With the March 16 deadline approaching for farmers to finalize crop insurance decisions on 2026 spring-seeded crops, participation in the federal safety net continues to grow. Many farmers are focused on new programs and higher subsidies, but according to Ben Rand, regional director for Federal Crop Agency, some of the most important decisions producers can make this year involve parts of crop insurance that have existed for years.
Rand says the industry has done a strong job explaining new options like the Supplemental Coverage Option and Enhanced Coverage Option, along with increased subsidy levels that allow farmers to buy higher coverage.
“The media has done a spectacular job of explaining to farmers SEO, ECO, subsidies, increased subsidies, look at your price, look at your coverage level, you can often buy up,” Rand says. “The media’s done a really great job this year of helping us agents advertise these products.”
But when he sits down with farmers during renewal meetings, Rand says the moments that stand out often come when producers rediscover long-standing features of crop insurance they had forgotten about.
“When I sit across from a farmer and I talk about something and see a light bulb come on and they say, ‘Oh, I didn’t even realize I could do that,’” Rand says. “Believe it or not, it’s actually some of the stuff that’s been around for a while.”
One of the most overlooked tools, he says, is the ability to structure crop insurance differently across irrigated and non-irrigated acres.
“A great example is the coverage level by practice,” Rand says. “If you have an irrigated and a non-irrigated farm, you can take different coverage levels on that. Some people forget about that.”
That flexibility can help farmers better match coverage to their level of investment and risk on different acres.
“If you have a high-dollar investment in your irrigated acres, and you want a little bit more coverage there than on the dryland, you can buy up on the irrigated,” Rand says. “If your bias is that the irrigated doesn’t have a loss potential because it’s irrigated and isn’t going to burn up, you can buy less on that.”
Farmers can also structure their units by practice, separating irrigated and dryland acres into different enterprise units.
“You can do unit by practice,” Rand says. “Enterprise by practice: enterprise on irrigated, enterprise on dryland.”
Beyond those structural choices, Rand says farmers should also make sure they fully understand the revenue protection built into their policies before making marketing decisions for the year ahead.
“A farmer this year needs to know more than ever what kind of level of coverage they have,” Rand says. “What does that mean dollar-wise?”
That understanding becomes especially important in volatile commodity markets.
“He needs to be able to forward market, put those orders in on the stuff that isn’t covered and take advantage of some of this volatility in the markets,” Rand says.
Interest and Participation is Higher This Year
New data shows farmers purchased a record 2.54 million crop insurance policies last year, covering more than 561 million acres across the United States. The growth reflects the increasingly central role crop insurance plays in managing farm risk, especially during periods of tight margins and volatile markets.
At the same time, several policy changes reshaped the choices farmers faced as they met with their crop insurance agents this winter. Changes to subsidy levels, expanded benefits for beginning farmers and new program options are prompting many producers to reevaluate how much coverage they carry.
Rand says the combination of those updates has made this year’s insurance conversations far more detailed than usual.
That’s because one of the most significant changes this year involves higher federal subsidies for base multi-peril crop insurance coverage. Rand says those higher subsidies are giving farmers an opportunity to increase their protection without dramatically increasing premium costs.
“With increased subsidies on the base multi-peril program, it allows a farmer essentially to buy up in this part of the world — we’re talking the western Corn Belt — allows them to buy it up from the coverage level that they were last year to another level or potentially to higher, increasing their total revenue guarantee for little or no extra money over last year’s premiums,” Rand says.
In an environment where many producers are operating on narrow profit margins, he says that type of change can have a major impact on risk management decisions.
“That’s a huge thing in a year where we have really tight margins for somebody to be able to go out and buy better coverage at the same or lower price,” Rand says. “And a lot of farmers are taking advantage of those additional subsidies.”
Higher subsidy levels are also encouraging farmers to revisit coverage levels they may not have considered in previous years. For some operations, moving from a 70% policy to 75% or even 80% coverage is now financially feasible in ways it wasn’t before.
Supplemental Coverage Programs See Major Subsidy Increase
In addition to the base multi-peril policy, several supplemental insurance programs also received major subsidy increases through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Rand says the subsidies for both SCO and ECO increased significantly.
“The One Big Beautiful Bill Act raised the subsidy,” Rand says. “Last year the subsidy on both of those products was 65%. It went to 80%.”
That means both programs are now heavily subsidized by the federal government.
“The Enhanced Coverage Option, ECO, is now 80% subsidized,” Rand says. “And the Supplemental Coverage Option is also 80% subsidized.”
These products are designed to stack additional protection on top of a farmer’s base crop insurance policy, extending revenue protection further up the coverage scale.
“The SCO takes you from your multi-peril up to 86%,” Rand explains. “And then the ECO takes you from that 86% revenue to a 95% revenue.”
The result is a level of protection that, until recently, was rarely used because of the cost.
“Farmers are able to buy just unprecedented levels,” Rand says. “And this is a really great time to be in crop insurance for an agent being able to offer something like that, sit across the table and not only be able to offer a program that takes them to a 95% revenue coverage, but it’s very affordable.”
For many producers, the new subsidy levels are making those higher coverage levels a realistic option.
“We like to be able to explain to farmers, ‘Hey, let’s stretch your dollar a little further,’” Rand says. “‘Let’s take the money that you had last year, and we will invest it in something that gets you a little more coverage and really not spend a whole heck of a lot more.’”
Because of that shift, Rand says this renewal season has been unlike any he has experienced.
“It’s kind of a once-in-my-lifetime type event,” he says. “I’ve never seen that happen before. So it’s been a really fun crop insurance renewal season.”
Beginning Farmers See Expanded Support
Another significant change involves how crop insurance supports beginning farmers and ranchers.
Historically, new producers have received additional premium assistance, but the length and structure of that support has now changed.
“Previously, a beginning farmer or rancher only got a 10% additional subsidy for a period of five years,” Rand says. “That has been extended to 10 years.”
In addition to extending the timeline, the law also introduced a tiered subsidy structure that provides greater support early in a producer’s career.
“And instead of just 10%, it’s tiered,” Rand says. “You start at 15% and you work your way down to 10% additional subsidy over that 10-year period.”
When that extra assistance is combined with the new subsidy levels on other programs, the result can significantly reduce insurance costs for young producers.
“When we look at things like SCO and ECO, and even some multi-peril coverages, which are now 80% subsidized, you stack all those subsidies together,” Rand says. “You’re able to afford a really robust program at a very affordable price for a beginning farmer or rancher.”
That combination of support could make it easier for the next generation to enter agriculture.
“Quite frankly, there’s probably not been a better time to get that next generation involved,” Rand says. “Because you can do it very affordably.”
New CLIP Program Adds Another Coverage Option
Alongside the subsidy changes, some farmers also have access to a new insurance option this year: the Climate-Linked Insurance Program, or CLIP.
Rand says the program is currently available in a band stretching from South Dakota south to Texas and then east to Georgia.
“Unfortunately our friends in the eastern Corn Belt don’t have access to this program yet,” Rand says. “I don’t know what it’s going to look like in the future.”
For producers in areas where CLIP is available, the program can function similarly to SCO, but with some notable differences.
“For the 100% dryland grower of the Western Corn Belt, SCO and CLIP are very comparable,” Rand says.
In some situations, CLIP premiums may even be lower.
“We have plenty of examples where CLIP has come in cheaper than SCO,” he says.
One feature that stands out to farmers is how CLIP triggers payments.
“The thing that the producer loves about CLIP is it works off their bushels,” Rand says. “It’s not a county-based trigger.”
Instead of relying on county yield averages, the coverage is tied more directly to the producer’s own performance.
At the same time, Rand says CLIP does not fit every operation.
“There are some situations where we’re talking about irrigated production where CLIP gets a little expensive, and maybe it’s not the right answer in that scenario,” he says.
Because of those variables, Rand says farmers should bring the program up during their crop insurance meeting.
“A farmer needs to ask his agent, ‘Hey, I’m looking at SCO. I like the premium. I heard about CLIP. Am I eligible? Can you talk me through it?’” Rand says.
“I think CLIP is something that needs to be looked at. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, but the question needs to be asked.”
Interaction With ARC and PLC Programs Also Changing
Farmers also need to consider how their crop insurance decisions interact with Title I farm programs, including Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC).
Rand says 2025 is shaping up to be an unusual year because of changes involving base acre reallocations.
“For the Title I programs, this year is going to be kind of a unique scenario because of the reallocation of base acres,” Rand says. “And the producer is going to get the better of either ARC or PLC.”
While that may not affect every insurance decision immediately, it could influence long-term risk management strategies.
“Maybe not necessarily for 2025,” Rand says. “But going forward, we have to combine both the risk management that we’re electing with the Title I program that we’re electing.”
One important change this year allows farmers to pair ARC with SCO.
“In the past, you could not take ARC and SCO together,” Rand says. “Now the producer can take SCO and ARC if he elects that.”
Rand says farmers should also keep in mind crop insurance coverage levels can influence eligibility for certain disaster and emergency programs.
“A lot of the emergency relief programs — their first round or first tranche of payments — in most of these are based off multi-peril losses,” he says.
That means farmers carrying higher base coverage may receive payments sooner if a disaster occurs.
“The guy that takes 80% and suffers the loss, or has an indemnity on his multi-peril, is more likely to get paid in the first round than the guy who takes 70% and does not have the multi-peril loss,” Rand says.
As the March 16 deadline approaches, he says reviewing those details with an agent can make a meaningful difference in risk management for the 2026 crop year.
“If I’m going to recommend something here toward the end,” Rand says, “review what revenue protection means, what it does for you and don’t forget some of the basics like enterprise by practice or coverage level by practice.”