USDA Chief Economist Justin Benavidez will deliver his first forecast on the state of the ag economy today.
At the department’s two-day Agricultural Outlook Forum that kicks off in Northern Virginia today, Benavidez will provide analysis on commodity markets, trade and farm income, according to USDA. He came on as chief economist last month.
The ag futures market will get its first look at this year’s corn and soybean plantings — even if the estimates aren’t backed by data from growers yet.
“If these numbers prove accurate, it will be by accident,” said Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist for StoneX Group. Suderman and other analysts will be scouring USDA’s March 31 planting intention survey of farmers for a more accurate picture.
The trend yields for corn and soybeans will be of interest, however, Suderman said in a note to clients Wednesday. “We can expect USDA to use those yields in their new-crop balance sheets in the May WASDE crop report,” he said.
Funny numbers? Benavidez’s address comes as USDA faces growing scrutiny over its crop production estimates following the departure of around a fifth of department staff. The January supply and demand estimates included a sharp upward revision of corn acreage, sending grain prices downward.
The administration has patched things up with Beijing — for now, at least. It has also announced a string of trade deals in recent weeks with provisions to strengthen U.S. ag exports.
But farmer sentiment is still plummeting, with almost a third of producers anticipating deteriorating economic conditions in the next 12 months. Many will be looking to Benavidez to confirm their fears — or offer a glimmer of hope.
Follow Agri-Pulse’s coverage of the forum at agri-pulse.com
Former trade officials consider future of trading system
Some of the rules underpinning the global trading system were under pressure long before the second Trump administration, former trade officials say, and may have already outlived their utility.
The idea that countries apply tariffs to all trading partners evenly outside of free trade agreements, known as the most-favored-nation principle, underpins World Trade Organization agreements. But countries, as well as the European Commission, have questioned whether it allows the flexibility to deal with modern problems like climate change.
“We have to be open to the notion that MFN maybe has run its course,” Maria Pagan, a deputy U.S. trade representative under President Joe Biden, said Wednesday.
President Donald Trump has run roughshod over international trade norms since returning to office, including by hiking tariffs on individual countries in defiance of MFN.
“I'm not saying that necessarily what's happening right now in the United States is the way to go about it, but we do have to think how we fix MFN,” Pagan said.
Why it matters: Pagan argued that the U.S. needs the freedom to target individual economies in their trade treatment. Brazil, she said, may be a developing economy but it is also an agricultural behemoth that competes with the U.S. and others. Should it receive the favorable trade treatment in this area that other developing economies receive?
Take note: Politico EU has reported that Canada, the European Union and others are in talks on how to collaborate to counter Trump’s trade policy.
Former WTO Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said in Wednesday’s webinar that he hopes the EU, along with countries in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, comes up with a new system.
“I hope that they think about multilateralism as they do something regional and bring the system forward,” he said.
Trump signs order to shore up domestic glyphosate supply
The president on Wednesday signed an executive order to strengthen domestic supplies of glyphosate-based herbicides and phosphorus, a critical ingredient.
Glyphosate-based herbicides “are a cornerstone of this Nation’s agricultural productivity and rural economy,” the order reads. Supply disruptions would “critically jeopardize agricultural productivity,” it adds.
The order invokes the Defense Production Act to allocate resources to strengthening production and directs the agriculture secretary to issue implementing regulations.
Specialty crop coalition: Farm bill has it right
The specialty crop sector is calling attention to an emergency assistance framework in the draft GOP farm bill that’s notably different than the relief plan the Trump administration announced last week.
The farm bill that the House Ag Committee will debate next week would authorize the first Specialty Crop Emergency Assistance Framework. It’s based on the structure of the second version of the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program and the more recent Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops. Those programs were based on farm revenue. The new program planned by USDA would provide commodity-specific assistance.
The farm bill’s proposed “framework would establish the parameters of a unique payment structure to compensate specialty crop producers in times of need,” the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance said in a statement. The provision sends a “clear signal that specialty crops are fundamentally different than row crops and need their own program at USDA for delivering economic aid.”
Alliance members include Western Growers and the International Fresh Produce Association.
New lawsuit challenges federal energy grant terminations
Thirteen state attorneys general and the California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development are suing the Trump Administration over its decision to terminate several energy grants, including one to research agrivoltaics.
The AGs claimed the decision to end over 300 energy projects under Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act programs violates the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.
One $1.7 million award to Rutgers University had been intended for researching agrivoltaic systems for diversified agriculture. Another award would have studied geological formations under Springfield, Illinois, for potential carbon dioxide storage.
EPA repeal of endangerment finding prompts lawsuit
Here come the lawsuits.
Major environmental and public health groups are taking the Trump administration to court following EPA’s repeal last week of its endangerment finding, which in 2009 found that greenhouse gases “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations” and need to be regulated.
“The finding became the legal foundation for federal climate policy, including regulating vehicle, industrial and power plant emissions and treating climate change as a public health issue under the EPA’s authority,” the World Resources Institute said.
At the same time, EPA eliminated GHG tailpipe emissions standards for vehicles. On Wednesday came a lawsuit filed in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The action is styled as a petition to the court and does not include arguments against the repeal, which will come later in the litigation.
The American Public Health Association, Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Law & Policy Center and Public Citizen are among the 17 groups on the lawsuit. The repeal was published in Wednesday’s Federal Register. A group called Our Children’s Trust also petitioned the court Wednesday.
Final word
“We can't function in this chaos, supported by the meaningless ‘We love our farmers’ slogan. We're not feeling the love when beef imports from Argentina are meant to cut into our profits because somehow paying farmers a fair price for their work to raise high-quality beef in a challenging environment is asking just too much.” — Berleen Wobeter, a corn, soybean and cattle producer in Tama County, Iowa, during a press call Wednesday organized by Iowa Democrats.
For more news, go to Agri-Pulse.com.
.webp?t=1762183428)
