Farm Economy

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

Mon, 13 Apr 2026 21:22:18 GMT

What You Need to Know:

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

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

The Evolution of the Cycle

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

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

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

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

Change Fatigue and Modern Volatility

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

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

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

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

Global Competitiveness and the Trade Reallocation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Rise of Generics and Decision Paralysis

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

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

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

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

AI: The “Undergraduate Intern”

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

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

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

Livestock and the GLP-1 Impact

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

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

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

Financial Stability: Not the 1980s

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

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

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

Strategic Reassessment: Winning at the Bottom

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

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

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

So Is This Ag Cycle Different?

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

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

The Shrinking Slice: Farmers Receive Less Than 6 Cents of Every Food Dollar

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 20:30:44 GMT

For the past two years, USDA has estimated farmers and ranchers received less than 6 cents of every food dollar. In 2023, that was 5.9 cents, and using the latest data from 2024, it’s 5.8 cents.

“Our oldest data point right now is 2007 [USDA updated the data series] and that’s 14.7 cents per dollar, and now we’re down all the way to 11.8 cents per dollar,” says Faith Parum, economist with the American Farm Bureau Federation. “So we’ve really seen that decline year after year. It reflects how much of the value of things in the grocery store or when you go out to eat is going to other parts of the supply chain and not necessarily to farmers and ranchers.”

Livestock vs. Crops: A Widening Gap

The aggregate decline masks a widening gap between sectors. While the overall farmer share is down, livestock and crop producers are seeing divergent trends:

Crop Farmers: Share dropped from 2.9 cents to 2.5 cents (a 2.5% year-over-year decrease).
Livestock Producers: Share increased from 3 cents to 3.3 cents.

“Overall, the farmer share is down. But we have those two markets really at odds,” Parum says. “We’ve seen that tale of two farm economies where our livestock producers maybe have seen a little bit of better days than they had had in the past, while our row crop farmers and our specialty crop farmers are really facing strong headwinds in the market.”

Effect at the Farm Gate

As highlighted by USDA, farm finances are quickly strained when farmers/ranchers are capturing a small percentage of the food dollar and even modest swings in commodity prices and/or input prices take place.

Parum adds, “when we talk about the health of our farms and the health of future generations on the farm, and being economically viable and sustainable and being able to keep their operations open, the trends we’re seeing right now are really hard for those farmers. Our ranchers are seeing a little bit of better days right now with high beef prices, but that’s not going to last forever, and with production expenses continuing to increase, we’re really going to see that that question come up of, what is sustainable if, if these dollars we’re spending in the grocery store aren’t making it back to our farmers.”

Where Does the Money Get Distributed?

The key takeaway: farmers produce the raw commodities that make food production, however, the price is clearly more determined by what happens after the products first leave the farm.

The USDA Food Dollar Series tracks how each dollar is spent by consumers and then divides it across the industries contributing to the value in the supply chain, such as farming, food processing, transportation, packaging, wholesaling, retail and food service. As noted by the USDA, with each step in the process, the additional services, labor, transportation and infrastructure add value and increase costs to the final food product.

USDA’s Economic Research Service Food Dollar Series shows in 2024, farmers received 11.8 cents of every dollar spent on domestically produced food, the remaining 88.2 cents of the food dollar went toward the ‘marketing bill’, which includes costs associated with food processing, transportation, packaging, wholesaling, retailing and food service. Over time, this shift illustrates how an increasing share of food spending is driven by services and supply chain activities rather than farm production itself.

Groceries Leave the Most on The Table For Farmers

Farmers’ share of consumer food spending varies widely depending on the type of food purchased. For example, the farm share of the food-at-home dollar was 18.5 cents in 2024, up slightly from 18.4 cents in 2023. But even in this category it means only than one-fifth of what consumers spend on groceries goes back to farmers.

As you may expect, products with minimal processing, require less of the value to be retained in that part of the food system, and therefore return a larger share of the food dollar to producers.

“The highest commodity that gets the most of that food dollar is fresh eggs,” Parum notes. “That’s just because there’s limited labor to process that food.”

Examples include:

Fresh Eggs: 69.1 cents (+6% from 2023)
Beef: 52.2 cents (+4.8%)
Fresh Milk: 50.8 cents (+5.6%)
Pork: 23.7 cents (+7.2%)
Poultry (+3.1%)
Fish (+2.8%)
Tree nuts and peanuts (-1.7%)
Fresh fruits and vegetables (unchanged)
Bakery Products: 4.8 cents (-9.4%)
Soft Drinks/Bottled Water: 1.3 cents (-7.1%)

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

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 18:26:40 GMT

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

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

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

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

Stabilizing, Not Recovering

December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

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

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

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

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

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

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

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

Consolidation a Growing Threat

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

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

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

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes)

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s Driving the Farm Economy Right Now

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

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

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

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

Farm Journal’s December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lori Hayes )

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

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

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

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

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

Livestock: A Continued Bright Spot

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

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

What Could Move Crop Prices in the Next Six Months

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Biofuels Policy: A Potential Turning Point?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Policy Uncertainty Still Looms

Economists also flagged top priorities for 2026 policy action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Acreage Expectations: Stress, Not Shock

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Will Congressional Inaction Force Farmers to Choose Between Health Insurance and Their Farm Budget?

Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:29:25 GMT

Healthcare insurance plans for some U.S. farmers could double in 2026, as enhanced federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are scheduled to expire.

The impending cost surge could affect thousands of U.S. farmers who currently rely on the ACA marketplace for their health insurance, according to the non-partisan KFF (formerly Kaiser Family Foundation), a health policy organization.

KFF estimated in 2023 that 27% of “farmers, ranchers, and other agriculture managers” relied on individual ACA market coverage. Nationally, more than 22 million Americans rely on the ACA marketplace for insurance options.

Farmers ‘Don’t Have Many Options’
Iowa farmer Aaron Lehman, who testified before Congress last week, highlighted the severity of the potential cost increase on his family. He said he expects to pay double to purchase an insurance plan for 2026 that would be comparable to what his family had this year.

“That is an incredible cost for our family budget and for our farm budget,” Lehman stated. The fifth-generation farmer and president of the Iowa Farmers Union described how rising healthcare costs are colliding with already harsh economic realities in agriculture.

“Farmers right now are trying to make all sorts of decisions because commodity prices are low, because of the chaotic trade situation that we’re in and higher input prices. All these things have made a real crisis for a lot of our farmers,” said Lehman.

“Finding ways to deal with that, we just don’t have too many options. Farmers will buy less equipment or not make the necessary upgrades and equipment that they need to,” he added. “They’ll look at their input suppliers, and they’ll decide, ‘what can we do to get through just this year … to get a plan to put the crop in the ground?’”

Read the testimony of Aaron Lehman here. A portion of his testimony and discussion is also featured on a posting to YouTube .

Signup Deadlines For Coverage
The challenge for farmers trying to decide on what insurance policy to purchase is compounded by the deadline to enroll in ACA marketplace plans: People needed to choose their ACA plan by Monday for coverage to begin Jan. 1. Open enrollment continues in most states until Jan. 15 for coverage beginning Feb. 1.

Despite broad public support for an extension to the ACA tax credits — a KFF poll said 74% of Americans favor continuing the enhanced credits — a congressional standoff has so far failed to produce a solution:

Failed Votes: Both a Democratic plan to extend the enhanced tax credits for three years and a Republican proposal to replace them with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) failed to pass the Senate last week.
Impending Crisis: Nearly six in 10 enrollees (across all categories) told KFF they could not afford even a $300 annual increase in 2026 without significantly disrupting household finances.
Political Fallout: The issue of healthcare costs and expiring subsidies is highly polarizing, with some Republicans warning that a failure to address the problem could cost them legislative majorities in next year’s mid-term elections.

As the deadline for open enrollment closes and the Dec. 31 subsidy expiration date approaches, farmers must prepare for substantially higher health insurance costs in 2026 unless Congress acts to reach a last-minute agreement.

Young Farmers Need Better Options
During his testimony and ensuing discussion, Lehman stressed that healthcare isn’t just a personal household issue; it’s central to the future of American farming. With the average age of an Iowa farmer at 57, he said the sector desperately needs young and beginning farmers to return to the land. But without affordable, reliable health coverage, inviting the next generation back onto the farm becomes a far riskier proposition.

“You have to be very smart to figure out the plan that can bring the next generation on the farm,” he said, adding that many talented, innovative young people want to farm, but face daunting financial barriers — healthcare high among them. He noted that one of his sons works with him on their family operation, which is based in Polk County, Iowa.

Lehman framed affordable healthcare for farm families as an investment, not a handout: a way to make it possible for young farmers to feed their communities, support local and regional food systems, or continue larger family commodity operations.

“Extending the federal support for lowering the cost of health insurance is a true win for farmers and for all of rural America,” he said.

Thanksgiving Turkey Dinner Costs Dip By 5%

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:46:11 GMT

As families across America prepare for their Thanksgiving celebrations next week, the 40th annual American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) survey brings some welcome news for the wallet.

The classic Thanksgiving dinner for 10 people is projected to cost an average of $55.18, marking a 5% decrease from last year. However, this price point remains notably higher than five years ago.

A Long-Standing Tradition
Since 1986, the AFBF has tracked and reported the cost of a traditional Thanksgiving meal. Each year, volunteer shoppers from across the U.S. and Puerto Rico canvas local grocery stores—or their online counterparts—to record prices for a standard list of holiday staples.

The list of items surveyed for prices includes turkey, cubed stuffing, sweet potatoes, dinner rolls, frozen peas, fresh cranberries, celery, carrots, pumpkin pie mix and pie crusts, whipping cream, and whole milk.

This year’s grocery bill highlights several price shifts. Four key items saw a drop in price: the centerpiece turkey, cubed stuffing, fresh cranberries, and dinner rolls.

Conversely, five items—sweet potatoes, frozen green peas, vegetable tray, whole milk, and whipping cream—experienced price increases. Pumpkin pie mix and pie shells remained virtually unchanged from last year’s figures.

Regional Differences Contribute To Costs
For those celebrating in the West, the classic Thanksgiving dinner for 10 people costs $61.75, making it the most expensive region and approximately 12% higher than the national average. Families in the Northeast also face prices above the national average, with their classic meal coming in at $60.82. The South boasts the most affordable holiday meal at $50.01, closely followed by the Midwest at $54.38.

Americans living in the West will pay, on average, nearly $10 more per meal than those living in the South.

(AFBF)

If you expand dinner options to include ham, Russet potatoes, and green beans, including these additional items elevates the total meal cost for 10 to $77.09, or $7.71 per person.

Regionally, the South again offers the lowest total at $71.20, followed by the Midwest at $76.33. Both the Northeast and the West saw a jump in cost, reaching $82.97 and $84.97, respectively. The West once more stands out, with costs higher there than in other regions.

Turkey Takes a Back Seat in the Bill
Historically, the turkey has been the undisputed heavyweight on the Thanksgiving receipt, often accounting for an average of 43% of the total dinner cost. However, in 2025, a 16-pound turkey represents only 39% of the cost for a 10-person dinner—its lowest share since 2000.

Turkey prices have dropped for consumers this year because, in many instances, retailers are using them as a loss leader to attract shoppers.

(AFBF)

A 16-pound turkey will set shoppers back an average of $21.50, reports the AFBF, a significant 16% decrease from 2024. While fresh turkey prices continue to climb as the poultry sector battles highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), the prices for frozen turkeys—the preferred choice for most Thanksgiving feasts—are steadily declining.

Adding to this trend, turkey demand outside of the holiday season continues to wane, with the average American consuming only 13 pounds of turkey per year, nearly 3 pounds less than six years ago.

Side Dishes Gain Weight on the Grocery Receipt
Despite the overall dip in Thanksgiving meal costs this year, side dishes now command a larger share of the total grocery bill. Price increases for fresh produce and essential baking ingredients underscore elevated costs throughout the entire supply chain.

Items like fresh vegetables and sweet potatoes registered some of the most substantial cost increases. A veggie tray is up by more than 61%, and sweet potatoes saw a 37% jump.

Several items saw price reductions this year, helping to mitigate the overall meal cost, according to the AFBF survey. Dinner rolls are down 14.6%, stuffing is down 9%, and cranberries are down 2.8%.

Your next read: Normal La Niña Pattern to Return By Thanksgiving

How to Get a Loan Approval: A Banker's Point of View

Tue, 18 Nov 2025 20:28:26 GMT

For most farmers, the next big project on the operation starts with a conversation with your banke, and being fully prepared before you walk into that meeting can significantly increase your chances of getting a loan approval.

Curtis Gerrits, senior lending specialist at Compeer Financial, has spent years helping producers get the financing they need. During a recent Professional Dairy Producers webinar, he shares what truly makes a loan application stand out and how farmers can set themselves up for a smoother approval process.

Get Your Financial House in Order
When preparing for a loan, Gerrits emphasizes lenders look first at clear and complete financial documentation. The process begins with the fundamentals.

“Some of the documents that are top of mind are your profit and loss statement,” he says. “Don’t just stick with the current year. Try to have access to the last three years.”

A profit and loss statement not only establishes whether a business is profitable but also helps lenders understand how the farm manages revenue and expenses over time. Gerrits encourages farmers to follow this with a current balance sheet that breaks down assets and liabilities in detail.

This balance sheet should include livestock numbers, acres owned and leased and a complete equipment list with updated values. Together, these documents paint a picture of financial health and management discipline.

For long-term planning, Gerrits stresses the importance of forward-looking projections.

“Probably one of the last things is to have a detailed projection,” he adds. “What is the business plan, and how is this going to impact your business?”

These projections help both the producer and the lender understand how an expansion, land purchase or capital improvement will affect cash flow and operational stability in the years ahead.

Details Matter
Gerrits says one of the most common pitfalls he sees is overlooking the finer points of financial reporting. Accurate and transparent records build trust and demonstrate professionalism, giving lenders greater confidence in the producer’s decision-making capacity.

“The attention to detail is probably a key thing that maybe gets overlooked from time to time,” he explains.

A lender needs to see exactly what makes up the operation’s income. This could include crop sales, livestock sales, custom work, direct-to-consumer revenue or any other streams that support the business. Clear categorization helps verify performance and gives lenders a better understanding of how the farm is managed.

Build a Strong Relationship
Beyond the numbers, Gerrits stresses the importance of working with a lender who understands the realities of farming. A loan officer familiar with agriculture can better interpret financial statements, spot trends and anticipate challenges.

“Working with a loan officer that understands your day-to-day is really important,” he says. “Having that good relationship where you can bounce ideas off of one another is a really great thing.

Gerrits also encourages producers to bring their lender onto the farm. Sometimes a walk-through can communicate more than a financial packet ever could.

“Put your boots on and take a walk through the barns and show them what you are doing and why the loan application that you are requesting is important,” he says.

Seeing the animals, the facilities and the workflow helps lenders fully understand the operation’s strengths and opportunities, and it gives them greater clarity when evaluating a loan request.

Be Honest About Tough Years
Producers should not shy away from acknowledging difficult financial periods or reporting losses on taxes. Gerrits reassures farmers that losses do not automatically disqualify them from financing.

“Do not get too hung up on the losses out there,” he explains.

A balance sheet can often show how those losses are supported or offset by strong assets, such as land, livestock or equipment equity. What matters most is transparency and context. And demonstrating that you have a plan to manage challenges and leverage your assets can build confidence with your lender.

Plan for the Future
Constant communication with your loan officer can make a big difference in the approval process. Gerrits says checking in periodically, even with a quick touch base, helps avoid surprises.

“Maybe you’ve already talked about: ‘Hey, in a couple of months we might have something come in, and I’m going to have a request for an operating line of credit,’” he says. “That way it’s already in the back of the loan officer’s mind, and they can start preparing or gathering the right information.”

A little preparation can also greatly speed up the loan process. Gerrits recommends giving your loan officer about one month of lead time before funds are needed, along with complete financial documents.

“At the end of the year, we’ll see some borrowers who need to borrow money to do some prepaids to help their tax situation,” he says. “It’s hard to turn things around because a lot of folks are coming in at the last hour. If you give them a month’s lead time with all of the information pertinent, all the financials and balance sheets, that will just help expedite it.”

Looking further ahead, Gerrits encourages producers to think generationally and begin planning for succession well before retirement becomes imminent.

“It is never too early to start a succession plan,” he says.

Early planning gives the next generation clarity about future roles and expectations, helping them prepare financially and personally for the responsibilities that lie ahead.

Own Your Numbers
Ultimately, Gerrits believes successful borrowers take responsibility for knowing and understanding every aspect of their financial position.

“Know your numbers first,” he says. “Don’t just rely on your loan officer to tell you how you are doing.”

Throughout the loan process, preparation and transparency go a long way. Clear financials, attention to detail and regular communication help your lender understand your goals, while on-farm conversations and honest discussions build trust. Being organized, consistent and informed does more than streamline an application, it helps you make better decisions, catch issues early and keep the operation moving in the right direction.

A Kansas Comeback: Farm Income Set to Nearly Double in 2025

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 18:48:46 GMT

When it comes to the farm economy, 2025 has been a year of contrasts. Some farmers are finally seeing brighter days, while others are fighting just to stay afloat.

Kansas State University’s Joe Parcell says the latest farm financial data tells a story of both opportunity and risk — and of two very different realities across American agriculture.

A Center Focused on Risk — and Reality

Inside the business school at K-State, Parcell leads what he calls a “pretty unique” operation. As director of the K-State Risk Management Center, Parcell’s work spans across the College of Business, College of Agriculture, and College of Engineering.

“I have the pleasure of leading a center here that’s pretty unique out there in the country,” he says. “It’s the Risk Management Center, and here we believe it’s interdisciplinary, that as you get into your career and making decisions, it’s not just about your discipline — it’s about learning from others, because we don’t work in disciplines. We work interdisciplinary when we’re trying to solve problems with firms. So, we’re a joint [operation] between really the College of Business, the Ag College, and the Engineering College here at K-State.”

That interdisciplinary approach is helping shed new light on farm-level financial pressures. Recently, Parcell’s team joined forces with the University of Missouri to study leading indicators of farm financial stress. What they found, he says, reveals a growing divide within agriculture.

Row Crops Versus Livestock: A Tale of Two Economies

“The one glaring [issue] out there is the difference between row crop farming and livestock farming right now,” Parcell explains. “The other is what’s going on in the equipment sector — and not just at the farm. I mean, this really extends into our communities and our rural areas. And, you know, probably the third one is the banks. It’s not just the farms, but it’s the banks that are lending them money and what kind of situation that they’re in, especially our local community banks.”

The disparity between the sectors has widened dramatically, as noted in a recently released report called “Leading Indicators of Farm Financial Stress: Fall 2025.” Cattle producers are seeing strong profits and renewed optimism, while many young row-crop farmers are dealing with tight margins and higher costs that have become the new normal.

Parcell notes part of the challenge is policy-related.

“Frankly, we need the government to reopen,” he says, referring to the ongoing federal shutdown. “We got some good news last week with our FSA offices reopening on limited staff, but we’ve got a lot of money out there to push out to the farmers from even last year yet — and this year. Plus, we need the Risk Management Agency to be open and help those producers out with what’s going on in crop insurance and stuff.”

Cattle Drive Kansas’ Rebound

Despite the challenges, Kansas agriculture is showing signs of recovery — thanks largely to cattle. Parcell says farm income in Kansas is set to double from last year. That’s one of the revelations that showed up in a report released last last week called the “Fall 2025 Farm Income Outlook for Kansas.” The report was released jointly between the University of Missouri and K-State.

“We’re going to have farm income about doubling from last year to this year,” he says. “And that’s a combination of three things really driven by an increase in revenues more than a drop in expenses. That revenue is being driven — of the $6.2 billion we’re going to add to the farm revenue side — 58% of that is with the cattle side or livestock side. We’ve got 34% of the government payments and only 8% in row crop.”

Kansas crop receipts are projected to rise by $559.18 million (8%) in 2025, with increases expected across all four major commodities despite lower prices. This is because yields are estimated to recover from recent lows as the state recovers from persistent drought.

(Kansas State University )

The report shows Kansas crop receipts are projected to rise by $559.18 million (8%) in 2025, with increases expected across all four major commodities despite lower prices. This is because yields are estimated to recover from recent lows as the state recovers from persistent drought.

According to the new report:

Corn planted area is projected 550,000 acres (9%) higher at 6.85 million acres in 2025. This, combined with higher yields than in 2024, results in a 17% projected increase in production that would offset a 9% drop in price and generate a $316.34 million (11%) increase in cash receipts. Crop receipts will increase by 8%, and 2025 Kansas net farm income will increase by 88% in 2025.
Soybean cash receipts are projected to jump $182.98 million (13%) in 2025, driven largely by recovering yields after three years of drought. Total production is expected to increase 2% to 157.95 million bushels, despite a decline of 430,000 planted acres (-9%).
Wheat planted acres dipped by 300,000 (-4%) in 2025; however, an increase in yield is projected to contribute to a $25.49 million (2%) increase in cash receipts.

A breakdown of the share of projected crop receipts in Kansas.

(Kansas State University and University of Missouri )

Recovery from drought is also helping fuel the cattle sector. According to the report,

Cash receipts for cattle and calves, which account for 90% of Kansas’s livestock receipts, are projected to increase by $3.54 billion (24%) to $18.33 billion in 2025.
Marketings for cattle and calves are projected to increase by 4%, and fed steer prices are projected to increase by 21%.

Cash receipts for cattle and calves, which account for 90% of Kansas’s livestock receipts, are projected to increase by $3.54 billion (24%) to $18.33 billion in 2025. Marketings for cattle and calves are projected to increase by 4% and fed steer prices are projected to increase by 21%.

(Kansas State University and University of Missouri)

After years of drought and depressed prices, cow-calf producers are finally getting a chance to reinvest.

“These cattle producers, especially the cow-calf producers, I mean they’ve suffered through a lot of years,” Parcell says. “They’ve had drought years, they’ve had low prices, and this has just given them a chance to kind of replenish their supplies so they’re getting ready for the next cycle — because we know everything will come to an end and we’ll end up the other way as part of this cattle cycle. High prices sell high prices, and we’re going to be at low prices in the near future.”

Equipment and Banking Pressures Build

While higher cattle prices offer temporary relief, Parcell warns that other parts of the rural economy are under real stress. The Association of Equipment Manufacturers’ latest flash report shows new 4-wheel-drive tractor and combine sales are down almost 40% this year — a sign of cautious spending and shrinking margins.

“I think our biggest concern in this is with the equipment dealers themselves,” Parcell says. “We saw a lot of consolidation last year. These equipment dealers hire a lot of folks in the rural areas. They’re an important source for our farmers when it comes time to fix equipment and get parts and stuff. It’s just their survivability — and they’re carrying some pretty expensive equipment on that yard right now with some higher interest rates than we had a few years ago.”

Still, despite the softening in sentiment among farmers, Parcell says bankers aren’t panicking — at least not yet.

“That’s the most interesting one,” he says. “Because you really see things in a declining mode, but it’s not in a fully worrisome mode. So, in what we talk about, or what we use as kind of our benchmark, we go back to 2016, ’17, ’18, where we had similar things. We had depressed commodity prices, we had some trade wars going on in there, and sentiment is not strong. But it’s not as weak as what it was back during that period.”

Looking Ahead: Volatility Rules

When asked what worries him most, Parcell doesn’t hesitate. It’s not what’s happening today — it’s what could happen next.

“I think the biggest concern is what’s to come,” he says. “There’s so much volatility out there in the market right now. We have trade wars. We have what’s going to be said next out of the administration. We have a government shutdown right now. We continue to have, again, strong land prices. There’s just so much uncertainty — some things that maybe we don’t typically associate with a downturn in the farm economy. Or counter to what we might expect to see right now in there. So, I think that’s the biggest challenge in all this — we all feel like things should be worse. At least the indicators should be worse than what they are.”

As the new year unfolds, Parcell says Kansas farmers and ranchers will continue navigating this uncertain terrain — balancing optimism with caution, and watching closely for what’s next in this unpredictable farm economy.

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

Wed, 29 Oct 2025 13:57:30 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

From Missouri Roots to National Reform

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

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

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

“We Don’t Feed the World Anymore”

Maxwell challenges one of agriculture’s most familiar slogans.

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

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

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

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

The Growing Grip of Consolidation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Beef Debate: “We’re Blindsided”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He dismisses claims that M-COOL violates WTO rules.

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

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

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

Those changes, he says, should include:

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

Rebuilding from the Ground Up

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

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

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

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

Why It Matters Now

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

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

A Call to Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

Listen to the Full Conversation

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

Ag Economists Warn of Lingering Farm Economic Strain: ’Not the 1980s, But Close’

Thu, 23 Oct 2025 22:35:03 GMT

The October Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor paints a tough picture for U.S. farmers heading into 2026: weak trade demand, stubbornly high input costs and continued consolidation across agriculture. While experts say today’s challenges don’t match the full-blown crisis of the 1980s, most agree the current downturn is dragging on with few signs of a quick turnaround.

“High input costs and the inability of domestic soybean crush growth to offset lost Chinese demand” continue to weigh heavily on profitability, one economist explains.

Another adds: “The lack of trade opportunities, and high input costs, are doing the most damage right now.”

A third economist sums it up more bluntly: “Margins are collapsing, and optimism is evaporating fast.”

By the numbers, here are highlights from the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor.

(Lori Hayes )

Conditions Expected to Continue or Worsen Into 2026

One of the major themes in the latest survey is the fact negative margins could be a theme for row crop agriculture for the foreseeable future.

Nearly 60% (59%) of economists say the farm economy is worse off than a month ago, and almost 90% believe it’s weaker than last year. 76% expect the situation to persist or even worsen through 2026, while only a quarter expect any improvement in the next 12 months. As one economist puts it: “It’s not a collapse, but it’s a grind.”