Insights on Agricultural and Rural Economies

Regular updates and concise analysis on agricultural and rural economic trends from the Center for Agriculture and the Economy.


Disclaimer

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City or the Federal Reserve System.


Crop Farmers Could Face Slight Profit Margin Compression After Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz

By Francisco Scott

Disruptions at the Strait of Hormuz have driven up production costs for U.S. crop farmers, even as higher commodity prices created profit opportunities for some. From early February to late March, urea prices, a key source of nitrogen fertilizer, rose about 50%, and diesel prices increased more than 45%. As planting season approaches, input price hikes could squeeze profit margins, especially if cost increases outweigh the nearly 10% gain in December corn futures prices since the beginning of the year.

Some producers are likely to see a slight decline in profit margins due to the disruption, particularly those who have not prepaid or contracted fertilizer. Before March, USDA forecasts suggested that the cost of producing a bushel of corn would exceed average corn prices by $0.07 in 2026. As of mid-March, this gap has likely widened to $0.12 per bushel. Average expected margins have declined alongside higher fertilizer expenses, rising energy costs, and slightly lower yields due to reduced nitrogen application. The recent distribution of government payments could alleviate some pressure on producers, but prolonged disruptions could further strain the supply of energy and fertilizers and influence farmer decision making in future years.

Bar chart indicating the gap between corn prices and breakeven corn prices for years before the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz and after the disruption in March 2026. The gap for 2026 was -$0.07 dollars per acre before the disruption and -$0.12/bu after the disruption, indicating moderate profit margin compression for U.S. crop farmers.

Note: Corn breakeven prices are calculated from USDA’s “Cost and Returns” for 2021 to 2026F, and exclude opportunity cost of labor. Corn prices for 2026 are based on futures prices and set to $4.67/bu before the disruptions, and $4.88/bu in March 2026. We use Iowa State University’s “Estimated Costs of Crop Production” to obtain prices and quantity used of N fertilizer for a typical corn-corn rotation for 2026 before the disruption. We update the price of nitrogen (N) fertilizer for March 2026 based on the increase in urea prices at the Gulf. We assume that farmers adjust N application based on N fertilizer price changes and use the supply disruption from the Russia-Ukraine war to identify the sensitivity of aggregated U.S. N use to prices (elasticity of -0.115). We then use a rule-of-thumb of 1 bu/acre reduction in corn yield from a 1 lbs/acre decrease in N application to update corn yields for March 2026 (Enrria et al., 2024). Finally, we update energy costs in March 2026 based on the percentage increase in Brent crude oil prices and the pass through rate of oil prices to energy prices from Känzig (2021) (elasticity of 0.45).

Sources: USDA, International Fertilizer Association, Iowa State University, Enrria et al. (2024), Känzig (2021), and author’s calculations

Agriculture Crop and Livestock Sectors

Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz Pressure Fertilizer Prices Ahead of the U.S. Growing Season

By Ayesha Cooray

Producers currently purchasing fertilizer ahead of the planting season are facing significant cost increases given the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz is a key shipping channel for globally traded fertilizers. Notably, more than a third of global exports of urea, a widely used solid nitrogen fertilizer, typically pass through this waterway. Since the beginning of the year, the price of urea has increased by about 55%, sharply rising with the onset of conflict with Iran.

As a nitrogen-intensive crop, fertilizer purchases comprise a large component of corn production expenses. As such, corn growers face higher input costs with supply shocks in the urea market. Urea markets have already been under pressure from persistently high natural gas costs alongside the Russia-Ukraine war and export restrictions from China. At present, the relative price of urea, or implied trade-off between corn and urea, is close to the record high experienced in 2021 amidst natural gas supply disruptions. However, recent increases in the price of corn may support profitability. In addition, many producers secured fertilizer for this year’s growing season last Fall ahead of the surge in prices. Going forward, developments in global urea markets and movement in commodity prices will be important for evaluating the outlook for corn profitability.

Line graph indicating the ratio of the price of urea to the price of corn from January 2020 to January 2026. The y-axis ranges from 0 to 160 bushels per ton, displayed on both left and right sides. The blue line starts around 60 bushels per ton in early 2020, remains relatively stable between 50-80 bushels per ton through 2020 and early 2021, then spikes dramatically to approximately 140 bushels per ton in late 2021. The ratio then declines by mid-2023 before gradually rising again through 2024 and 2025. In early 2026, the ratio increases sharply back toward 141 bushels per ton. The graph illustrates significant volatility in the corn-urea price ratio, with notable peaks in late 2021 and early 2026, indicating periods when urea became substantially more expensive relative to corn prices.

Note: The relative price of urea to corn is calculated as the ratio of the Urea U.S. FOB Gulf $/Ton to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s 1st Expiring Contract Settlement Corn Futures Price, with cents/bu converted to $/bu.

Data Sources: Bloomberg and Haver.

Agriculture Crop and Livestock Sectors

The Number of Cattle Processed into Beef Has Declined Alongside Low Inventories and Reduced Slaughter Capacity

By Cortney Cowley

U.S. beef cattle slaughter has continued to deviate from the pre-pandemic baseline in early 2026. During 2020 and 2021, shocks associated with COVID-19, severe weather, and a cyberattack at JBS contributed to substantial disruptions in the beef supply chain. Similarly, in November 2025, the total number of cattle slaughtered in the U.S. was 22% lower than in January 2020. However, more recent deviations in cattle slaughter have not resulted from shocks in the supply chain but from historically low cattle inventories. As cattle inventories have declined, higher procurement costs and lower capacity utilization have created challenges in the beef packing industry and contributed to reduced hours for workers and closures at three beef packing plants in early 2026. Moving forward, reduced slaughter capacity will likely boost efficiency in the supply chain but keep beef production at lower levels.

A line graph showing the percent change in the number of cattle slaughtered in the United States from January 2020 through early 2026. The y-axis ranges from -25% to +10%, with the baseline at 0%. The x-axis shows time progression from January 2020 to January 2026. After mid-2022, the data shows a persistent negative trend, with cattle slaughter numbers remaining consistently 5-20% below the January 2020 baseline through January 2026.

Note: Calculations based on the total number of cattle, greater than or equal to 500 pounds, that are slaughtered in commercial meat packing facilities in the United States.
Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City staff calculations

Related Content

COVID-19 Disruptions in the U.S. Meat Supply Chain

Cortney Cowley

COVID-19 created substantial challenges for all segments of the U.S. meat supply chain, but especially for producers and...

Agriculture Crop and Livestock Sectors

Mass Layoff Events Occur Less Frequently in Rural Areas but Tend to Have a Larger Impact

By John McCoy

A recent meatpacking plant closure in Lexington, Nebraska has highlighted the severe, negative consequences of large employment disruptions on small communities. A recent Economic Bulletin provides an overview of these expected consequences with a particular focus on Lexington. Existing literature suggests that smaller, more economically concentrated communities might face larger negative consequences than larger, more economically diversified areas. As the charts below show, mass layoffs have occurred less frequently in rural areas but those occurrences, on average, tend to affect a much larger share of the local labor force.

Left Chart - WARN Notices (thousands): A line graph showing WARN notices from 2000 to 2025, comparing urban (blue line) and rural (purple line) areas.   Right Chart - Layoff as share of county's labor force, average: A line graph displaying layoffs as a percentage of the county's labor force from 2000 to 2025, comparing urban (blue line) and rural (purple line) areas.

Mass Layoff Events Announced through WARN Notices Since 2000

Note: right hand chart includes only those WARN notices impacting at least 100 workers where the location of the layoff is in a single location and where the location is easily identifiable. On average, about 16% of notices per year affect multiple locations or do not have easily accessible geographic information. The WARN Act requires employers with at least 100 employees to provide advance notice of employment disruptions under External Linkcertain criteria.

Sources: warntracker.com and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City staff calculations

Related Content

Economic Bulletin: Mass Layoffs Can Disproportionately Disrupt Small Communities

By John McCoy

The recent closure of a meatpacking plant in Lexington, Nebraska, raises questions about how mass layoffs affect nearby...

Rural Labor and Demographics Regional

USDA’s Net Farm Income Projections Reflect New Timing of Government Transfer and Weaker Revenues in Parts of the Livestock Sector

By Francisco Scott

Estimates from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) showed a decline in net farm income for 2025 of more than $25 billion from the previous projection. The timing of government payments previously expected during 2025 were responsible for most of the decline. Lower than expected revenues in the livestock sector, particularly for poultry and eggs and small upticks in feed, fertilizers, and pesticides expenses pulled net farm income lower than projected in September of last year. Crop revenues slightly offset the declines, as the USDA estimated oil crop revenues in 2025 to be stronger than previously projected.

Initial projections by the USDA indicate that net farm income may decline by 2.6% ($4 billion) in 2026 compared to last year. Government payments are expected to continue to contribute positively to net farm income, totaling $42 billion, as some direct transfers planned for 2025 will likely be paid in 2026. Projections show operational expenses softening slightly, while livestock revenues may increase moderately, which could help pull net farm income higher. However, the USDA projects lower revenues from crops, dairy, and poultry and egg production, which may offset some of the projected savings on inputs and expected gains from other sectors.

The first chart shows a series of bars. The first bar represents the USDA's September 2025 projection for net farm income. The remaining bars break down how different balance sheet items may have contributed to the decline in net farm income, as estimated by the USDA in February 2026. The second chart shows a series of bars. The first bar represents the USDA's estimated net farm income for 2025. The remaining bars show how different balance sheet items may affect the projected decline in net farm income for 2026.

Source: USDA, staff calculations.

Agriculture US Agriculture Crop and Livestock Sectors

Demand for Stable Access to Water Has Supported a Rise in the Price Differential for Tenth District Irrigated Farmland

By Ayesha Cooray

According to fourth quarter results from the Tenth District Survey of Agricultural Credit Conditions, land values remained stable in 2025, with a premium for irrigated farmland. In fact, the price differential between irrigated and non-irrigated farmland has increased five-fold in the last two decades. The rise in the premium for irrigated farmland has been supported by heightened demand for stable access to water given more severe droughts, depletion of existing water resources, and the pursuit of higher yields. Rather than large-scale expansion of irrigated acreage, mounting concerns about water scarcity have altered investment decisions and production practices towards the adoption of more efficient irrigation technology and shifting regional cropping patterns.

This graph depicts two data series. The blue line represents the difference between irrigated and non-irrigated farmland values on the left scale, which shows a four-fold increase from 2001 to 2025. The gray shaded area represents the percent of 10th District land area categorized as 'Exceptional Drought' on the right scale, indicating several significant drought periods, with major drought events around 2011-2012 and 2020-2022. The graph illustrates the relationship between drought conditions and irrigated land value premiums over a 25-year period.

Note: The premium for irrigated farmland is calculated as the difference between the survey average of irrigated and non-irrigated land values (per acre). This difference is indexed to 2025 to account for inflation. Exceptional drought refers to the highest intensity level on the U.S. Drought Monitor, indicating a 1-in-100-year event.

Sources: Federal Reserve Surveys of Agricultural Credit Conditions; National Integrated Drought Information System’s U.S. Drought Monitor.

Related Content

Ag Credit Survey: Farmland Values Remain Firm Despite Deterioration in Farm Finances

Ty Kreitman and Ayesha Cooray

Despite gradual deterioration in farm financial conditions over the past year, agricultural real estate values in the Tenth...

Agriculture Regional Agriculture Natural Resources and Environment

High Production Costs and Subdued Liquidity Spurred Strong Farm Lending Activity in 2025

By Ty Kreitman

Estimates from the National Survey of Terms of Lending to Farmers showed a 20% year-over-year increase in the average inflation-adjusted volume of new farm operating loans at commercial banks during 2025. Demand for financing grew considerably for the second consecutive year alongside elevated production expenses and subdued liquidity in the sector, particularly for crop producers challenged by narrow profit margins. The latest Ag Finance Update describes how the growing size of operating loans continued to drive increases in lending volumes over the past year.

Chart showing trends in Farm Operating Loans, Operating Expenses, and Liquidity from 2000 to 2025. The graph displays three lines indexed to the year 2000 (index=100), with inflation-adjusted values. The purple line represents Operating Expenses, which shows an overall increasing trend reaching about 150-160 by 2025. The blue line shows Farm Operating Loans, which fluctuates significantly throughout the period with notable peaks around 2014 and projected 2025. The green line shows Debt Service Ratio, which fluctuates between roughly 90-120, with a note indicating 'Lower Debt Service Ratio = Lower Liquidity' at the bottom of the chart. All three metrics show considerable volatility over the 25-year period, with operating expenses generally trending higher than the year 2000 baseline.

*Average annual volume of loans for current operating expenses estimated in the Survey of Terms of Lending to Farmers.

**Total U.S. farm sector production expenses less interest expenses and capital expenditures.

Sources: USDA, Survey of Terms of Lending to Farmers, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City staff calculations

Related Content

Agricultural Finance Update: Larger Operating Loans Boost Farm Lending Activity in 2025

Ty Kreitman

Strong demand for operating loans boosted farm lending activity at commercial banks in the fourth quarter of 2025.

Agriculture US Agriculture Agricultural Finance Update National Survey of Terms of Lending to Farmers

Artificial Intelligence Could Be Useful for Increasing Productivity and Managing Labor Costs in the Agricultural Sector

By John McCoy

Like other industries, agricultural businesses employ individuals whose labor could be enhanced with Artificial intelligence (AI). The share of current employment in agriculture exposed to AI varies across states and is influenced by differing labor requirements among farm products. In regions like the Midwest and Plains, agriculture concentrated in row crop production requires relatively few employees and a greater share of labor could be enhanced with the use of AI. Conversely, the prevalence of specialty crop production in California and Florida requires more in-field farm workers that could limit the benefits of AI.

Map of the U.S. showing the percentage of employment exposed to agriculture by state, color-coded from less than 20% to more than 50%, with most Midwest and Plains states showing the highest exposure.

Note: The map follows calculations described in the December 2025 Nebraska Economist (External LinkMcCoy 2025). Employment includes agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting industries.

Sources: Eloundou et al (2024), Census Bureau (American Community Survey), author’s calculations.

Related Content

Nebraska Economist: Artificial Intelligence Offers an Opportunity for Nebraska Firms

By John McCoy

While the adoption of artificial intelligence remains in early stages and its ultimate effects are uncertain, firms in...

Agriculture US Agriculture

Government Assistance and Insurance Payouts Will Limit Losses for Some Crop Farms

By Francisco Scott

Profit opportunities in the crop sector remained limited at the end of 2025, but the combination of ad hoc government assistance and expected crop insurance payouts is likely to support farm financial conditions. A hypothetical analysis estimates a corn and soybean farm with average U.S. yields, selling at average annual cash prices will lose $80 per acre in 2025. If these conditions persist in early 2026, those losses could be cut in half with disbursements from the Farmer Bridge Assistance (FBA) Program and mostly offset with payments from revenue and price protection programs. The level of direct support is notable compared with recent years and together with aid from the Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP) earlier this year, could ease financial stress for many crop producers.

Note: Profits are based on production costs from the USDA cost and return estimates and national average yields and prices. For purposes of this analysis, the opportunity cost of unpaid labor is excluded from total costs. Government payments from 2010-2023 are estimated using average government payments per farm for corn and soybean specialized operations reported in the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). Estimated payments from FBA and ARC/PLC in 2025 are derived from analysis published by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Sources: USDA, Wall Street Journal, Reports of Condition and Income, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City staff calculations

Crop and Livestock Sectors Agriculture US Agriculture