Photobucket


La Vida Locavore
 Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

Obama Admin Loosens Eligibility Requirements for Ag Subsidies

by: Jill Richardson

Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 14:40:50 PM PST


Bookmark and Share
In the fall of 2008, the GAO found that the USDA had screwed up. While the very wealthy were ineligible for commodity subsides, the USDA wasn't talking to the IRS to make sure that those who were ineligible were actually excluded. It was a $49 million "oops" that sent free cash to 2500 people who shouldn't have gotten it. The Obama administration has been working to fix this. In March they said that farmers would have to sign a form allowing the IRS to send income information to the USDA for verification, and now there is more news.
Jill Richardson :: Obama Admin Loosens Eligibility Requirements for Ag Subsidies
As with all things related to commodity subsidies, this is confusing. First of all, there are various programs and an individual farmer may be eligible for a number of them depending on the yield and acreage history of his or her land, prices for that year, yield for that year, which crop(s) he or she is growing, and more. According to the most recent rules:

  1. Anyone who makes over $500,000 in off-farm adjusted gross income (AGI) cannot receive subsidies. That rule presumably ensures that the real help goes to actual farmers (although if that were truly the case, they might consider setting the limit below half a million dollars!).
  2. Those with over $750,000 AGI from agricultural sources are ineligible for direct payments but can still receive counter-cyclical payments and loan deficiency payments. Translation: Direct payments are payments the government gives out each year regardless of need. If you're making big bucks off of farming, then the government no longer gives that to you. But if prices fall very low, you still get subsidies to compensate for the loss you take from low prices.
  3. Anyone who makes over $1 million AGI cannot enroll in conservation programs. This reserves conservation programs (which are perennially underfunded) to farmers who aren't millionaires.

So here's the news. Typically, you must be "actively engaged" in farming in order to get Direct Payments and Counter-Cyclical Payments and to participate in the new ACRE program (which is an alternate to taking Counter-Cyclical Payments). Actively engaged means that you must provide land, equipment, capital or labor, and management in order to get subsidies. Now, the USDA has new, more relaxed rules aimed at sending more money to "family farms:"

USDA has implemented the following change to permit certain operations, most often family-run operations, to meet 'actively engaged' in farming requirements under less restrictive rules.

Every stockholder or member of a legal entity, such as a corporation, does not have to contribute labor or management if both of the following apply:

   * at least half of the interest in the legal entity is held by stockholders or members who are providing active personal labor or active personal management that altogether qualifies as a significant contribution to the farming operation;
   * the total direct payments received, both directly and indirectly, by the legal entity and each of the members does not exceed $40,000.

I'd just like to point out that 96% of all U.S. farms are "family farms" so saying "family farms" is pretty much the same as saying "farms."

Let's see who this actually effects. Here are the payment rates for direct payments for the duration of the 2008 farm bill:

Wheat: $0.52/bu
Corn: $0.28/bu
Grain sorghum: $0.35/bu
Barley: $0.24/bu
Oats: $0.024/bu
Upland cotton: $0.0667/lb
Long-grain rice: $2.35/cwt
Medium-grain rice: $2.35/cwt
Soybeans: $0.44/bu
Peanuts: $36/ton
Other oilseeds: $0.80/cwt

Direct payments are calculated by (83.3% of base acres * base yield) * direct payment rate. Using average yields from 2007, the following farms would get direct payments of $40,000 or less:

1161 acres (or fewer) of corn
800 acres (or fewer) of cotton
284 acres (or fewer) of rice
2701 acres (or fewer) of soybeans
2359 acres (or fewer) of wheat

In other words, you can still have a pretty big farm and qualify for this new loosened eligibility requirement. So this is all kind of a load of B.S.

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
market prices (4.00 / 2)
Jill, for the commodities you listed, is there any way you can estimate some range of prices farmers sold the commodities at in 2009? Meanwhile, I'll scout the inet.

prices (4.00 / 2)
I see this from today. What do the numbers mean?

Futures     MO     Last
CORN        Mar    418-4
Soybeans   Jan    1050-0
WHEAT      Mar     552-4
COTTON     Mar    73.12


[ Parent ]
wheat prices (4.00 / 2)
Here's a chart for some 2009 wheat prices, but it is in dollars per metric ton, which doesn't tell me the price per bushel. ah, well...

[ Parent ]
Conversion... (4.00 / 2)
1 metric ton (wheat) = 36.7437 bushels, according to the US Grains Council

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!

[ Parent ]
dollars per bushel (4.00 / 2)
OK, thanks Jay, one metric tonne is 36.7 bushels of wheat. Say the average market price per metric tonne FOB Gulf of Mexico, January-November, was about $224, that's about $6.11 per bushel. As Joanne points out, though, that doesn't tell us much about what farmers were paid at the elevator.

huffing and puffing, this is hard labor.


[ Parent ]
Remember when you look up commodity prices (4.00 / 3)
that what the farmer gets at the elevator ain't anywhere near what the commodity may be going for on the markets/exchanges.

I was at a website the other day that showed what the commodity prices were for corn, soy and wheat at the elevator, and was floored that the corn price was less than $4/bushel, and of course, if the corn came in with too much moisture, the farmer is docked an ammount per bushel.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....


[ Parent ]
corn price (4.00 / 1)
In my above quote for futures prices, is that saying that the wheat contract for March is $552/tonne, and corn is $418/tonne?

[ Parent ]
FOB (4.00 / 1)
whatever the delivery point may be. argh.

[ Parent ]
Sure, I've been poking around here (4.00 / 2)
USDA Feed grain database. It's a good source for corn, sorghum, barley, and oats data

Lately corn and soy prices have been very high compared to historic prices.

Avg prices for corn ($/bu)

2002/03: $2.32
2003/04: $2.42
2004/05: $2.06
2005/06: $2.00
2006/07: $3.04
2007/08: $4.20
2008/09: $4.06
2009/10: $3.25-$3.85

Avg prices for sorghum ($/bu)

2002/03: $2.32
2003/04: $2.39
2004/05: $1.79
2005/06: $1.86
2006/07: $3.29
2007/08: $4.08
2008/09: $3.20
2009/10: $2.85-$3.45

Avg prices for barley ($/bu)

2002/03: $2.72
2003/04: $2.83
2004/05: $2.48
2005/06: $2.53
2006/07: $2.85
2007/08: $4.02
2008/09: $5.37
2009/10: $4.10-4.60

Avg prices for oats ($/bu)

2002/03: $1.81
2003/04: $1.48
2004/05: $1.48
2005/06: $1.63
2006/07: $1.87
2007/08: $2.63
2008/09: $3.15
2009/10: $2.00-2.30

Soy isn't in here but from what I found it typically is between $5-$7 in recent decades and lately it's been more like $9+, even topping $11/bu.

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman


[ Parent ]
wheat (4.00 / 2)
and from this page we can go here.

farmer prices, all wheat types
2008/09  6.78
2009/10  4.65-5.05  


[ Parent ]
fyi (4.00 / 2)
i put up a new diary with all of this info to save you the trouble. The USDA does a nice job keeping track of this shit for us :)

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

[ Parent ]
sexy (4.00 / 2)
Jill, you are so sexy. You're the only person I know who can navigate the USDA website to useful purpose.

[ Parent ]
Those corn prices look right in line with the elevator price I saw. nt (4.00 / 3)


Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

[ Parent ]
all I gotta say is, (4.00 / 2)
The USDA must have goddamn big computers.

or many, many... (4.00 / 3)
...gerbils running on wheels!

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!

[ Parent ]
Smacks head... (4.00 / 3)
That's where all the corn's going - to feed the gerbils. ;-)

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

[ Parent ]
Too funny for words! (4.00 / 2)
great take.

[ Parent ]
It's a small improvement, right? (4.00 / 3)
Obama seems like an incrementalist to the core.  Thanks, Jill, for not needing to praise him all the time.  You're a leader in a movement, not a Democratic partisan, and I'm really glad you recognize that.

Vote for yourself at www.ni4d.us!

Numbers and Obama in Context (0.00 / 0)
Wow, a lot of numbers floating around here.  And people are interested in them.

On the payment limits, remember that, on average, on most years since 1980, farmers lost money on most of the program crops.  The subsidies are compensations.  That's because, (Daryll E. Ray) the commodities lack price responsiveness, so they usually lose money, unless there are adequate price floors and supply management.

Ok, you can get price data and other data from the Crop Track Record Book here:  http://usda.mannlib.cornell.ed...

You need to compare prices with costs.

Yes, USDA ERS has big computers.  Parity is a calculation including costs and prices.  You can see how they compare over time.

You can also compare a bushel of wheat and a barrel of oil, which used to be about the same, several decades ago.    OPEC has periodically tried to use their clout to raise prices.  We have long had even bigger clout in corn and soybeans, and used it to lower prices.  So what is a barrel of oil these days?  Well over 1000% of the price of wheat.

You can see parity of individual crops several places almost monthly, such as in NFU and NFO newsletters.  For September 2005, for example, (http://www.nfu.org/documents/nfunews/2005/1105_nfunews_wb.pdf) major farm commodities were often 25% of parity (in need of quadrupling, which corn almost did for a day) or tripling.  That's for fair trade, living wage, making the corporations pay the subsidies (ie. not so far below full costs) plus a profit.  That would drastically change the situation for CAFOs, high fructose corn syrup, and dumping on poor farmers in Africa and Mexico.  That would take adequate price floors and supply management (international).  (Ending subsidies without price floors would only turn our agriculture into peasant agriculture).  You can see what parity would be today at the latest of these newsletters.  (ie. http://nfu.org/newsletter, http://www.nfo.org/Newsfolder/...

Obama supported a farm bill similar to the Republican Freedom to Farm, as did all of the Democrats.  In the 1980s Democrats supported the traditional Democratic farm programs with price floors, supply management, price ceilings and grain reserves.  In 1985 (I think it was) only Babbit went with the subsidy approach (like Reagan and Republicans) among Democratic candidates for President.

"We're trying to warn this nation of a tidal wave ..., and it's coming your way, whether you want to know it or not...!"  female family farm activist in Iowa warning against agribusiness, Donahue Show, 1985


Political Activism Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Notable Diaries
- The 2007 Ag Census
- Cuba Diaries
- Mexico Diaries
- Bolivia Diaries
- Philippines Diaries
- My Visit to Growing Power
- My Trip to a Hog Confinement
- Why We Grow So Much Corn and Soy
- How the Chicken Gets to Your Plate

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Blogs
- Beginning Farmers
- Chews Wise
- City Farmer News
- Civil Eats
- Cooking Up a Story
- Cook For Good
- DailyKos
- Eating Liberally
- Epicurean Ideal
- The Ethicurean
- F is For French Fry
- Farm Aid Blog
- Food Politics
- Food Sleuth Blog
- Foodgirl.ca
- Foodperson.com
- Ghost Town Farm
- Goods from the Woods
- The Green Fork
- Gristmill
- GroundTruth
- Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles
- John Bunting's Dairy Journal
- Liberal Oasis
- Livable Future Blog
- Marler Blog
- My Left Wing
- Not In My Food
- Obama Foodorama
- Organic on the Green
- Rural Enterprise Center
- Take a Bite Out of Climate Change
- Treehugger
- U.S. Food Policy
- Yale Sustainable Food Project

Reference
- Recipe For America
- Eat Well Guide
- Local Harvest
- Sustainable Table
- Farm Bill Primer
- California School Garden Network

Organizations
- The Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Community Food Security Coalition
- The Cornucopia Institute
- Farm Aid
- Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
- Food and Water Watch
-
National Family Farm Coalition
- Organic Consumers Association
- Rodale Institute
- Slow Food USA
- Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
- Union of Concerned Scientists

Magazines
- Acres USA
- Edible Communities
- Farmers' Markets Today
- Mother Earth News
- Organic Gardening

Book Recommendations
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle
- Appetite for Profit
- Closing the Food Gap
- Diet for a Dead Planet
- Diet for a Small Planet
- Food Politics
- Grub
- Holistic Management
- Hope's Edge
- In Defense of Food
- Mad Cow USA
- Mad Sheep
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Organic, Inc.
- Recipe for America
- Safe Food
- Seeds of Deception
- Teaming With Microbes
- What To Eat

User Blogs
- Beyond Green
- Bifurcated Carrot
- Born-A-Green
- Cats and Cows
- The Food Groove
- H2Ome: Smart Water Savings
- The Locavore
- Loving Spoonful
- Nourish the Spirit
- Open Air Market Network
- Orange County Progressive
- Peak Soil
- Pink Slip Nation
- Progressive Electorate
- Trees and Flowers and Birds
- Urbana's Market at the Square


Active Users
Currently 2 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox