The Farm Economy’s Profitability Problem: Can It Be Fixed?

Corn is tasseling. Soybeans are rapidly growing. From the road, many fields across the Corn Belt look promising as the growing season reaches its halfway point.

But beneath those healthy-looking crops, many farmers say the financial outlook hasn’t improved.

“It’s gonna be a tough year too for sure,” says Ohio farmer and National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) President Jed Bower.

The concern extends far beyond one growing season. After several years of tight or negative margins, many economists believe row crop agriculture could remain under pressure for years.

“I think sometimes these cycles take a bit,” says Krista Swanson, chief economist for NCGA. “We’re really already in the fourth year for a lot of commodities, certainly across the row crop sector, of what I would say is a downturn or low margins, tight margins, negative margins. The possibility of it taking a few more years to get out of this cycle is really frustrating and makes things really difficult for farmers.”

That outlook aligns with results from Farm Journal’s latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, where half of the economists surveyed believe it could take another three to five years before row crop farmers consistently return to profitability.

(Source: Farm Journal Survey, June 2026)

Costs Continue to Outpace Revenue

University of Missouri Extension agricultural economist Ben Brown says profitability isn’t being squeezed by just one side of the equation.

“I think it’s a little bit of both,” Brown says. “Certainly, we’ve seen the big rise in input costs. When we look at inflation-adjusted terms, both for price times yield, which is our revenue metric, the revenue side of the equation has not necessarily kept up with what we’ve been seeing in prices paid by producers.”

For corn growers, those production costs have become increasingly difficult to overcome.

“It can be over $1,000 an acre really easily to put in that corn crop and produce it,” Swanson says.

New NCGA Study Shows U.S. Farmers Pay More Compared to Brazil

This week, NCGA released a study commissioned through market research firm Kynetec comparing crop input prices paid by U.S. and Brazilian farmers between 2023 and 2025.

The findings confirmed what many growers have long suspected: U.S. farmers consistently paid higher prices for many of the same products, even after adjusting for taxes, exchange rates and currency differences.

(NCGA )

Among the findings:

• U.S. corn seed prices averaged 68% higher than comparable prices in Brazil.
• Corn insecticide prices averaged 87% higher.
• Fungicide prices were more than double what Brazilian farmers paid.
• Many herbicide prices also approached double Brazilian price levels.

“I think the biggest takeaway here isn’t drilling into specific differences of one product versus another,” Swanson says. “It’s the larger overall theme that really, no matter how we look at it, U.S. farmers are paying more for these products.”

(NCGA)

She says fungicides were among the most striking examples.

“For some of those crop protection products, farmers in the U.S. might be paying more than double their counterparts in Brazil.”

That becomes a major competitive disadvantage when both countries are producing corn that ultimately competes in the same global marketplace.

“We are producing the same global commodity that we’re selling into a world market for largely based on the same global price,” Swanson explains. “When we are at a disadvantage in terms of costs to produce it, that’s a problem.”

(NCGA)

Farmers Question Price Gouging and Ability to Compete

For Bower, the study simply quantified what farmers have experienced for years.

“Are U.S. farmers the low-cost producer any longer?” he asks. “Boy, it sure doesn’t look that way.”

Bower believes American farmers have helped finance decades of agricultural innovation, only to see competitors around the world benefit from those advancements while paying lower prices for many of the same inputs.

“As a business, I understand companies have to make money,” Bower says. “But when we’re being gouged, it’s just so sad. Corn is America’s crop. We’ve been around longer than the United States has. We take a lot of pride in that as America’s farmers. To see that system abuse us, it’s really sad.”

NCGA says the report will be used to push for greater transparency throughout the crop input industry.

“In some cases, these price differences could be due to a value-added product,” Swanson says. “But we need transparency to determine where those additional costs are truly adding value and where unnecessary costs should be reduced.”

Government Payments Grow as Farm Finances Tighten

As profitability deteriorates, government assistance is becoming a larger share of farm income.

USDA earlier projected direct government farm program payments would reach roughly $44.3 billion this year. More recently, the Trump administration requested an additional $11.1 billion in supplemental farm aid aimed at helping offset high fuel and fertilizer costs. Together, that adds up to an estimated $55 billion in government payments to farmers this year.

(WSJ)

Those figures have drawn criticism from some outside agriculture, but economists argue the payments serve an important purpose.

“I think it’s important to put that number into context,” says John Newton, vice president of public policy and economic analysis for the American Farm Bureau Federation. “That includes conservation program payments. That includes the dairy safety net. It also recognizes that farmers have burned through a considerable amount of working capital over the last few years.”

Brown says farm policy was originally designed to help smooth the dramatic swings in agricultural income.

“What government payments do is slow down what we call a disruptive exit,” Brown says.

While Chapter 12 farm bankruptcies increased last year, federal filings remain well below levels seen during previous periods of financial stress, including 2010 and 2019.

Brown cautions that government payments alone won’t solve agriculture’s long-term profitability challenges.

“There are different objectives when it comes to ag policy, and there are unintended consequences that come with every policy outcome,” he says.

Building New Demand

NCGA leaders believe the longer-term solution isn’t simply reducing costs, but creating significantly more demand for U.S. corn.

“When we have production that keeps growing, that’s one of the great stories of American agriculture,” Swanson says. “But it also puts pressure on prices and profitability. This new demand strategy is about being proactive for the future.”

The organization has identified three major growth opportunities:

• Marine fuel
• Sustainable aviation fuel
• Biobased products

Swanson says capturing just 10% of the global marine fuel market could create demand for roughly 3 billion bushels of corn.

Longer term, biobased products may offer even greater potential.

“This is a sector that I think is really exciting,” she says. “Ten percent of the global plastics or biobased products market comes out to about 6.6 billion bushels.”

That could eventually translate into new markets for products ranging from packaging materials to clothing fibers.

“We Can’t Solve Tomorrow’s Problems With Yesterday’s Solutions”

Despite today’s financial pressures, Brown notes demand for U.S. corn remains historically strong.

“The demand for feed grains is as strong now as we’ve seen in a while,” he says. “It’s hard to accept that when prices are where they’re at, but it’s both supply and demand. Demand has remained resilient. It’s just being overburdened by local supply here in the U.S.”

He believes agriculture’s future will depend on continued innovation rather than relying on past solutions.

“We cannot expect to solve tomorrow’s problems with yesterday’s solutions,” Brown says. “We’ve got to continue to find ways to be innovative and continue to try new things.”

Bower remains confident farmers will continue adapting, even as the financial challenges mount.

“The American farmer’s resilient,” he says. “We continue to do more with less, and we will be there till the end.”