FARMLAND Act Proposes Crackdown on Foreign Farm Buys: More Scrutiny, New Watchdog, FSA Program Ban

Alright, let's unpack the proposed "FARMLAND Act of 2025." In plain English, this bill aims to significantly tighten the rules around foreign individuals and entities buying or leasing U.S. agricultural land. Citing national security, economic stability, and the protection of agricultural secrets (think advanced seeds or farming tech), the act introduces new reporting requirements, beefs up penalties for non-compliance, expands government review powers, and cuts off certain federal program benefits for foreign participants.

Tightening the Reins on Foreign Land Deals

The bill ramps up enforcement of the existing Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act (AFIDA). If someone fails to report foreign ag land ownership or submits false info, the penalty jumps from a max of 25% of the land's value to a minimum of 5% and up to 25% (Sec. 2(b)). Plus, who got penalized becomes public info (Sec. 2(c)). The government is also tasked with educating folks like landowners and real estate companies about these rules (Sec. 2(d)). Crucially, anyone involved in buying or transferring ag land must now perform "due diligence" related to foreign ownership and certify compliance (Sec. 2(e)). On top of this, the Secretary of Agriculture has to produce an annual report detailing land holdings by entities from specific countries (like state sponsors of terrorism and other "covered foreign countries"), analyzing potential threats to food security, biosecurity, and even spying risks near critical infrastructure (Sec. 3).

Meet the New Gatekeepers: More Eyes on Ag Investments

Two major changes boost oversight. First, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)—the multi-agency group that vets foreign deals for national security risks—gets broader authority (Sec. 5). CFIUS can now specifically review ag land purchases or leases by "foreign entities of concern" exceeding $5 million or 320 acres. The definition of "foreign entity of concern" comes from a prior defense act, often pointing towards strategic competitors. When reviewing, CFIUS must now consider impacts on food security and safety. The Secretary of Agriculture and FDA Commissioner are also added as permanent CFIUS members (Sec. 5). Second, a new "Chief of Operations" role is created within the USDA (Sec. 4) specifically to monitor compliance, investigate potential agricultural espionage or disruption attempts, audit foreign ownership data, and refer suspicious deals to CFIUS. This includes building a consolidated digital database of foreign-owned ag land within three years, pulling from existing government forms (Sec. 6).

Cutting Off Farm Program Access

The bill draws a clear line regarding federal farm support: "foreign persons" (as defined in the act, referencing existing regulations) owning or operating agricultural land would be prohibited from participating in Farm Service Agency (FSA) programs (Sec. 7). This means no access to certain loans, subsidies, or disaster assistance programs typically available to U.S. farmers. Owners and operators would need to certify they aren't foreign persons to qualify for benefits. Getting caught receiving benefits improperly could lead to penalties up to 125% of the benefits received (Sec. 7).

The Ground-Level View

So, what does this mean practically? For anyone involved in selling, buying, or managing farmland, expect more paperwork and scrutiny regarding the buyer's origins, especially if they might fit the definition of a "foreign entity of concern." Foreign investors will face higher hurdles, stricter reporting, potential CFIUS reviews for larger deals, and exclusion from FSA programs. The stated goal is to shield U.S. agriculture from espionage and undue foreign influence, particularly from strategic rivals. The bill allocates funds ($35M initially, then $9M annually for five years) for building the necessary infrastructure, like secure workspaces and the database system (Sec. 8). While aiming to protect domestic interests, these changes could also impact the flow of foreign capital into the U.S. agricultural sector and add administrative layers to land transactions.