Key Takeaways

• Labor, input and regulatory expenses have climbed sharply, making it harder for domestic produce growers to recover costs, invest in their operations, and keep up with consumer demand. Since 2010, U.S. fruit production has declined 32% and vegetable production has fallen 10%, while fresh fruit and vegetable imports have each increased about 70%.
• Foreign supply still fills important seasonal gaps and supports year-round consumer demand, but imports are arriving in greater volumes during active domestic seasons, adding lower-cost competition when growers must market highly perishable crops.
• Import pressure extends across a range of fresh produce markets. The pattern varies by commodity, from higher year-round import volumes for lettuce and cabbage to sharper overlap during important blueberry, strawberry and tomato harvest windows. Together, these examples show that growing competition is not confined to a single crop, region or season.
• Growing dependence on foreign production can create food security risks. As U.S. production declines, more of the nation’s fresh produce supply becomes exposed to political instability, extreme weather, food-safety disruptions and regulatory decisions governed by other countries. Trade will remain essential, but a resilient food system requires U.S. farmers to be able to profitably grow fruits and vegetables here at home.

Fresh produce markets run on strict timing. Fruits and vegetables are highly perishable, harvest windows are often short, and growers generally cannot store a crop while waiting for prices to improve. A few weeks of excess supply can determine whether a season ends in profit or loss.

Imports are an essential part of this system. They fill seasonal production gaps, support year-round consumer demand, and strengthen integrated supply chains. Yet the rapid growth of foreign supply, and its increasing overlap with active U.S. harvest periods, has created legitimate concerns about downward price pressure during the narrow windows when domestic growers must sell their crops.

Those pressures are particularly difficult for U.S. growers facing rising labor, regulatory, input and compliance costs that are often difficult to pass on to buyers. These competitive challenges do not diminish the broader value of agricultural trade. Rather, it highlights the need for a trade environment that preserves reliable consumer access while ensuring U.S. growers have a viable opportunity to compete.

Rising Costs, Falling Production and Greater Import Reliance

U.S. fruit and vegetable growers face an increasingly difficult cost environment. Many crops require extensive hand labor, specialized equipment and substantial spending on food safety, water quality, pest management and environmental compliance. A Cal Poly study of Salinas Valley lettuce operations found compliance costs rose from $109 per acre in 2006 to more than $1,600 per acre, increasing from about 1% to over 12% of total production costs. An Oregon State University study similarly estimated regulatory compliance costs of roughly $250 to $700 per acre across four cherry and pear operations, driven by H-2A requirements, worker safety and training, pesticide rules and worker housing. An earlier University of Florida comparison, using 2013/14–2014/15 data, found labor costs averaged $2.81 for each eight-pound flat of Florida strawberries, compared with $1.27 for the same quantity exported from central Mexico, roughly 35 cents versus 16 cents per pound. Perishability, limited price transparency, and the lack of futures markets leave growers with few tools to absorb these added costs or manage sudden price declines.

Broader production expenses have also climbed sharply. Between 2020 and 2025, pesticide costs increased 25%, fuel rose 31%, fertilizer climbed 37%, and labor costs increased nearly 50%. Specialty crop farms averaged more than $466,000 in cash expenses in 2023, up 47% in two years, with labor accounting for nearly 40% of total costs.

As those pressures have constrained domestic production, imports have filled a growing share of U.S. supply. USDA estimates imports supplied 59% of U.S. fresh fruit availability and 35% of fresh vegetable availability in 2023, up from 50% and 20%, respectively, in 2007. Put differently, domestic sources accounted for about 41% of fresh fruit and 65% of fresh vegetables available to U.S. consumers. Between 2010 and 2024, fresh fruit and vegetable imports each increased by roughly 70%, while U.S. fruit production declined 32% and vegetable production fell 10%. Imports are not the sole cause of those declines, but they are increasingly filling the gap as the domestic sector struggles to meet demand. The U.S. population grew about 10% over that same period, meaning population growth explains some of the increase in overall demand, but is far smaller than the increase in import volumes. High labor, regulatory compliance and input costs make it harder for U.S. growers to expand production, recover costs and remain competitive, reinforcing the shift toward greater reliance on foreign supply.

Seasonality: Filling Gaps and Extending Windows

Import growth can mean different things depending on when a product arrives. Rising consumer demand for year-round fresh produce has encouraged investment in growing regions with seasons that complement U.S. production. Berry imports rise during winter when domestic supplies are more limited, orange imports peak as U.S. production declines in summer and fall, and pineapple imports remain relatively steady because domestic production is minimal.

These trade flows give consumers access to products that were once available only seasonally and help retailers maintain consistent supplies throughout the year. Pressure on U.S. growers increases, however, when imports arrive earlier, remain later or grow during active domestic harvests. For highly perishable crops, even a short period of added supply can affect prices during the narrow window when growers must sell.

This expanding overlap, sometimes called market window creep, varies considerably by crop. The following examples range from imports that primarily fill domestic supply gaps to those that have become a larger presence during important U.S. harvest periods.

Watermelon: A Longer Import Season

Watermelon offers a useful starting point because imports remain largely complementary to domestic production, but the edges of the import window have expanded. U.S. production runs from spring through early fall and typically peaks around July, led by Florida, Georgia, California and Texas. In 2024, domestic growers produced 1.68 million metric tons, while imports accounted for about 35% of U.S. supply and helped maintain availability before and after the main domestic season.

That said, average annual imports increased over 50%, from 533,000 metric tons in 2010–2014 to 802,000 metric tons in 2020–2025. Growth during the traditional April–May import peak was comparatively modest at 11%. However, June–July imports increased 67%, while October–December volumes nearly doubled.

The pattern suggests imports continue to serve their traditional role of filling seasonal gaps and meeting year-round demand, while also extending further into the shoulders of the U.S. season. For domestic growers, that means fewer months with limited import competition, including rising volumes as summer production is still moving through the market.

Lettuce: Import Growth Across a Year-Round Market

Unlike crops with a clear domestic off-season, U.S. lettuce production continues throughout the year by shifting between California’s coastal regions and the desert growing areas of California and Arizona. Those two states account for nearly all domestic output, allowing retailers to source U.S.-grown lettuce in every season. Domestic production accounts for most of the market, with USDA estimating U.S. growers supplied 85% of lettuce available to U.S. consumers in 2022.

Even so, average annual lettuce imports more than doubled, rising from about 172,000 metric tons in 2010–2014 to 385,000 metric tons in 2020–2025. Imports increased every month, with the largest gains concentrated during late fall, winter and early spring while U.S. domestic production remained flat.

Some of that growth helps buyers manage weather disruptions and transitions between U.S. growing regions. But with no true domestic off-season, rising imports also mean more consistent foreign competition across the production calendar. For growers already facing high labor, water and food-safety compliance costs, that added supply can make it harder to recover expenses during periods of otherwise adequate domestic production.

Cabbage: Higher Imports Throughout the Year

Cabbage is produced across several U.S. regions, with winter and spring supplies coming largely from Florida, Texas and California and later-season production shifting to northern states such as New York, Michigan and Wisconsin. That regional rotation gives the domestic market supply across much of the year. Yet domestic production has shown little growth, with U.S. cabbage output 11% lower in 2024 than in 2010. At the same time, USDA-based estimates show imports grew from about 4% of U.S. cabbage availability in 2000–2002 to 12% in 2017–2019.

That growing import presence has continued. Average annual imports have nearly doubled, increasing from about 68,000 metric tons in 2010–2014 to 130,000 metric tons in 2020–2025. Imports rose every month, with the largest volumes still concentrated from July through October.

Unlike crops where imports have clearly pushed into a new season, cabbage’s basic seasonal pattern has remained similar. The more notable change is that the entire import baseline has moved higher. Imports now provide more supply during both southern winter production and northern summer and fall harvests, creating more persistent competition across the domestic production calendar rather than a single period of concentrated overlap.

Blueberries: Imports Expand at Both Ends of the U.S. Season

Blueberries illustrate how trade can expand consumer access while exposing U.S. growers to lower-cost competition that can undercut domestic prices and margins during critical marketing windows. Growing supplies from Peru, Mexico and Chile have extended the retail season as consumer demand has increased.

Average annual imports have nearly tripled, rising from 94,000 metric tons in 2010–2014 to 278,000 metric tons in 2020–2025. The sharpest gains occurred at the edges of the U.S. season. Average March imports more than tripled, April imports increased more than sevenfold, and October imports rose more than eightfold. Altogether, March–May imports increased 348%, while September–October volumes increased 576%.

Imports remain comparatively low during the core summer harvest. The greater change is that foreign supply now reaches much further into the early- and late-season windows when domestic growers often rely on stronger fresh-market prices to recover their costs. Despite rising domestic U.S. production of blueberries, imports have captured a growing share of the expanding market, increasing from 44% of domestic availability in 2005 to nearly 60% by 2018.

Strawberries: Winter Imports Intensify Competition During Florida’s Season

Strawberries are produced primarily in California and Florida, but consumers expect them year-round. Imports, mostly from Mexico, help maintain winter availability when California volumes are lower. That same timing, however, overlaps directly with Florida’s November–March season and the beginning of California’s spring harvest, exposing domestic growers to lower-cost competition when they are trying to recover some of agriculture’s highest labor, packaging and compliance costs.

U.S. strawberry production has remained relatively flat in recent years, while imports have continued to expand. Average annual imports have increased 85%, from about 134,000 metric tons in 2010–2014 to 249,000 metric tons in 2020–2025. The growth was concentrated in winter: November–March imports more than doubled, rising from roughly 84,000 to 180,000 metric tons. November volume nearly tripled, December imports rose about 175%, and January and February each more than doubled.

Imports still fall sharply during the summer, so the pattern is not year-round displacement. The pressure is concentrated in a commercially important window, with imports at their highest precisely when Florida growers are harvesting and California production is building. Over time, that growth has also increased the imported share of the U.S. strawberry market: USDA-based estimates put imports at about 18% of domestic availability in 2017–2019, up from roughly 6% in 2000–2002. This increases the risk that strong consumer demand does not translate into prices sufficient to cover domestic costs.

Tomatoes: Imports Expand into the U.S. Summer Harvest

Fresh tomatoes are a year-round market, with Florida supplying much of the fall-through-spring crop, and California leading domestic shipments during summer. Mexico provides the overwhelming majority of U.S. fresh tomato imports, helping retailers maintain consistent supply across seasons. But as imports have grown, they have also expanded into what was once a pronounced summer trough in foreign supply. At the same time, U.S. fresh tomato production fell 24% between 2010 and 2024, and USDA estimates U.S. growers’ share of total fresh-tomato supply had fallen to 42% by 2017.

Average annual imports increased 31%, from about 1.37 million metric tons in 2010–2014 to 1.79 million metric tons in 2020–2024. Growth was much sharper during the domestic summer window: June–October imports rose 64%, while July–September volumes increased 77%. August and September imports each climbed about 85%, directly increasing competition during California’s primary season.

In July 2025, the Commerce Department ended the Tomato Suspension Agreement and imposed a 17.09% antidumping duty on most Mexican fresh tomatoes. Imports declined afterward: January–May 2026 shipments totaled about 748,000 metric tons, down 13% from the same period in 2025 and 13% below the 2022–2025 average. Every month was lower than a year earlier, including declines of 15% in January, 21% in February and 18% in May. While other market and production factors may also be involved, the change is consistent with a targeted trade remedy affecting shipment patterns. It also shows that specific pricing concerns can be addressed without treating the broader agricultural trade relationship as the problem.

Conclusion

The six crops analyzed represent a portion of the fresh produce market, but each shows how rising imports can increase pressure on U.S. growers. In some cases, that pressure comes from a steadily higher import baseline across the year. In others, foreign shipments have expanded directly into critical domestic harvest windows, when growers must quickly market highly perishable crops and recover their annual costs. Across most of the examples, U.S. production has been flat or declining even as imports have gained a larger share of the market.

That competition is especially difficult because many foreign suppliers operate with substantially lower labor, production and regulatory costs. U.S. growers face rising expenses for wages, worker housing, food safety, water quality, pesticide compliance and other requirements that are difficult to pass on to buyers. As those costs limit domestic acreage and investment, imports increasingly fill the resulting supply gap, reinforcing greater reliance on foreign production.

Trade remains essential to meeting consumer demand for affordable, year-round produce, and strong agricultural trading relationships benefit the broader food supply chain. But those benefits should not require accepting continued erosion of U.S. production capacity. Preserving a resilient produce sector will require reducing unnecessary domestic cost pressures, helping growers remain competitive and using targeted trade remedies when specific practices are proven to cause measurable harm. A dependable fresh produce supply ultimately requires both reliable trade partners and farmers who can afford to keep growing here at home.

Read Article on FB.org

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement is undergoing serious renegotiations. Chad Smith has more on the talks.

Read Article on FB.org

Now in its 15^th year, the Women in Agribusiness (WIA) Summit will bring professionals from across the food and ag value chains – including farmers and ranchers – together in New Orleans, Sept. 22-24.

Panel Discussions, Workshops, Networking and More

The Summit’s robust agenda includes panel discussions offering insights on ag markets, sustainability, risk management and several other topics, as well as workshops focused on leadership development and workplace transformation.

Along with various receptions and other formal networking opportunities, the whole event is an opportunity for connection and collaboration that lasts past the conference itself.

“It created both an internal community and an external foundation,” Michele Fite, chief commercial officer at ELO Life Systems and WIA Advisory Board member, said of her several experiences at the summit. “It resonated then and still does. Because it’s not about checking a box. It’s about building real relationships, confidence, and momentum for women in an industry that needs all three.”

Beyond the Conference Room Walls

Attendees looking for a unique way to kick off their WIA Summit experience can join a tour of CHS’ Myrtle Grove grain terminal or, for those looking for a little local flavor, there’s a “Coffee, Culture & the Women Who Shaped New Orleans” walking tour.

And, along with an onsite reception, there will be an evening event at Mardi Gras World.

Focus on Female Farmers

Leaning into the International Year of the Woman Farmer, the Women in Agribusiness Summit has numerous sessions highlighting female farmers and ranchers.

Jessica Cabrera, managing director of member engagement and Farm State of Mind at the American Farm Bureau Federation, will participate in a panel discussion on promoting women in agriculture across the globe.

Cabrera will be joined by Juliana Farah, president of the Agricultural Sowing Commission of the Sao Paolo State Agriculture and Livestock Federation, and Payal Pathak, director at Athena Tradewinds PVT LTD.

Svitlana Synkovska, portfolio director of Arc Network, will moderate the panel.

Cabrera will share the results of an extensive study conducted by AFBF, providing a comprehensive look at women in agriculture in the United States.

The study, released on June 1, identifies the essential roles women play in building a sustainable future for agriculture as well as opportunities for growth, improvement and additional support.

“I’m looking forward to sharing the insights the study has provided Farm Bureau and all of agriculture,” said Cabrera. “From the role women play in raising crops and tending livestock to balancing off-farm jobs, caring for children and volunteering in their communities, I’m sure there’s quite a bit of overlap in the challenges and opportunities for farm women across the globe.”

And, as they do every year, the WIA Summit will include a panel discussion among female farmers who grow a variety of crops and raise livestock.

Demeter Award Presentation

Among the accolades presented during the Summit is the Demeter Award of Excellence, which highlights women who have achieved excellence in their field or demonstrated an outstanding contribution to the agribusiness industry. Typically, there are three Demeter Award categories, but in honor of the International Year of the Woman Farmer, Women in Agribusiness expanded the award to include a female farmer category.

AFBF promoted the award opportunity among Farm Bureau’s strong network of female farmers across the United States and is providing support and recognition through the full award lifecycle, including covering travel and lodging for Hawbaker to accept her award at the 2026 Women in Agribusiness Summit.

Farm Bureau Member Discount and One-day Pass

Farm Bureau members can register for the Summit using code “AFBF15” for 15% off the $2,150 registration fee.

Additionally, Women in Agribusiness is offering one-day pass (Wednesday, Sept. 23) for $999 through this link.

American Farm Bureau Women’s Leadership Committee

For a deeper dive into Farm Bureau’s Women in Agriculture study, visit the American Farm Bureau Women’s Leadership Committee online here, where you also learn more about the committee’s work, including the Women’s Communications Boot Camp.

Read Article on FB.org

New Adverse Effect Wage Rates have been announced for H2-A employees. Chad Smith has details on which states will see increases.

Read Article on FB.org

The American Farm Bureau Federation announced a slate of top state Farm Bureau communications projects during the 2026 Communications Awards, held at this year’s Communications Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana. The competition recognizes state Farm Bureau professionals for their exemplary work in communicating about agriculture.

Nearly 200 entries for work produced in 2025 were submitted for the 2026 contest. Judged against states with similar membership sizes, California, Iowa, Illinois, Texas and Wisconsin stood out, receiving the most awards overall. Among 18 categories, states could submit one entry per category in the areas of writing, print, media relations, social media, graphic design, video, audio and website.

“State Farm Bureau communicators play a vital role in sharing the stories of farmers and ranchers across the nation and helping Farm Bureau fulfill its mission as the Voice of Agriculture,” said AFBF President Zippy Duvall. “I’m proud to congratulate the winning teams for their remarkable work to highlight the issues facing agriculture and rural America. My thanks to all those who work diligently to amplify the challenges and triumphs of America’s farmers and ranchers.”

Awards were presented to Farm Bureau communicators in: California, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin.

Award categories were evaluated by independent, experienced professionals in the field. A list of award winners follows. Most award categories were divided into two groups – one for small membership states and one for larger membership states.

Anne Marie Moss Team Effort Award – recognizes outstanding collaborative engagement on a regional or national issue.

• California, for a broad range of public relations tactics to elevate agricultural workforce and immigration issues: Barbara Arciero, Mahek Pandya, Ching Lee, Caleb Hampton, Connor Duncan, Samantha Adams, Shawn Collins, Bryan Little

• Texas, for a coordinated, multi-platform approach to elevate awareness of the New World screwworm issue: Gary Joiner, Julie Tomascik, Ed Wolff, Shelby Shank, Emmy Powell, Angela Lujan, Pedro Rosas, Jessica Domel, Carey Martin, Tom Nicolette

Trailblazer Award – recognizes an innovative tactic or execution of a communications project.

• Nebraska, for “Sincerely, Yours,” a docuseries of farm and ranch stories: Cassie Hoebelheinrich, Kenzie White, Abby Samuelson

• Iowa, for an innovative initiative to enhance county Farm Bureau Facebook pages: Zach Sturgeon, Zach Bader

Best Agriculture Story

• Wisconsin: Cassie Sonnentag

• South Carolina: Stephanie Sox, Carey Henderson

Best Single Blog Item, Editorial or Column

• California: Shannon Douglass, Steven Fenaroli, Bryan Little

Best Newspaper

• California, Ag Alert: Barbara Arciero, Shawn Collins, Caleb Hampton, Ching Lee, Christine Souza, Paula Erath

• Iowa, The Spokesman: Tom Block, Bob Bjoin, Teresa Bjork, Corey Munson, Conrad Schmidt

Best E-Newsletter

• Wisconsin, Gather Wisconsin: Rachel LaCount, Cassie Sonnentag

• Illinois, Daily Update: Lyndsay Jones

Best Magazine

• California, California Bountiful: Barbara Arciero, Linda DuBois, Caleb Hampton, Ching Lee, Christine Souza, Nicole Love, Paula Erath

• Tennessee, Tennessee Home & Farm: Lee Maddox, Amy Beckham, Stacey Warner, Jessy Yancey

Best Overall Graphic Design

• Wisconsin: Raegan Statler, Rachel LaCount, Cassie Sonnentag, Amy Eckelberg, Kylie Ver Kuilen

• Texas: Angela Lujan

Best Farmer or Rancher Photo

• Maryland: Jeb Burchick, Rachel Eck, Alan Eck

• Iowa: Conrad Schmidt

Best Audio News Story, Feature Story or Commentary/Editorial

• New York: Amanda Powers, Erik Flora

• Idaho: Kristy Lindauer, Joel Benson, Jacob Christensen, Ott Clark, Cam Hammond

Best Video News Story

• Illinois: Mark Pressburger, Scott Anderson

Best Video Feature Story

• Nebraska: Kenzie White, Cassie Hoebelheinrich, Abygail Petersen

• Illinois: Steven Salinas, Emily Hall, Kelly Spicer

Best Social Media Video

• California: Brian Farinas, Connor Duncan, Samantha Adams

• Illinois: Morgan Donaldson, Emily Hall, Steven Salinas, Kelly Spicer

Best Website

• Wisconsin: Cassie Sonnentag, Rachel LaCount, Amy Eckelberg

• Illinois: Kevin Daugherty, Gracie Pierson

Best Social Media Campaign

• California: Connor Duncan, Bryan Little, Brian Farinas

• Iowa: Dana Ardary, Sara Payne, Zach Bader, Zach Sturgeon, Bo Geigley, Aaron Siskow, Caitlyn Lamm, Tanner Nissen, Conrad Schmidt

Best Social Media Presence

• California: Connor Duncan, Samantha Adams

• Iowa: Zach Bader, Zach Sturgeon, Dana Ardary, Bo Geigley, Aaron Siskow, Caitlyn Lamm, Teresa Bjork

Best Media Relations Outreach

• Missouri: Jacob King, Chris Cline, Tyler Madsen, Rebecca Hoelscher, Janet Adkison

• Utah: Matt Hargreaves

Best Public Relations Outreach

• Wisconsin: Cassie Sonnentag, Tyler Wenzlaff, Brad Olson

• Texas: Gary Joiner, Julie Tomascik, Carey Martin, Ed Wolff, Shelby Shank, Emmy Powell, Angela Lujan, Jessica Domel, Tom Nicolette, Pedro Rosas, Shaler Keenum

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways  

• The Department of Labor's 2026-2027 H-2A wage rates are the first full annual update under the methodology prescribed by its October 2025 Interim Final Rule.

• Skill Level I AEWRs average $12.31 per hour nationally, up 3.5% from 2025-2026; Skill Level II AEWRs average $16.07 per hour, up 2.1%.

• Skill Level I increases affect 39 states; Kansas posted the largest jump at +21.3%, while New Hampshire posted the largest decrease at -2.8%.

• The bipartisan Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act, if passed, would institute caps to reduce large year-over-year AEWR increases.

H-2A Adverse Effect Wage Rates (AEWRs) for 2026-2027 are set to increase across the country, with a handful of exceptions. Released by the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Office of Foreign Labor Certification, AEWRs represent the federally mandated minimum wage for H-2A guestworkers in each state. Notably, this set of AEWRs is the first full-year iteration of wages based on DOL's new Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, as stipulated by the department’s Interim Final Rule (IFR) issued in October 2025. While these wage rates are a significant improvement from the previous wage structure, congressional action is still needed to ensure farm and ranchers can continue to grow the nutritious food our country depends on for our health and well-being.

This Farm Bureau Intel breaks down notable AEWR changes from 2025-2026 by state and skill level, and highlights how farm labor legislation currently under consideration by Congress would help farmers and ranchers who employ H-2A workers.

Methodology: OEWS Skill Levels and the Adverse Compensation Adjustment

Under the IFR, DOL assigns each state an AEWR for two occupational skill levels drawn from OEWS wage data for field and livestock workers: Skill Level I, which corresponds to entry-level farm labor duties, and Skill Level II, which corresponds to more experienced or supervisory-adjacent roles. Drawing from May 2025 OEWS estimates rather than the May 2024 data that was used to establish the initial 2025-2026 IFR rates, the 2026-2027 rates mark the first complete annual update under the rule..

A notable addition to the AEWR calculation included in the IFR is the Adverse Compensation Adjustment (ACA). Expressed as an hourly rate, the ACA is calculated as the weighted average of rents for four-bedroom housing units in the relevant state or territory, based on data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The ACA is applied on top of the OEWS-derived wage for H-2A positions specifically. In practice, this change allows H-2A employers to account for the cost of housing and transportation they’re required to offer to H-2A workers for the length of their contract.

The 2026-2027 Wage Rates by State

Skill Level I AEWRs for 2026-2027 range from $8.84 per hour in Mississippi to $14.91 in Nebraska, with a simple average of $12.31 across all 50 U.S. states and territories, a 3.5% increase from the previous year’s average of $11.89/hour. Level II rates run from $13.41 in Florida to $19.22 in Nebraska, averaging $16.07 per hour nationwide, up from $15.76 a year earlier (a 2.1% increase overall). Importantly, H-2A employers are required to pay their H-2A employees the highest wage rate among five distinct wage categories: the AEWR, the state minimum wage, the prevailing wage, the collective bargaining wage, and the local minimum wage. Several states have minimum wages higher than their AEWR for 2026-2027, as indicated in the maps below.

Notable Wage Changes for 2026-2027

Comparing the finalized 2026-2027 rates to the 2025-2026 IFR rates shows an increase overall, though the magnitude varies widely by state and there were a few states that decreased. For Skill Level I, 39 of 54 jurisdictions (50 states plus D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) had an increase, and 15 had a decrease. Kansas recorded the largest increase in the country, up 21.3%, from $11.43 to $13.86 per hour, followed by Nebraska (+15%) and North Dakota (+17.2%). New Hampshire posted the largest decrease, down 2.8% to $11.69.

Skill Level II rates moved in the same direction: wages increased in 39 states and territories and decreased in 15, with a total average increase of 2.1% across the board. Rhode Island had the largest increase (+9.7%, to $16.78), while West Virginia posted the steepest decline (-3.1%, to $14.57).

Impact on Farm Labor Costs

Labor remains one of the largest and least flexible costs on a diversified farm operation, and this year's update lands at a time when farm income is already under pressure from soft commodity prices and elevated input costs. A double-digit AEWR increase in a state like Kansas, Nebraska or Louisiana flows directly into per-acre production costs for the specialty crop and livestock farms that rely on H-2A labor to market their products. As DOL issues subsequent annual updates under the IFR framework, growers should expect continued year-over-year volatility in these rates and should build that uncertainty into multiyear labor cost planning.

SAWA’s Solution to AEWR Volatility

Legislation introduced by House Agriculture Committee Chairman G.T. Thompson this summer seeks to address the potential for volatile yearly swings in the AEWR. The Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act (SAWA) includes provisions that would limit year-over-year AEWR increases to no more than 3.25%, while capping decreases at 1.5%.

If this provision were the existing law prior to the release of this year’s AEWRs, farmers in several states would see significant wage savings via smaller upward swings in the year-over-year AEWR for their states. For example, in Louisiana, the 2026-2027 ACA-adjusted Skill Level I AEWR increase of 90 cents per hour (10.9 % year-over-year) would have been limited to an increase of just 27 cents per hour, (3.25% year-over-year). While a 63 cents per hour wage difference may seem negligible, Louisiana farmers could expect to save nearly $8.5 million in wage costs for Skill Level I H-2A workers alone.

Ultimately, SAWA offers a much-needed solution to address the year-to-year swings in AEWRs, reducing production expense uncertainty for growers who rely on the H-2A visa program to market their products.

Conclusion

DOL’s October 2025 Interim Final Rule made significant strides to move the H-2A program away from the costly wage structure promulgated by the now-defunct Farm Labor Survey. The 2026-2027 AEWRs for Skill Level I and II wages under the H-2A visa program represent the first full year of wages under the new methodology. Wages increased overall, with some states experiencing massive swings that will only add to record-high costs associated with producing an agricultural commodity in 2026. Congress could take significant steps toward codifying the current methodology while curtailing these costly increases by passing the bipartisan Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act.

Read Article on FB.org

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall today expressed deep disappointment in the failure of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry to advance a farm bill. He called on senators to return to the negotiating table for the sake of rural communities across America.

“We are deeply disappointed that senators failed to advance a farm bill today,” said Duvall. “At a time when farmers, ranchers and rural communities across the country are facing multiyear losses, the need for a strong, bipartisan farm bill, one that included the long-awaited year-round E15, has never been greater. We appreciate the efforts of Chairman Boozman and members who supported the bill and urge them not to give up.

“An overwhelming majority of Americans recognize that the farm bill is a matter of national security to ensure we continue to have a safe and abundant food supply. In fact, most Americans say they would be more likely to support a member of Congress who votes to reauthorize the farm bill, which makes the current gridlock even more puzzling.

“We urge senators to return to the table, work across party lines, and advance a farm bill out of committee in order to continue the negotiations toward a bipartisan farm bill that provides the long-term support and certainty our farmers, ranchers and rural communities need. The reality is that this might be our last chance this year to get it done. The stakes are too high to allow the opportunity to slip away.”

Read Article on FB.org

More than 250 food and agriculture organizations joined forces to urge the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry to advance a bipartisan farm bill out of committee in a letter delivered today. The American Farm Bureau organized the letter, which notes that farmers and ranchers haven't had a new farm bill in almost ten years.

“As organizations representing a broad swath of food and agriculture, we urge you to advance the Agricultural Act of 2026 in a bipartisan manner out of the Senate Agriculture Committee,” the letter states.

“The time is now for a full five-year farm bill. American family farms have had to rely on programs and policy that haven’t been updated since 2018, resulting in continued ad hoc support. The President called on Congress to pass a farm bill, and in response, the House has taken action with bipartisan passage of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, the first time a farm bill has passed the full House since 2018…

“The Agricultural Act of 2026 builds on this momentum and provides a strong foundation of policy and program updates for the Senate Agriculture Committee to consider and further amend in committee markup. This is the furthest we have gotten to a full, modernized farm bill. U.S. food and agriculture, as well as American families who rely upon the food, fiber, and fuel produced from our country’s farmers, ranchers, growers, and producers, deserve a farm bill now.”

Read the full letter here.

Read Article on FB.org

Farmland values hit all-time highs this year even as the rate of increase has slowed. Chad Smith has the numbers.

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways

• H.R. 1 allows eligible farms to voluntarily add base acres as provisions allow up to 30 million new base acres to be allocated to farms that have historically produced program crops but don’t currently have base acres.

• A mandatory base acre update would hurt farmers across the country, costing the farm economy billions in lost risk management support and eliminating any base acre gains for farmers under H.R.1.

• By redistributing and eliminating base acres among farms, commodities, counties and states, it would create new divisions within agriculture and make passage of a new farm bill more difficult, if not impossible.

• A mandatory base acre update would reduce projected commodity program benefits by $2.24 billion annually, or approximately $18 billion from fiscal years 2029 through 2036, with farmers in every state losing risk management support.

As the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry prepares to mark up the farm bill (also known as The Agricultural Act of 2026), debate over whether to require a mandatory base acre update has resurfaced.

Farm programs such as Agriculture Risk Coverage-County (ARC-CO) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) use base acres to determine program payments. Base acres reflect a farm’s historical planting rather than what is planted in the current crop year. This decoupling allows farmers to respond to market signals, weather conditions and agronomic needs without government payments influencing annual planting decisions.

However, production has shifted considerably since many base acres were established. Some farms now produce covered commodities on land with little or no base, while others maintain base for crops that remain part of a larger and more diverse crop rotation.

H.R. 1 addressed this disconnect without taking support away from existing base holders. The law allows USDA to add up to 30 million base acres to eligible farms, including many run by young, beginning and small farmers, where recent planted and prevented-planted acreage exceeds existing base.

A mandatory update would take a different approach by redistributing existing base acres based on more recent planting history. This Market Intel evaluates how such a proposal would affect the farm safety net and the farmers who depend on it.

Losses Reach Every State

Based on USDA Farm Service Agency Crop Acreage Data and estimated program payments from the 2026 Baseline for USDA Mandatory Farm Programs for fiscal years 2029 to 2036 (eight years), it is estimated a mandatory base acre update would reduce commodity program benefits by approximately $2.24 billion annually and reduce the farm safety net across the country. From fiscal year 2029-2036, the farm safety net would have a net loss of $18 billion across commodity program payments. Additionally, a mandatory base acre update would create winners and losers across the country, with some counties gaining support while others lose.

Wheat would account for the largest reduction in annual average ARC-CO and PLC payments, with a total decrease of $6.5 billion over eight years. Corn would lose $4 billion, followed by rice at $3.4 billion, and cotton and peanuts at $2.5 billion each.

Soybeans would gain approximately $2.4 billion in projected benefits, but the increase would cover only a fraction of the losses experienced by other commodities.

The effects would also extend beyond traditional wheat, cotton and rice regions. Every state would experience a net decline in projected support. Texas would face the largest cumulative loss at approximately $2.3 billion, followed by Arkansas and Louisiana at $1.2 billion each, and Mississippi at $1.1 billion.

States outside of the South would likewise suffer losses. North Dakota would lose approximately $810 million and Montana would lose $934 million, while California would lose around $937 million.

Bottom Line

A mandatory base acre update would dramatically reduce the farm safety net and risk management options for farmers at a time when there is already bipartisan support to reinforce the farm economy with additional economic support on top of the major investments made in H.R. 1.

That is particularly concerning as Congress works toward a new farm bill. A proposal that would significantly weaken the risk management support Congress strengthened in H.R. 1 at a time when the farm economy is experiencing a multi-year economic downturn runs counter to congressional goals of supporting farmers, ranchers and rural economies.

Read Article on FB.org