With so much happening in our country and around the world, it can be hard to keep up with the changes to farm policy these days. If you’re a family farmer and you feel like the odds are stacked against you, it’s because there is a lot going on that is making farming a challenge. Here’s what Farm Aid is keeping an eye on right now and what it means for family farmers.
What we know
Costs are up for farmers. Fertilizer costs have spiked this spring during the planting season – urea costs are up 30% – because of the war with Iran and clogged nitrogen supply chains through the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. imports about 25% of its fertilizer, leaving it vulnerable to global disruptions. Fuel costs are also up; the national average for a gallon of diesel no.2 was $4.92 in March 2026, compared to $3.59 in March 2025. For farmers who use 2 to 6 gallons of diesel per acre in a growing season, this increase is a significant cost. Combined, these price spikes are squeezing farmers’ already-tight margins and forcing some farmers to consider selling land in order to stay afloat.
Bankruptcy rates are rising. Chapter 12 farm bankruptcies rose 46% in 2025, with farms in the Midwest and Southeast experiencing the highest number. History tells us that farms that close are often bought by larger operations, increasing consolidation in agriculture, meaning our food production continues to concentrate in fewer, larger farms.
Land access is hard to come by. The National Agriculture Statistics Services (NASS) released its 2024 Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land (TOTAL) survey in March. The survey found that the number of farmland landlords increased 2% between 2014-2024, that 52% of landlords have never farmed the land they own, and that most non-operating landlords intend to sell only about 5% of their owned acres in the next 5 years. Overall, statistics in the report point towards the continuation of the trend of very little land availability to buy and own for the next generation of farmers and ranchers.
People are losing food assistance. H.R. 1 – the President’s signature budget bill passed last summer– included cuts to federal funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Nine months later, the impact of that bill is starting to be felt. As these effects take place, 2.5 million people have lost SNAP benefits since July 2025. The loss of SNAP impacts farmers because many SNAP recipients buy from local producers and SNAP dollars boost local economies.
How is the government responding?
On April 3, at a time when farmers are facing very difficult challenges, President Trump proposed cutting an additional $5 billion from USDA. The president sent his budget request for the fiscal year 2027 to Congress, which included cutting about 20% of USDA’s budget, but makes a request for $50 million to fund the USDA’s reorganization plan. Read more about the budget request here.
What it means for farmers: it’s important to note that this is a request and that Congress might choose not to act on it during the appropriations process (they didn’t follow it exactly last year). If Congress does follow this proposal, important programs that farmers rely on, including the National Organic Program (which supports farmers transitioning to organic production) and Rural Business Service would face major cuts. The proposed USDA reorganization plan is anticipated to lead to further staffing losses at the agency and to reduce farmers’ access to USDA and FSA programs.
In March, USDA delayed the Packers and Stockyards Act rule that was set to take effect this July. This rule would have given contract poultry farmers protections against opaque payment systems and practices by poultry companies. The rule has been delayed for an additional 1.5 years for further evaluation, despite already having been thoroughly evaluated and approved by USDA.
What it means for farmers: This rule was a meaningful first step in enforcing the Packers and Stockyards Act, an important piece of antitrust legislation that would allow Congress to address the problem of corporate consolidation in our food and farming system. Without this rule, poultry farmers remain vulnerable to unfair payment systems, with many trapped in a cycle of debt.
USDA cancelled the Increasing Land, Capital, and Market Access program. On March 23, USDA announced that it would terminate 49 out of 50 projects under the program, totaling about $300 million. The program’s purpose is to address the greatest barriers that young, beginning and underserved farmers face in the U.S. The projects were abandoned after significant time and public investment, on the grounds of “excessive spending.” Read more about the cancellation here.
What it means for farmers: Land access remains a major barrier to new farmers and ranchers. The program was USDA’s only program designed to address land access challenges and was working to provide innovative and locally-led solutions. The cancellation of this program comes at a time of record land prices and operating costs for farmers.
The House Agriculture Committee released its farm bill proposal in March. The partisan bill largely contained Republican priorities and is still awaiting a vote from the whole House, which may come as early as April 27. Read more about the process here.
What it means for farmers: Farmers and advocates hoping for a bill that addressed current hardships were disappointed. The bill does not meaningfully change current agricultural policy nor does it rehabilitate the bipartisan farm bill coalition that was ruptured last year during the reconciliation process by reinstating nutrition funding.
In January, USDA announced it would start to enforce the “Product of USA” labeling rule. Before this rule, companies could label meat that was raised in other countries but repackaged in the U.S. as a “Product of USA.” This practice undercut U.S. ranchers; companies could source cheaper meat from other countries but sell it for a premium to consumers who weren’t able to make an informed decision about the meat they were buying. Unfortunately, the rule isn’t mandatory and doesn’t require every meat package to carry a country of origin label.
What it means for farmers: This is good news for American ranchers, who can benefit from selling their meat under the “Product of USA” label. But because the labeling requirement is voluntary and not mandatory, many products can be sold without a label or origin information, leaving an information and transparency gap for consumers.
The big picture
Farmers are up against mounting challenges, with little policy being proposed to help them in a meaningful way. Farm Aid will continue to monitor our federal agricultural policy and advocate for the interests of family farmers.
