent by 427 ag organizations and businesses on January 15th,” said another economist.

20% of economists say Rollins wouldn’t be positive for U.S. agriculture.

One economist said, “USDA focused heavily on under-served producers during the Vilsack era and my sense is that producers wanted the Secretary to come from a production ag view; whereas Rollins come at it more from an overall domestic policy view. Also, feel the administration isn’t helping her out with the Deputy Secretary nomination. Producers don’t see themselves in the upcoming USDA leadership.”

Senate confirms historic Treasury Secretary; Transportation Vote on Deck.

The Senate confirmed Scott Bessent as Treasury Secretary in a 68-29 vote, with support from 16 Democrats and independents. Bessent becomes the highest-ranking openly LGBTQ official in U.S. history and is set to play a key role in upcoming tax and trade debates.

Meanwhile, Sean Duffy is poised for confirmation as Transportation Secretary in a vote at noon ET today, following a unanimous procedural vote (97-0) Monday.

Your Next Read:

Trump 2.0: From Early Executive Orders to Delaying Tariffs Against China, Here’s What to Expect as Trump Takes Office

Biggest Takeaways From President Trump's First Day in Office

Tue, 21 Jan 2025 16:27:10 GMT

President Trump may enact 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada on Feb. 1, he said during remarks in the Oval Office. Trump had initially suggested implementing these tariffs on his first day in office. This delay may allow for some negotiation or preparation time.

The exchange happened while the president was signing a number of executive orders just hours after inauguration. While signing those orders, Trump fielded a host of reporter questions, answering or commenting on them specifically. He asked the reporters if they ever had a similar opportunity with former President Joe Biden. During one of the exchanges, that’s when Trump revealed he may enact 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico on Feb. 1.

Proposed 25% Tariffs on All Goods Imported from Canada and Mexico

The proposed 25% tariff would apply to all goods imported from Canada and Mexico, although there have been some conflicting reports about some product exemptions.

Trump has cited concerns about illegal immigration and drug trafficking, particularly fentanyl, as the primary reasons for these tariffs. He aims to pressure these countries to increase their efforts in addressing these issues.

Economic Impact

If implemented, these tariffs could have significant consequences for the North American economy:

Increased consumer prices in the U.S. for a wide range of goods, including produce, automobiles, and manufactured products.
Potential disruption of integrated supply chains across North America.
Estimated job losses of up to 1.5 million positions in Canada and significant GDP contractions for both Canada and the U.S.

Legal and Trade Agreement Implications

The proposed tariffs would likely violate provisions of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). This could lead to legal challenges and potentially undermine the agreement.

Responses from Canada and Mexico

Both countries have expressed concern about the tariff threats. Canada has indicated it would consider a “robust” response, potentially involving retaliation in sectors such as energy and critical minerals.

Global Trade Implications

These tariffs, combined with proposed tariffs on China and other countries, could significantly reshape global trade patterns and potentially trigger retaliatory measures from affected nations.

Trump Orders Comprehensive Trade Policy Overhaul

President Trump has ordered an expansive investigation into America’s trade policy, divided into three critical areas, with recommendations due by April 2025.

The investigations aim to address trade imbalances and unfair practices, focusing on trade deficits, currency manipulation, and counterfeiting. Key areas under review include:

The USMCA and other trade agreements.
Anti-dumping duties and discriminatory taxes.
The potential establishment of an External Revenue Service (ERS) to collect trade-related revenues.

Of note: While Trump has announced this intention, the actual implementation of these tariffs remains uncertain and may be subject to change or negotiation in the coming weeks.

Trumps Signs Several Executive Orders

President Donald Trump signed several executive orders on stage at a rally in Washington, D.C.'s Capital One Arena on Monday, immediately following inauguration. It marked a dramatic and public start to his administration.

Hours after being sworn in, Trump rescinded 78 executive actions from the Biden era, froze federal hiring (excluding the military), and initiated a regulatory freeze to halt bureaucratic rulemaking.

He also ordered federal agencies to address cost-of-living concerns, formally withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, gave TikTok another 75 days before being banned; withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization, and ordered an end to birthright citizenship (if it makes it through court).

Paused Spending in Inflation Reduction Act

He also ordered federal agencies to “immediately pause” the spending of money from the Inflation Reduction Act , Biden’s signature climate law that provided billions of dollars in subsidies to clean energy and other climate initiatives.

In the directive, Trump included an executive order that mandates agencies to review grants, loans and other payments associated with the IRA.

Other Executive Orders and New Directives

Trump signed many executive orders an d announced new directives , including:

America First priorities
Detailed the America First Trade Policy
Unleashing American Energy
Temporary withdrawal of all areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing and review of the federal government’s leasing and permitting practices for wind projects .
Declaring a national emergency at the southern border of the United States, triggering the use of Pentagon resources and personnel that will be deployed and used to build the border wall.
Declaring a national energy emergency
Withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organization
Re-evaluating and realigning U.S. foreign aid
Emergency price relief for American families and defeating the cost-of-living crisis
Reversed dozens of Biden-era orders, including a sweeping measure to regulate artificial intelligence.
“Department of Government Efficiency” aimed at spending cuts and regulatory reform
Putting people over fish : Stopping radical environmentalism to provide water to Southern California ( link ).
Tapped new leadership and acting heads who will guide regulatory and enforcement priorities

Trump Meets with Congressional Leaders

House and Senate Republican leadership will meet with President Donald Trump at the White House today. The list includes Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), Senate GOP Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.).

This is an important gathering to discuss the new administration’s legislative agenda. This meeting is likely to focus on coordinating efforts to implement Trump’s policy agenda, including issues such as immigration reform, tax policy, energy initiatives, potential budget cuts and spending reductions. Also likely to be discussed: budget reconciliation strategy and the debt limit.

There’s a sense of urgency among Republicans to make progress quickly:

The first 18 months are seen as critical for implementing major changes
There’s pressure to show early victories to the American people
Trump needs to move fast because he can’t run for re-election

Potential challenges. The leaders may discuss obstacles to their agenda:

The slim Republican majority in the House
Potential divisions within the party on certain issues
The need for Democratic support on some legislation due to Senate rules

Upcoming deadlines. Important deadlines that may be addressed include:

A March 14 government funding deadline
The need to raise the debt ceiling by early summer

From Early Executive Orders to Delaying Tariffs Against China, Here's What to Expect as Trump Takes Office

Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:49:41 GMT

This week is mostly about President Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th president, with a flurry of executive orders and illegal immigrant deportations expected soon.

President Donald Trump and Senator JD Vance were sworn into office inside the Capitol Rotunda, avoiding the dangerously cold temperatures forecast for Washington, D.C. The entire ceremony, including prayers and speeches, will take place indoors, according to Trump’s announcement on Truth Social.

This marks the first indoor inauguration due to weather since Ronald Reagan’s second term in 1985, and the second such event in history, following James Monroe’s indoor inauguration due to a snowstorm.

Mexico’s Slim and Cervantes to Attend Inauguration; Sheinbaum Left Out

Billionaire Carlos Slim, Mexico’s wealthiest man with a net worth nearing $100 billion, will attend Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th president of the United States in Washington, D.C. He will be joined by Francisco Cervantes, president of Mexico’s influential Business Coordinating Council (CCE), who confirmed plans to begin talks with high-ranking U.S. officials during the event.

Notably absent from the invitation list is Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. Mexico will be officially represented by Ambassador Esteban Moctezuma. The Trump administration’s policies, including a planned 25% tariff on Mexican exports and mass deportation operations, are expected to pose significant challenges to Mexico.

Slim expressed confidence that the Mexican economy would navigate these challenges effectively, emphasizing its complementary relationship with the U.S. economy. Meanwhile, Sheinbaum’s government has signaled readiness to implement reciprocal tariffs and address deportation logistics if needed.

World leaders, including Argentina’s Javier Milei and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, are also set to make history by attending a U.S. presidential inauguration.

Early Executive Orders: A Preview

Stephen Miller, Trump’s top domestic policy adviser, briefed Republican lawmakers Sunday on an ambitious slate of executive orders planned for the early days of the administration. These orders, many of which Trump had campaigned on, will focus on government reform, energy policy, and immigration. While details remain fluid, key areas discussed:

Government reform: Streamlining federal hiring and dismissal processes, targeting DEI initiatives, and reforming rules for Schedule F employees.
Energy policy: Halting climate-related spending, accelerating energy infrastructure projects, expanding drilling — including in the Arctic — and repealing electric vehicle mandates. Also: declare a national emergency related to energy.
Immigration: Declaring cartels as terrorist organizations, reinstating strict border policies like “Remain in Mexico,” declare an emergency at the U.S./Mexico border, which will allow Trump to deploy military forces to the border, and ending “catch and release.”

Miller cautioned that these orders are still under development, with specific details yet to be finalized. Miller, a key architect of Trump’s immigration policies, is expected to play a significant role in shaping and implementing these executive orders. Miller’s involvement suggests a continuation of the hardline approach to immigration that characterized Trump’s first term.

Trump to Delay Tariffs on China, Signals Shift Toward Negotiation

President-elect Donald Trump is not expected to impose China-specific tariffs on his first day in office, signaling a strategic shift toward engagement with Beijing rather than reigniting a trade war.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the decision reflects Trump’s desire to begin his second term in a negotiating mode, with hopes of striking a new deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

During his first term, Trump brokered a “Phase 1” trade deal with China, but many of Beijing’s commitments to purchase U.S. goods were not fully realized. While plans are underway for a memorandum directing federal agencies to review trade policies with China, Canada, and Mexico, the approach appears more measured than the aggressive tariff rhetoric from Trump’s campaign.

However, sources caution that Trump’s strategy could shift, given his history of abrupt decisions. His swearing-in ceremony is scheduled for midday Monday in Washington.

Trump to Declare National Energy Emergency to Boost Domestic Production

President-elect Donald Trump will declare a national energy emergency after his inauguration on Monday to lower energy costs, an incoming White House official announced.

The emergency declaration is expected to “unlock a variety of different authorities” to enhance natural resource production, though specific measures were not disclosed.

The official emphasized the importance of energy independence in the context of the U.S./China AI race, highlighting the need for domestic energy to power advanced technology. Additionally, Trump plans to sign an executive order to accelerate energy production in Alaska, citing its geostrategic significance and potential for LNG exports to the Asia-Pacific region.

Focus on Deregulation

President-elect Donald Trump plans to start one of the most sweeping deregulatory drives in U.S. history. Border czar Tom Homan says the incoming administration is assessing plans to launch post-inauguration immigration raids in Chicago after plans leaked in news reports about plans for a large-scale immigration raid in Chicago Tuesday.

Trump has outlined a sweeping array of 31 major policy initiatives for his second term, according to the Washington Post. These include moves on immigration, such as mass deportations, reinstating a travel ban, and ending birthright citizenship. He also plans significant economic shifts, like imposing high tariffs on imports, cutting taxes, and promoting cryptocurrency. The list, according to the WaPo:

1. Immigration

Mass Deportations: Pledges to implement the largest deportation operation in U.S. history, including undocumented workers.
‘Remain in Mexico’ Program: Plans to reinstate policies requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico.
Travel Ban: Intends to reimpose restrictions on travelers from several majority-Muslim countries.
Birthright Citizenship: Proposes ending automatic citizenship for children of noncitizens.
Punish Sanctuary Cities: Plans to cut federal funding to cities refusing to cooperate with deportations.
Death Penalty for Migrants: Advocates for automatic death sentences for migrants who kill U.S. citizens.
Border Wall: Plans to complete construction of the U.S./Mexico border wall.

2. Economy

Tariffs: Proposes imposing tariffs on all imports and higher rates on goods from China, Mexico, and Canada.
Inflation: Vows to lower prices, including energy and gas costs.
Tax Cuts: Promises extensive tax reductions, potentially adding to the national debt.
Eliminate Taxes on Tips and Overtime: Suggests removing taxes on certain income sources.
Cryptocurrency: Aims to make the U.S. a global leader in cryptocurrency by adopting industry-friendly policies.

3. Education

Abolish Education Department: Proposes dismantling the department, redirecting its responsibilities elsewhere.
Punish Schools Over Content: Plans to cut federal funding for schools promoting “critical race theory” or “radical gender ideology.”
Transgender Policies: Seeks to ban trans athletes from women’s sports and revoke inclusive school policies.
School Vouchers: Advocates for taxpayer-funded school-choice programs.

4. Environment

Rollback of Regulations: Plans to remove policies addressing climate change and protecting species.
Oil and Gas Expansion: Proposes increasing domestic production and exports of fossil fuels.
Paris Climate Agreement: Intends to withdraw the U.S. from this global pact.

5. Healthcare

Lower Costs: Pledges to reduce healthcare and prescription drug expenses.
Preserve Social Security and Medicare: Promises to maintain these programs while cutting waste.
Abortion Laws: Plans to leave decisions on abortion to state legislatures.
Free IVF: Proposes covering in vitro fertilization costs.

6. Democracy and Governance

Retaliation Against Rivals: Suggests acting against political enemies and media outlets.
Reshape Federal Workforce: Plans mass job cuts, reduce union power, and make civil servants “at-will” employees.
Voting Requirements: Proposes stricter voter ID and citizenship proof, ending mail-in and early voting.
Pardon Jan. 6 Defendants: Pledges to pardon individuals charged in the Capitol riot.

7. Defense and Foreign Policy

Isolationism: Advocates for “America First” policies, including shutting out imports and withdrawing from international conflicts.
End Wars in Ukraine and Middle East: Claims he would end these conflicts quickly, potentially conceding to adversaries.
Military Diversity Policies: Plans to reverse diversity initiatives and restrict women in combat roles.
Strike Mexican Cartels: Proposes military action against cartels operating in Mexico.

These policies reflect significant shifts across numerous domains and have raised concerns about their feasibility and broader implications.

It’s also key to note Trump will meet with House and Senate GOP leadership at the White House on Tuesday.

Vance, Han Discuss Trade and Fentanyl Ahead of Inauguration

Vice President-elect JD Vance met with Chinese Vice President Han Zheng in Washington to discuss trade and the fentanyl crisis, a day before Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration.

The meeting follows a call on Friday between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, which addressed similar topics, including TikTok. Han is expected to attend Monday’s inaugural ceremony, relocated indoors due to subfreezing temperatures in the capital. it will be the first time a high-ranking Chinese official attends a U.S. presidential inauguration. The Vance/Han meeting represents the most substantial individual engagement for Vance since securing his election victory alongside Trump last year.

Of note: Han also met billionaire Elon Musk and other U.S. business figures, underscoring Beijing’s efforts to set a positive tone in ties with the US before President-elect Donald Trump returns to office.

TikTok Returns After Brief U.S. Shutdown Amid Uncertainty

TikTok has reappeared in the United States following a temporary shutdown that began late Saturday night, Jan. 18. The app was blocked due to a federal law mandating that its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, divest its U.S. operations. Service began to be restored on Sunday, January 19, driven by two key developments: (1) President-elect Donald Trump’s intervention: Trump announced plans to issue an executive order on his inauguration day, Jan.20, to delay the ban’s implementation.

He emphasized the need for negotiations to protect national security and suggested the possibility of a joint venture granting the U.S. a 50% ownership stake in TikTok’s operations. (2) TikTok’s agreement with service providers: TikTok confirmed service restoration through agreements with its service providers.

The company thanked President-elect Trump for providing “necessary clarity and assurance.” While the app is back online, its future remains uncertain, contingent on the Trump administration’s actions and potential negotiations with ByteDance.

Biden Issues Pre-emptive Pardons on Final Day in Office

Outgoing President Joe Biden issued pardons to members and staff of the Jan. 6 select committee. including GOP Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois; and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), as well as police officers who testified before it.

The pardons also extended to Gen. Mark Milley, former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

In a statement, Biden emphasized that the pardons “should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing.”

Your Next Read:

Treasury Nominee Bessent Defends Trump Policies in Testimony; Promises to Press China to Resume Ag Purchases in Phase 1 Agreement

Top Takeaways from Zeldin’s Confirmation Hearing for EPA Lead and the Impact On Ag

Fri, 17 Jan 2025 13:36:45 GMT

President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin, underwent hours of testimony Thursday, commenting on everything from year-round E15, the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) and the controversial WOTUS rule. When pressed about climate and environmental policies, Zeldin stated he believes climate change is real.

During the hearing, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) asked Zeldin to ensure access to year-round E15, but he did not make a definitive commitment, responding cautiously. Zeldin stated that while he couldn’t prejudge the outcomes of any processes, he acknowledged the importance of the issue to Sen. Ricketts and President Trump.

His exact words were: “Senator, while I can’t prejudge outcome of processes to follow across the board, I know how important this issue is to you and I know how important this is to President Trump.”

Despite this non-committal response, leaders of ethanol industry groups, including the American Coalition for Ethanol and Growth Energy, expressed appreciation for Zeldin’s commitment to doing his part to ensure nationwide availability of year-round E15.

Zeldin’s Stance on Ethanol
Zeldin’s stance on ethanol has been a point of interest, given his previous opposition to ethanol usage mandates during his time in Congress. Zeldin was asked about upholding legal deadlines for new Renewable Volume Obligations (RVO) standards, which are part of the RFS program.

Ricketts criticized the Biden administration for setting RVOs below industry production levels and not meeting the law’s deadlines. Zeldin expressed his commitment to implementing the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) as written by Congress.

He stated, “If confirmed, I commit to you that I will faithfully execute the law as written by Congress.” This statement was seen as an attempt to reassure senators from agricultural states who are concerned about the EPA’s implementation of biofuel policies.

Zeldin addressed his past opposition to ethanol usage mandates. He acknowledged that his views on the issue have evolved since his time in Congress.

Zeldin stated, “My position has evolved. I’m not in the same place I was years ago.”

He explained that his perspective has changed due to conversations he’s had with farmers, producers, and others in the industry. Zeldin emphasized that he now has a better understanding of the importance of ethanol to rural economies and energy security.

To further illustrate his evolving stance, Zeldin mentioned that he has visited ethanol plants and spoken with industry stakeholders.

He said, “I’ve learned a lot more about ethanol. I’ve visited plants. I’ve talked to a lot of people in the industry.”

WOTUS Rule Opposition
The EPA nominee has been vocal about his opposition to the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. He expressed strong criticism of the Biden administration’s decision to reinstate and expand the WOTUS rule. Zeldin argued that the WOTUS rule represents federal overreach and places an undue burden on farmers, landowners, and local governments.

He stated that the rule would negatively impact agriculture, construction, and other industries by expanding federal authority over water bodies and wetlands. The congressman emphasized that the expanded definition of WOTUS would lead to increased regulations and permitting requirements for activities on private property. He contended that this expansion of federal control would hinder economic growth and development in rural areas.

In his statement, Zeldin called for the repeal of the WOTUS rule, advocating for a more limited interpretation of federal jurisdiction over water bodies. He supported efforts to restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority in implementing the rule, arguing that states should have more control over their water resources.

Zeldin’s position on WOTUS aligns with many Republican lawmakers who view the rule as an example of government overreach and excessive environmental regulation. His statements reflect a broader debate about the balance between environmental protection and economic development in water resource management.

Zeldin’s Criticism of EPA Staff
Zeldin made notable comments regarding EPA staff. He criticized EPA employees for what he described as their attempts to undermine the Trump administration’s policies.

Specifically, Zeldin accused some EPA staff members of leaking information to the media and actively working against the administration’s agenda. He expressed concern that these actions were hindering the implementation of policies and creating unnecessary obstacles for the agency’s leadership. The congressman’s remarks were part of a broader discussion on government accountability and the role of career civil servants in executing administration directives.

Zeldin emphasized the importance of loyalty to the current administration’s goals, regardless of personal political beliefs.

Climate Change and Climate Policies
As for his position on climate change, the hearing showed the political dynamics and implications surrounding the issue considering President-elect Donald Trump’s stance, particularly as seen through an exchange involving Zeldin with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). Sanders emphasized the existential threat of climate change, framing it as a matter transcending politics. Whitehouse voiced concern about Zeldin’s ability to resist fossil fuel industry influence.

Zeldin stated, “I believe that climate change is real,” marking a departure from previous EPA leaders during the first Trump administration and from President-elect Trump, who has previously labeled climate change a “hoax.”

Regarding EPA’s role in regulating carbon dioxide emissions, Zeldin referenced a 2007 Supreme Court decision, noting that while the ruling grants the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it does not mandate such action. He emphasized that the agency is “authorized, not required” to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

When pressed on specific climate policies, such as reducing reliance on fossil fuels, Zeldin refrained from committing to particular actions. He expressed a desire to collaborate with scientists and policymakers, stating, “I don’t sit before you as a scientist.”

In response to inquiries about campaign donations from fossil fuel companies, Zeldin asserted that financial contributions would not influence his decisions, emphasizing his commitment to impartiality in his role as EPA Administrator.

Of note:
Throughout the hearing, Zeldin underscored the importance of protecting the environment without hindering economic development. He stated, “We can, and we must, protect our precious environment without suffocating the economy.”

Economists React to Zeldin’s Nomination

December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound )

In the December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor and prior to this week’s hearing, Farm Journal asked economists about what Zeldin’s past stance on ag issues could mean if he’s approved as the next EPA adminstrator.

Based on Zeldin’s track record, 60% of economists said they don’t think Zeldin’s policies will be positive for agriculture. 40% said they do think his policies will be good for agriculture.

In the survey, economists said:

“I expect there to be fewer new regulations in the Trump Administration. This is positive for agriculture.”
“I imagine many of the tax credits for new demand (either low carbon fuels or carbon programs) will be on the table to be cut.”
“He generally is not a fan of the RFS. My guess is that he will impact the RFS only marginally.”
“A deregulatory agenda could be positive for many farmers, but Zeldin has a record that is not favorable toward biofuels. How he (and the President) will address biofuel issues is unclear--in the first Trump administration, there were many large disputes between pro-biofuel and pro-fossil fuel interests.”
“His track record is negative toward liquid biofuels, which is a big part of our domestic demand.”

Related News:

Trump Taps Lee Zeldin to Lead EPA; What Does It Signal for Agriculture?

Trump Taps Lee Zeldin to Lead EPA; What Does It Signal for Agriculture?

Tue, 12 Nov 2024 15:36:34 GMT

President-elect Donald Trump has selected former New York congressman Lee Zeldin to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in his upcoming administration. This appointment signals a potential shift in environmental policy and regulatory approach. Here are the key points about this nomination:

• Zeldin is a former Republican congressman who represented New York’s 1st congressional district from 2015 to 2023.
• He lacks extensive experience in environmental policy, having not served on committees with direct oversight of environmental issues during his time in Congress.
• Zeldin has a lifetime score of only 14% from the League of Conservation Voters, indicating a record of frequently voting against environmental legislation.

Trump stated that Zeldin would “ensure fair and swift deregulatory decisions” to “unleash the power of American businesses.” The administration aims to maintain “the highest environmental standards, including the cleanest air and water on the planet” while pursuing deregulation.

Zeldin is expected to focus on restoring “U.S. energy dominance” and revitalizing the auto industry.

He may be tasked with rolling back several Biden administration environmental regulations, particularly those targeting power plant pollution and vehicle emissions. There are plans to end the pause on constructing new natural gas export terminals and potentially withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

Zeldin joined Trump and Sen.-elect Dave McCormick in Pennsylvania for a roundtable on agriculture during Trump’s campaign in September. Zeldin praised Trump for addressing the “threat” of foreign entities buying U.S. agricultural land and highlighted Trump’s trade policies, including the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which prioritized American farmers and strengthened supply chain resiliency.

Of note to the biofuels sector, In November 2015, Zeldin and several other members of Congress sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy expressing concerns about the proposed 2016 Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs) under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. The lawmakers worried that the proposed 2016 RVOs would require blending more ethanol than could be absorbed by the E10 gasoline market, effectively “breaking through” the blend wall. There were concerns that exceeding the blend wall could drive up the price of E10 gasoline for consumers. Ultimately, the EPA did finalize 2016 RVOs that were lower than originally proposed in the RFS statute, but still represented an increase over previous years. The agency attempted to balance the competing interests and technical constraints in the fuel market.

Meanwhile, discussions are underway about possibly relocating the EPA headquarters outside of Washington, D.C.

Environmental advocates criticized the nomination, viewing it as a potential regression in environmental policy. Zeldin’s record includes opposition to several climate-related bills and support for increased fossil fuel production.

Zeldin’s appointment as EPA Administrator will require Senate confirmation.

Trump Return Likely to Slow, Not Stop, U.S. Clean-energy Boom

Wed, 06 Nov 2024 21:40:48 GMT

Donald Trump’s return to the White House will refocus the nation’s energy policy onto maximizing oil and gas production and away from fighting climate change, but the Republican win in Tuesday’s presidential election is unlikely to dramatically slow the U.S. renewable energy boom.

Investor fears of a reversal under Trump sent clean-energy stocks down sharply on Wednesday. The MAC Global Solar Energy index was down 10% in midday trade, while shares of top renewable project developer and owner NextEra Energy slid 6.2%.

A Biden-era law providing a decade of lucrative subsidies for new solar, wind and other clean-energy projects would be near-impossible to repeal, however, thanks to support from Republican states, while other levers available to the next president would only have marginal impact, analysts say.

“I don’t think a Trump president can slow the transition,” said Ed Hirs, energy fellow at the University of Houston. “This is well under way.”

Renewable energy sources such as solar and wind are the fastest-growing segments on the power grid, according to the Department of Energy, driven by federal tax credits, state renewable-energy mandates, and technology advancements that have lowered their costs.

President Joe Biden in 2022 signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act guaranteeing billions of dollars of solar and wind subsidies for another decade as part of his broader effort to decarbonize the power sector by 2035 to fight climate change.

Before the election, Trump slammed the IRA as being too expensive and promised to rescind all unspent funds allocated by the law - a threat that, if accomplished, could pour cold water over the U.S. clean energy boom. But dismantling the IRA would require lawmakers, including those whose states have benefited from IRA-related investments such as solar-panel factories, wind farms and other projects, to vote to repeal it.

“The jobs and the economic benefits have been so heavy in red states, it’s hard to see an administration come in that says, ‘we don’t like this,’” said Carl Fleming, a partner at law firm McDermott Will & Emery, who advised the Biden White House on renewable energy policy.

Many of Trump’s allies also benefit from the IRA through their investments in clean-energy technologies, Reuters has previously reported.

Fleming said Trump could, however, slow things down around the margins by hindering federal agencies that deliver IRA grants and loans, or by reducing federal leasing for things such as offshore wind.

“You could see a new administration come in and they can very quickly begin to cut budgets or restrict budgets or restrict the freedom of agencies to do certain things that are tied to funding,” he said. “But I think that’s a smaller subset of the larger renewables market that’s really relying on those, so I don’t think it would have a shocking effect.”

The Biden administration has rushed to ensure it spends the majority of available grant funding under the IRA before a new president arrives, Reuters has previously reported.

One way Trump could slow the transition is through executive action by changing public lands leasing, analysts said. The Biden administration had sought to expand lease auctions for offshore wind in federal waters, along with solar and wind on land.

“I think you would see more preference given to fossil-fuel extraction on public lands and waters,” said Tony Dutzik, associate director and senior policy analyst at Frontier Group, a non-profit sustainability think-tank.

That could have an outsized impact on the offshore-wind industry, which aims to site projects in federal waters. Most onshore solar and wind projects are located on private property, as is the vast majority of oil and gas drilling. Trump has said he intends to end the offshore-wind industry “on day one,” arguing it is too expensive and poses a threat to whales and seabirds, a dramatic policy reversal after his first administration supported offshore-wind development.

Bernstein Research said Trump is likely to enact a moratorium on new offshore-wind lease sales. Meanwhile, U.S. fossil-fuel production is likely to look much the same under Trump, experts said. The U.S. has already become the world’s largest oil and gas producer, under the watch of Biden, thanks to a drilling boom in fields such as the Permian Basin under Texas and New Mexico.

The production boom started under former President Barack Obama and has continued through the Trump and Biden presidencies. Even so, Trump’s campaign has sought to claim credit, saying his efforts to slash regulatory red tape during his 2017-2021 term paved the way, and arguing he could further expand U.S. fossil-fuel production in a second term by rolling back Biden’s climate initiatives.

“Presidents can make a lot of noise about plans for U.S. oil and gas, but ultimately it’s individuals and companies responding to prices of a global commodity that make the decisions on when to drill,” said Jesse Jones, head of North American upstream at Energy Aspects.

Dan Eberhart, Trump donor and CEO of oilfield-services company Canary, LLC, said he supports Trump’s encouragement of increased oil-and-gas drilling, saying it could further lower energy prices for businesses and consumers.

He added he would also welcome a move by Trump to once again withdraw the United States from international climate cooperation, like he did in his first term, arguing other big greenhouse-gas emitters were not doing enough.

“The Paris accord was aspirational and meaningless if China and India don’t participate,” he said, referring to a landmark U.N. deal in 2015 to limit global warming.

How the Supreme Court's Big Decision to Overturn the Chevron Doctrine Could Impact Agriculture

Mon, 01 Jul 2024 17:11:47 GMT

On Friday, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, overturned Chevron and handed authority back to Congress and the courts. Overturning the doctrine is a significant ruling that limits federal regulatory power.

The Chevron doctrine, established in 1984, had directed courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous laws.

The decision was split along ideological lines, with the conservative majority voting to overturn Chevron. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, called the Chevron framework “unworkable” and said the court was ending “our 40-year misadventure with Chevron deference.”

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine is expected to have far-reaching implications for federal regulations across various sectors, including environmental protection, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections. It impacts the power of federal agencies, such as EPA, to issue regulations. The Chevron doctrine previously allowed agencies to interpret vague laws. This change provides opponents a clearer legal path to challenge regulations, potentially forcing agencies to be more cautious in drafting rules.

Environmental regulators, such as EPA, will face tougher judicial challenges. The decision is expected to slow down the regulatory process, requiring more time to craft, weigh comments and finalize rules. Many environmental rules stem from old laws with few modern amendments, adding to the uncertainty.

Mixed Reaction After Decision

Proponents of overturning Chevron argue it will reduce the power of unelected bureaucrats and increase accountability.

Critics warn the decision could lead to legal and administrative chaos, making it harder for agencies to respond to new challenges and implement regulations.

The ag and energy sectors are already asking how this ruling could impact energy and environmental regulations — both existing and new. Biofuel interests are wondering if this will impact the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. Given that EPA has more leeway to set RFS levels without the mandates in law, it could. But the RFS levels have been challenged before and the resolution takes a long time, so it really doesn’t affect the mandates, i.e., the 2023 standards included 250 million gallons to meet a court remand of the 2016 standards.

Possible Impact on Agriculture Regulations and Farm Bill

USDA and EPA will no longer have the broad authority to interpret ambiguous statutes. This change is expected to limit their ability to create and enforce regulations without explicit congressional authorization. For instance, regulations related to farm subsidies, crop insurance, and environmental practices, including the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, will now face closer judicial scrutiny.

Farm subsidies and crop insurance: Agencies will need clear statutory authority to implement or modify programs related to farm subsidies and crop insurance ... could lead to fewer regulatory changes ... unless explicitly directed by Congress.

Environmental practices: Regulations under the Clean Water Act and other environmental laws will be more challenging to enforce if they rely on ambiguous statutory language. This could affect rules aimed at protecting wetlands and managing agricultural runoff.

Animal welfare standards: The ruling could impact regulations like those via the Packers & Stockyards Act, which aim to ensure fair competition and treatment in livestock markets.

Support from agricultural groups. They argue that it restores a balance of power by ensuring that unelected bureaucrats cannot impose regulations beyond what Congress has explicitly authorized.

Impact on the farm bill. The ruling puts pressure on Congress to draft more precise and detailed legislation. This is particularly relevant for the new farm bill, as lawmakers will need to ensure that the statutory language is clear to avoid judicial challenges and ensure effective implementation by federal agencies.

The decision is expected to increase accountability within the legislative and executive branches. Congress will need to be more explicit in its directives, and federal agencies will be limited to implementing laws as written, without broad interpretative leeway.

Potential for legal challenges. With the Chevron deference overturned, there may be an increase in legal challenges to existing and new regulations. Courts will now play a more significant role in interpreting agricultural laws, which could lead to a more stable regulatory environment but also more litigation as stakeholders seek judicial clarification on ambiguous statutes.

Opportunity to review prior cases? The conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC) said House committees “have an opportunity to review any regulatory action that was justified by Chevron deference toward agency interpretation.” The RSC views the overturning of Chevron as a way to “reclaim congressional authority” and roll back what they see as executive overreach. The committee’s memo encouraged its members to “scour Biden-era regulatory actions and highlight any that should be considered for judicial review post-Chevron.” This indicates a specific focus on reviewing and potentially challenging regulations implemented during the Biden administration.

Bottom line: This ruling represents a significant shift in administrative law and is likely to have broad impacts on how federal agencies interpret and implement laws passed by Congress. It may lead to more challenges of agency regulations in court and could potentially slow down or complicate the regulatory process across various sectors of government.

How Farmer Protests Across Europe Played a Role in the Recent EU Elections

Thu, 13 Jun 2024 20:59:23 GMT

Farmer protests across Europe are heating up again leading up to the elections in Europe, and the outcome of the European Parliament elections over the weekend sent a clear message. One agricultural economist says it’s not just frustrations from farmers that fueled the election results. It’s also EU voters who are worried about the cost of environmental reforms.

The issue has been brewing for the past year, with farmer protests showing the frustration.

“Things have been slowly coming to the boil over the last 12 months or so. But really, the origins of all this are traceable back to when the last European Commission came into place, which was in 2019,” says Trevor Donnellan, who is the head of economics at the Rural Economy Research Centre based in Ireland.

After the 2019 election, and the Green Party become more dominant, the push to fast-track climate policies and regulation was swift.

“European environmental policy around agriculture is significant. That’s the first thing people in the us need to understand, and it is becoming more significant,” he says. Regulation around things like greenhouse gas emissions is becoming an issue regulation around water quality, the usage of fertilizers, what we do with animal waste, these are all becoming more serious issues.”

Related Story: Why Farmers Are Protesting In Europe

In Donnellan’s own country of Ireland, agriculture is required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2030. He says for a country that has a large dairy and beef production footprint, that could require farmers to reduce their herd size to reach such a lofty goal.

In the Netherlands, environmental policy has already forced livestock producers to get rid of animals, even pushing some farmers out of business.

Those increased regulations are what propelled farmer protests over the past year. The scene drew international attention with farmers using tractors to block traffic on major highways across Europe, to even protesting outside the parliament, and it’s those protests that sent a loud message ahead of the elections.

“The protests, I think, have been significant in making politicians and the general public aware of the importance of taking into account the farmer perspective in setting all these regulations,” says Donnellan.

Related Story: Exploring the Root Causes of Global Farmer Protests Against Ag Policies

That message was apparently on the minds of voters this past weekend as the 27-nation bloc’s parliament membership shifted to the right. The surge by Nationalist and Populist parties will make it much harder for the assembly to approve legislation on issues ranging from climate change to agriculture policy.

“When we look at it in terms of what it might mean, for agriculture, the kind of political perspective in this new parliament has moved a little bit further to the right, which probably is a little bit more aligned with the interests of farmers. And farming is very important. In the context of the European Union, it’s one of the reasons why the European Union was created in the first place,” Donnellan explains.

He says that could mean less of an emphasis on green issues than what the EU has seen dominate policy the past 5 year.

“Looking at it from an agricultural point of view, it could mean that the pace of change in terms of pushing the environmental regulation could maybe slow down a little bit, or there might be a little bit of a rethink on some aspects of it. But it’s probably a parliament that might be a little bit more sympathetic to the concerns of farmers than the one that has just come to an end,” he adds.

Related Story: Will Europe’s Farmer Protests Make Their Way To The U.S.?

While it’s not clear exactly what will happen with EU climate policy in the years ahead, Donnellan says what’s happening in Europe is setting an example for the rest of the world.

“That might sound a little bit grand, but that’s kind of the thinking behind this politically in that Europe will demonstrate to the rest of the world what’s achievable in terms of having an more environmentally compliant economy, including in agriculture, and that the rest of the world should potentially follow suit from a policy perspective in the future,” he says.

What To Know From The Biden Administration's New Carbon Policy Statement

Thu, 30 May 2024 19:03:45 GMT

At the end of May, the Biden Administration published the Joint Policy Statement and Principles on Voluntary Carbon Markets . Farm CPA Paul Neiffer joined the AgriTalk podcast to break down the details of this 12-page document and what the ag industry needs to know.

According to Neiffer, part of the publication’s purpose is to steer companies toward more reliable methods of using carbon.

“You have these large, publicly traded companies that have been greenwashing. They’ve been trying to help the climate, so they go out and buy these credits that really aren’t very valid,” he says. “They’re trying to state the goals for these companies should not be to buy these carbon credits. Their goal really should be to fix their own carbon footprint in their own company and in their supply chain.”

Overall, he says the publication isn’t quite a policy, but more of a statement encouraging companies to clean up their supply chains.

When it comes to farmers, Neiffer believes the ag industry should begin focusing more on 45z tax credits and carbon intensity scores rather than carbon credits.

“It seems to be implying if you’ve already done a great job of reducing your carbon footprint, you’re not going to get a payment because you can’t really reduce your carbon footprint any further,” he says. “Whereas if you’re a farmer that maybe hasn’t done a great job [of reducing your carbon footprint], we’ll give you a payment because we can see in that case where we can reduce your footprint.”

For those who still intend to purchase carbon credits, the second half of the policy statement made an effort to create standards for program participation and make sure there is transparency, identification and documentation.

“They want to make sure it’s legit if you’re buying this carbon credit that you’re actually removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,” Neiffer says.

To hear more from Neiffer, listen to this episode of AgriTalk.

Related Stories

There’s a New Way to Cash in on Your CI Score on the Farm, Thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act

How To Increase Your Potential SAF Tax Credits Now

The New GREET Model is Finally Here: An In-Depth Look at What it Means for Farmers

Fri, 03 May 2024 15:01:37 GMT

The U.S. Treasury and IRS issued updated guidance on the Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) tax credit, aligning with the Inflation Reduction Act’s goal to boost SAF production by providing incentives based on lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions. The initial guidance on the Biden Administration’s SAF subsidy program, which includes three climate-smart practices for corn-based ethanol to qualify; two qualifying practices for soy-based biodiesel and producers of SAF are eligible for a tax credit of $1.25 to $1.75 per gallon

The new guidance includes the release of the now called 40BSAF-GREET 2024 model, designed to calculate these GHG reductions more accurately, incorporating new data and methodologies including climate-smart agricultural practices for soybeans and corn as a feedstock for SAF. GREET stands for Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Technologies.

EPA’s new model is designed to address previously identified shortcomings in the R&D GREET model, particularly in how it calculated lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. The lifecycle approach accounts for all emissions from the initial production stages through to the final use of the fuel.

Similarity to CORSIA Methodology

The Treasury Department notes that the methodology used by the new 40BSAF-GREET 2024 model is like that of the CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation) methodology. CORSIA also evaluates the full fuel lifecycle, which includes all stages from the production of feedstock to the end use of the finished fuel.

Both these methodologies aim to provide a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impact of aviation fuels, focusing on reducing greenhouse gas emissions throughout the entire lifecycle of the fuel. This is crucial for developing effective strategies and regulations for mitigating the aviation industry’s impact on climate change.

The SAF tax credit provides a base of $1.25 per gallon for SAF that achieves at least a 50% reduction in GHG emissions compared to traditional jet fuels, with additional incentives for greater reductions, capped at $1.75 per gallon. This move is aimed at fostering the use of domestically produced, lower-carbon fuels and enhancing the role of U.S. agriculture in sustainable fuel production.

Related Story: There’s a New Way to Cash in on Your CI Score on the Farm, Thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act

Significantly, a pilot program was introduced to credit SAF production using feedstocks grown under specific climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practices, like no-till farming and cover cropping. This pilot, part of the broader strategy to decarbonize aviation fuels, represents a shift towards recognizing and rewarding agricultural practices that contribute to carbon reduction. The release from Treasury on the credit noted that the CSA practices incorporated into the USDA CSA Pilot Program “are not a part of either the 40BSAF-GREET 2024 model or any CARB program including the LCFS program. Therefore, the Treasury Department and USDA have developed additional unrelated party certification requirements for the USDA CSA Pilot Program.”

Industry Reaction

Industry reactions have been largely positive, highlighting the progress towards integrating farming practices into carbon scoring for biofuels. However, some critiques focus on the need for less rigid frameworks to encourage broader adoption of innovative, carbon-reducing technologies and practices in agriculture and biofuel production. There is a desire for ongoing refinement of these models to ensure they are scientifically robust and economically beneficial, paving the way for significant reductions in GHG emissions from aviation fuels and strengthening the role of American agriculture in achieving these goals.

SAF production requirements:

SAF producers seeking to use the CSA reduction for producing SAF from CSA crops must contract directly with farmers enrolled in the USDA CSA Pilot Program for either CSA corn or CSA soybeans.

CSA corn production practices:

Farmers producing CSA corn for Alcohol to Jet (ATJ)-ethanol must implement three specific practices on the same acreage:

No-till farming.
Planting cover crops.
Using enhanced efficiency nitrogen fertilizer.

CSA soybean production practices:

For CSA soybeans, only two practices are required:

No-till farming.
Planting cover crops.

Added nitrogen is not required for soybean production.

USDA CSA pilot program and emissions reduction:

In partnership with the USDA, the Treasury Department allows for a SAF synthetic blending component produced from CSA corn or soybeans to be eligible for an additional proxy reduction (CSA reduction) in emissions calculation, without needing a full lifecycle analysis.

Emissions reduction example:

A synthetic blending component using CSA corn or soybeans is granted a safe harbor, with Treasury citing an example where CSA corn used in SAF production achieves a 53% emissions reduction.

Regulatory alignment and definitions:

The definitions and practice requirements outlined by the Treasury in their notice align with USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) practice standards and enhancements, with specific details provided in the notice.

Related Story: SAF IRS Guidance Released - Is it Worthless?

CSA pilot program practices:

No-till farming defined:

No-till involves limiting soil disturbance to manage the amount, orientation, and distribution of crop and plant residue on the soil surface year-round.
Residue must not be burned and should be uniformly distributed over the entire field. Removal from the seeding or transplanting area is acceptable.
In-row soil disturbance is permitted during strip tillage, planting, and when closing seed rows/furrows. Full-width soil disturbance is prohibited between crop cycles.
The Soil Tillage Intensity Rating (STIR) for the crop interval must not exceed 20. Examples include a tandem disk (STIR 19.5) and a rotary stalk chopper (STIR 31.2).

Cover crop practices:

Include grasses, legumes, and forbs for seasonal vegetative cover.
Planting must adhere to local criteria regarding species, seedbed preparation, seeding rates, dates, depths, fertility, and methods.
Cover crops should be compatible with other cropping system components and selected herbicides.
Establishment can occur during the fallow season, or as companion or relay planting.
Residue from cover crops cannot be burned, and crops must be terminated according to NRCS guidelines.
If grazed or hayed, management must not compromise soil health or organic matter.
Cover crops cannot be harvested for seed.

Enhanced Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizer (EENF) practices for corn:

EENF is used to improve nutrient use efficiency, reduce nutrient loss risk, and lower greenhouse gas emissions.
Defined by AAPFCO as products that increase plant uptake and reduce nutrient losses compared to standard fertilizers.
For corn, strategies include using nitrification inhibitors, urease inhibitors, or slow-release fertilizers for a minimum of 50% of nitrogen applications.
This practice does not apply to soybeans as they do not require added nitrogen.

Upshot: These practices and definitions are integral to the USDA CSA Pilot Program and aim to enhance sustainability in crop production by minimizing environmental impact and improving resource efficiency.

Record Keeping Requirements for Farmers in the CSA Pilot Program

General records:

Maintain records on the type and amount of feedstock produced.
Document ownership or operational control of the enrolled land; if leased, the lessee must declare operational control.
List all CSA practices implemented as per the guidelines.
Sign a letter of intent to continue using no-till and cover crops on the same acreage, allowing periodic tillage only once every five or ten years.
Declare that the produced feedstock using CSA practices is exclusively for SAF production and affirm no sale of GHG offset credits or associated GHG benefits.
Provide all records to an unrelated third party for verification.

Crop-specific records:

Document crop rotation and tillage practices for each crop before implementation and note any changes to ensure compliance with no-till practices.
Record planting and harvesting dates for each crop, detailing the month and year.
Document field operations and the timing of these operations.
Record total planted and harvested acreage and yield for crops produced under the no-till system and sold as SAF feedstock.
Keep records of seed purchases, seeding dates and rates, and field locations (using FSA maps or other reliable sources).
Document the amount of SAF feedstock delivered to various points such as elevators, millers, refiners, or other delivery locations.

Cover crop and fertilizer management:

Maintain similar records for cover crops as required for primary crops.
Keep management records for the use of Enhanced Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizer (EENF) strategies.

Bottom line: These record-keeping practices are crucial for ensuring accountability and verifying compliance with the sustainable practices stipulated by the CSA Pilot Program.

SAF producer requirements

Contractual obligations:

Farmers must have a direct contract with the SAF producer.

Record keeping and compliance:

SAF producers are responsible for collecting and maintaining all records from each supplying farmer. Note that the EENF portion is not relevant for soybean production.
Maintain full supply chain traceability records as per requirements.
If a grain elevator is used as an intermediary for storing feedstock, it must also maintain appropriate records linked to those bushels.

Intermediary entities:

Any intermediary entity that takes physical possession of the feedstock, including the registered SAF producer, must comply with traceability requirements aligned with the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA).

Documentation and forms:

Forms for farmers to provide their supporting information for the CSA Pilot are included in the notice covering the process, ensuring transparency and adherence to guidelines.

Impacts and Implementation

CSA pilot program requirements and participation:

All three CSA actions are required for corn, while only the first two (no-till and cover crops) are needed for soybeans.
Soybeans might qualify more easily due to the commonality of no-till, but fewer farmers use both no-till and cover crops together.

Land eligibility and coverage:

According to the Census of Agriculture, no-till is practiced on 105.2 million acres, but cover crops are much less common at 17.99 million acres.
There are 382 million acres of cropland, with 301 million acres harvested, raising questions about the universe of land eligible for the CSA Pilot.

SAF production and consumption:

SAF consumption has risen from 5 million gallons in 2021 to 24.5 million gallons in 2023.
The limited number of SAF producers in the US could pose a challenge for meeting program goals.

Periodic tillage and soil health:

Periodic tillage is crucial for some farmers using no-till to maintain soil health, requiring clarity on permissible tillage practices under the program.

Record-keeping requirements:

Farmers must maintain detailed records and provide them to third parties for verification.
Elevators used by SAF producers for storing CSA commodities also have specific record-keeping requirements.

Regulatory and financial considerations:

New domestic plants using the ATJ pathway with ethanol as feedstock are expected, though details are sparse.
Farmers selling CSA crops to SAF producers cannot earn GHG offset credits or sell associated GHG benefits, impacting participation in private carbon credit efforts.

Future developments and clarity:

The Clean Fuel Production Credit (45Z) starting in 2025 will require further modeling, data assumptions, and verification.
A new 45Z-GREET model will be developed to align with the 45Z tax credit, necessitating rapid development and expanded use of cover crops.

What is a Carbon Intensity Score (CSI) and what does it mean for farmers? We share some FAQs from farmers.

Exclusive: Presidential Candidate Nikki Haley Shares Her Vision For The U.S., Agriculture

Tue, 09 Jan 2024 19:26:13 GMT

Nikki Haley, a candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, joined AgriTalk on Tuesday to share her plans for the U.S. and U.S. agriculture if successful in her run for president.

Haley is a former ambassador to the United Nations and former governor of South Carolina.

AgriTalk has extended an invitation to all presidential candidates to join Host Chip Flory and answer five standard questions about what they would do if elected. That information follows below. You can also listen to the full conversation between Haley and Flory here:

Q1: What’s your motivation to be President? Why do you want the job?

A: The long answer to that is that my parents came here 50 years ago to an America that was strong and proud and full of opportunity. I want them to know that country again. I’m doing this for my husband, who is a combat veteran and who’s currently deployed. I’m doing it for him and his military brothers and sisters, because they need to know their sacrifice matters. They need to know that we love our country.

I’m also doing this for my daughter who just got married. I saw how hard it was for her and her husband to own a home. The average homebuyer right now is 49 years old. And I’m doing this for my son who’s a senior in college. I’m tired of watching him write papers and things he doesn’t believe in just to get an A. That’s not us.

Right now, 81% of Americans don’t think their kids are going to have as good of a life as we did. We can’t be OK with that. I’m not OK with that. I think we have a country to save, and I’m determined to do it.

Q2: What’s the No. 1 issue or challenge for America? How and when will you address it as President?

A: I think the first thing we have to do is end this national self-loathing that’s taken over our country – the idea that they say America is bad or rotten or racist. Our kids need to know to love America, they need to be saying the Pledge of Allegiance when they start school every day. And once we get that national self-loathing out of the way, we can start focusing on the economy and getting inflation back on track. We can start focusing on getting our kids reading again and going back to the basics with education. We can start focusing on securing our border with no more excuses. We can start focusing on law and order in our country, and we can start focusing on a strong America that we can all be proud of.

Q3: Let’s talk rural America, agriculture, farming and ranching. What issues will you address as President?

A: Well, you know, I grew up in an agricultural state, and I was governor of an agricultural state. So, I know the challenges. The first thing would be to get the EPA out of the way. Right now, they care more about sagebrush lizards than they do about whether we can afford our utility bill. Then, we need to start seeing producers as the partners that they are. Food security is national security; that’s always been the case, and we can’t ever be OK with getting our food from overseas. We have to make sure not only do we have enough food produced here in America, but that we have more than enough that we can export overseas so we can make it the powerhouse that we know it can be.

That’s the same with energy. You’ve got biofuels here in Iowa, and it’s hugely important that we see that for the opportunity that it is. So the biggest thing is, get the EPA out of the way, and let producers know that we’re partners and support them through the process. The one thing I saw in South Carolina is farmers are the ultimate survivors. They can’t control the weather, they can’t control pricing. So, the last thing they need is to … have government go and put other mandates on them, whether it’s water, whether it’s anything else. We’ve got to stop all that.

Q4: Describe your energy and renewable energy policy plans.

A: First of all, things that Russia, China and Iran never wanted us to have are a strong military, and they didn’t want us to be energy independent. I don’t want to be energy independent. I want to be energy dominant. We need to make sure that we do that by getting the EPA out of the way. We should roll back Washington’s old rules dictating when we can sell E15 fuel. The rules don’t make sense anymore, and we should get rid of them.

As president, I’ll roll back all of the Biden administration’s green mandates, especially the ones on electric cars that he’s trying to force on us. And when we start to focus on that, then we can see what economic incentives we have to make sure that we grow biofuels and biodiesel in a way we can export it. Let consumers decide which fuels they prefer. I think that’s the biggest thing. I’ll be completely supportive of Iowans and completely supportive of biofuels, and that includes supporting the Renewable Fuel Standard.

Q5: How will businesses small and large view the fiscal policies of a Haley administration?

A: If you put an accountant in the White House magic happens (Haley has a bachelor of science degree in accounting and finance from Clemson University). I will tell you that we are $34 trillion in debt, and we’re having to borrow money just to make our interest payments. China owns some of that debt. What we need to do is we need to stop the wasteful spending. We’re seeing that in both Republicans and Democrats.

The first thing that we’ll do is we’ll stop the spending, we’ll stop the borrowing. I’ll eliminate all these pet projects, and I’ll veto any spending bill that doesn’t take us back to pre-Covid levels. Secondly, we’ll move as many federal programs as we can to the state level. That way, you’re reducing the size of the federal government, but you’re empowering people on the ground and moving more of those resources to let the people decide how best to use them. Then, we want to let the middle class breathe, and the way we’ll let the middle class breathe is we will eliminate the federal gas and diesel tax in this country.

Then, we’ll cut taxes on the middle class and simplify the brackets, and then we’ll make sure that we make the small business tax cuts permanent. They made corporate tax cuts permanent, but they made small business tax cuts temporary. We’ll stop double-taxing farmers the way they are right now, which is keeping them from having generational farms taking place. When you do those types of things that’s when you really get spending back on track. You get inflation under control, and you help those that really need it. I know small businesses are the heartbeat of our economy. We need to start acting like it.

Q: On trade policy, former President Trump says he’s going to invoke at least a 10% tariff on all imports into the U.S. Is that something you would consider?

A: No, because you can’t. When you do that you’re costing Americans more money. The time you want to apply tariffs is when you’re dealing with an adversary, when you’re dealing with a situation where you need to go and make sure that you’re making things harder for them. We need to do more trade with more friends, and we need to do it in a way that we’re exporting as much as we possibly can. As governor, I focused on how to (help) businesses export as much as they could. As president, it should be no different. I would be the No. 1 salesperson of American products, of American produce, of American things.

If you just start doing tariffs on everybody, guess what? They do it right back to you, and then everybody suffers the consequences. So, you have to be strategic. You have to be smart. That’s when you can make sure that it’s more of an advantage and you use it as leverage. You don’t just use it as an across-the-board plan.

To date, along with Ambassador Haley, AgriTalk has also talked with presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis. That conversation is available here:

Exclusive Q&A With Presidential Hopeful Ron DeSantis