White House Previews Leaner U.S. Diet Rules as FDA Sets Stage for Major 2026 Food Policy Reset
U.S., China take beef trade action | Xi signals confidence as China targets 5% growth in 2025
| LINKS |
Link: Trump’s Cabinet and Top Economic Hands: A Report Card
Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Dec. 27
Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Dec. 27
| Updates: Policy/News/Markets, Dec. 31, 2025 |
| UP FRONT |
— Holiday market, gov’t schedules: Most U.S. markets run normal hours today (bond market closes early at 2 p.m. ET), then close Thursday and reopen with normal hours Friday, Jan. 2; federal offices are closed Thursday and Friday.
— White House previews leaner U.S. diet rules / FDA tees up 2026 reset: FDA officials say new Dietary Guidelines (early January) will be shorter and more practical, steering consumers toward whole foods and away from ultra-processed foods, added sugars/refined carbs, and certain additives (notably petroleum-based dyes), while also tightening GRAS oversight—setting up a major MAHA-driven food-policy push in 2026.
— U.S. reshapes beef import quotas to carve out UK share: USTR will cut the “other countries” beef TRQ from 65,005 mt to 52,005 mt and create a 13,000-mt UK country-specific quota effective Jan. 1, 2026, implementing a bilateral deal that mirrors UK access for U.S. beef.
— China caps beef imports with safeguard tariff: Beijing sets a 2026 quota of 2.688 MMT; volumes above face an extra 55% tariff under a three-year safeguard (through 2028), with big 2026 allocations for Brazil and other South American suppliers—formalizing a ceiling on import growth after 2024’s record 2.87 MMT.
— Argentina farm exports surge after policy shift: CIARA-CEC data show 2025 ag exports up 25% to $31.34B, with the rebound linked to export-tax rollback that quickly unlocked grain/oilseed sales and accelerated shipment flow into year-end.
— Xi signals confidence in ~5% 2025 growth: Xi projects China will hit “about 5%” growth, citing a manufacturing rebound and roughly $51B in early public spending commitments to support momentum.
— EU presses ahead with CBAM despite trade pushback: Brussels is moving toward full CBAM charges in 2026 for embedded emissions in imports like steel, cement, aluminum and fertilizer—raising compliance pressure and trade tensions as climate policy collides with WTO-style trade norms.
— ACA subsidy cliff hits as Congress deadlocks: Enhanced ACA/ObamaCare premium subsidies expire at day’s end, raising the odds of higher 2026 premiums and coverage losses; House Democrats plan an extension push in January, but Senate prospects look dim after shutdown-driven brinkmanship and failed mid-December votes.
— Winter cold snap to lift heating bills: Forecasts show electricity and natural gas users facing the biggest increases this winter (power +5% to +12%; gas +3% to +8.4%), while propane/heating oil may dip modestly—but total bills remain highest in many rural/cold regions.
— Wall Street nears rare “triple crown”: U.S. stocks are on track for a third straight year of double-digit gains (S&P ~+17% in 2025), with strength tied to earnings, AI optimism, and hopes for Fed cuts despite tariff/geopolitical/shutdown overhang.
— Fed minutes reveal how close December cut was: Minutes portray a deeply split Fed still focused on inflation persistence and tariff-driven price risks, with some officials near the “hold” camp and heightened data dependence heading into the Jan. 27–28, 2026 meeting.
— USDA export sales: China soybean buying still active: Weekly data show additional 2025/26 soybean sales to China (plus sorghum) and place total soybean commitments to China above 6 MMT — higher when adding post-report daily sales.
— China soymeal reform hasn’t dented soybean imports (yet): A farmdoc daily analysis finds soymeal inclusion-rate reductions appear smaller/uneven versus official claims, and fast feed-demand growth has offset gains — keeping imports near 100+ MMT with longer-run downside risks still possible.
— Sugar prices slide on swelling supplies: Raw sugar is tracking its steepest annual decline since 2017 on strong Brazil output and India rebound, though Thailand production shortfalls could trim (not erase) the projected global surplus.
— U.S. rice prices weaken in 2025; 2026 outlook still tough: Weather-driven acreage disruption and big prevented-plant in parts of the Delta combined with heavy global supplies and export headwinds to pressure prices; 2026 competitiveness hinges on normalized planting weather and any global supply shocks.
— USDA keeps fast-track farm loans through 2026: USDA extends the Application Fast Track pilot for direct OL/FO loans through Dec. 31, 2026 (or until a final rule), citing shorter approval times and plans to broaden eligibility.
— SDRP Stage 2 “spring-price” math continues to draw criticism: Farm groups argue valuing production at spring (projected) prices can understate real harvest-time revenue losses in falling-price years — shrinking or eliminating shallow-loss payments many producers expected.
— Farm bill gaps persist after reconciliation: CRS says reconciliation boosted Title I support (higher reference prices) and made targeted crop insurance enhancements, but left major reauthorization issues unresolved—including expiring authorities and looming “permanent law” risk (notably for dairy as early as 2027).
— HPAI expands in commercial poultry: USDA confirms new commercial cases across additional states, with roughly 870,000 birds affected nationwide over the past month — keeping biosecurity and surveillance pressure elevated.
— Oil ends 2025 under pressure / geopolitics vs oversupply: Despite episodic geopolitical risk premiums (Russia–Ukraine, Yemen, Venezuela, CPC disruptions), crude is set for steep annual declines as OPEC+ supply increases and 2026 surplus expectations cap upside.
— Opinion: U.S./Canada dairy fight is quota mechanics: Commentary argues USMCA dairy tensions are about how Canada administers/allocates TRQs — not dismantling supply management — suggesting a negotiated tweak rather than an existential clash.
— Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms nears sunset: CRS outlines how TAAF has barred new petitions since 2022 but continues supporting legacy cases via appropriations; Congress is weighing whether to revive, redesign, or broaden eligibility amid shifting Trump-era trade strategy.
— USDA sets 2026 ag research agenda: Rollins memo prioritizes applied R&D around farm profitability, bioenergy/biobased uses, market access, and pest/disease defense, while de-emphasizing DEI/environmental-justice framing.
— States restrict sugary foods under SNAP starting Jan. 1: At least 18 states will limit SNAP purchases of soda/candy and other sugary items in 2026 (first five on Jan. 1), aligning with the Trump administration’s nutrition-overhaul push but drawing criticism over stigma and practicality.
— Weather: lake-effect snow + flooding risk CA: NWS flags reinforced lake-effect snow into the new year, possible snow squalls from the Ohio Valley into the Northeast, and flash-flood risk in southern California tied to an anomalous low-pressure system.
| TOP STORIES — Holiday market, gov’t schedulesU.S. stock, financial and commodity markets will trade normal hours today except for the bond market that will close at 2 p.m. ET. Markets will be closed Thursday and will trade normal hours Friday, Jan. 2. U.S. gov’t offices will be closed Thursday and Friday. — White House previews leaner U.S. diet rules as FDA sets stage for major 2026 food policy resetFDA leadership says updated guidelines will target ultra-processed foods, dyes, and ingredient oversight as part of a broader MAHA push The Trump administration is preparing to release updated Dietary Guidelines for Americans in early January, a move senior Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials say will launch a sweeping overhaul of U.S. food policy in 2026 aimed at addressing obesity, diabetes, and declining public health outcomes. Kyle Diamantas, FDA deputy commissioner for human foods, described 2026 as a “fundamental transformational year” for the administration’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda under Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Food and Drug Administration. The comments were made in an interview on Fox News. Diamantas said the forthcoming dietary guidance will be significantly shorter and more practical than prior editions, which he criticized as overly technical and unwieldy. The revised approach, he said, is designed to emphasize whole foods, reduce parental confusion, and discourage consumption of highly processed products. According to Diamantas, the new guidelines will advise Americans to limit foods “loaded with addictive sugar,” refined carbohydrates, and ingredients that drive sharp glycemic spikes — patterns he argued have expanded dramatically since the 1980s and 1990s. Because federal dietary guidance shapes school meals and nutrition programs such as SNAP and WIC, the changes could ripple quickly through food purchasing and menu standards nationwide. A major focus of the FDA’s 2026 agenda will also be food additives, particularly petroleum-based dyes. Diamantas said products using those dyes contain, on average, substantially more sugar than products without them and are marketed heavily toward children, despite offering no nutritional benefit. Beyond dyes, the FDA plans to tighten oversight of ingredients classified as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS). Diamantas criticized the current system for allowing companies to self-certify ingredient safety and said future reforms will push for greater transparency and independent review. FDA officials framed the overhaul as a response to deteriorating national health metrics, citing that roughly 70% of Americans are overweight or obese, a majority of adolescents are ineligible for military service due to health standards, and tens of thousands of new diabetes cases emerge each month. — U.S. reshapes beef import quotas to carve out dedicated UK ShareNew tariff-rate quota structure reallocates volume from “other countries” to support bilateral trade deal The U.S. will reduce its beef import tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for “other countries and areas” beginning Jan. 1, 2026, while creating a dedicated country-specific quota for the United Kingdom, according to a notice published by the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Under the change, the “other countries and areas” TRQ will be cut from 65,005 metric tons to 52,005 metric tons. At the same time, a new country-specific quota of 13,000 metric tons will be established for UK beef exports to the U.S. The adjustment implements a trade agreement reached earlier this year, under which the UK agreed to open a 13,000-metric-ton quota for U.S. beef, and the U.S. committed to reallocating an equivalent 13,000 metric tons from the existing “other countries and areas” TRQ to create the UK-specific allocation. — China moves to cap beef imports with multi-year safeguard tariffBeijing sets 2026 quota below recent record imports, allocating largest shares to Brazil and South America China has set a 2026 beef import quota of 2.688 million metric tons (MMT), with any volumes above that level subject to an additional 55% tariff, as part of a three-year safeguard measure aimed at protecting its domestic cattle industry. Officials said surging imports have “seriously damaged China’s domestic industry,” prompting the action. The quota will take effect Jan. 1, 2026, and runs through 2028. China imported a record 2.87 MMT of beef in 2024, meaning the new threshold effectively tightens access relative to recent trade flows. Under the safeguard schedule, the total quota will gradually expand:2026: 2.688 MMT2027: 2.742 MMT2028: 2.797 MMT China also released country-specific allocations for 2026, underscoring its continued reliance on South American suppliers:• Brazil: 1.106 MMT• Argentina: 511,000 mt• Uruguay: 324,000 mt• New Zealand: 206,000 mt• Australia: 205,000 mt• United States: 164,000 mt• Other countries/regions: 172,000 mt Brazil’s share rises further in subsequent years, reaching 1.151 MMT by 2028, while the U.S. allocation edges up more modestly to 179,000 mt in 2028. The safeguard follows a prolonged government investigation into beef imports that was extended twice, signaling Beijing’s growing concern about import pressure on domestic producers. For exporters, the move formalizes a ceiling on China’s beef demand growth — at least through 2028 — and raises the cost risk for any shipments that exceed quota limits. — Argentina farm exports surge after policy shiftTax rollback fuels sharp rebound in grain and oilseed shipments Argentina’s agricultural exports climbed sharply in 2025, rising 25% year over year to $31.34 billion, according to data from CIARA-CEC, the country’s grains processor and exporter chamber. December shipments alone totaled $1.015 billion, capping a strong finish to the year. While CIARA-CEC did not formally attribute the surge to a single factor, the rebound followed Argentina’s decision earlier in the fall to remove export taxes, a move that rapidly unlocked pent-up sales across the farm sector. The move followed a U.S./Argentina $20 billion bond swap. That was followed by Argentina removing its export taxes and China then buying billions of dollars of Argentine soybeans during the timeslot that U.S. soybeans are more competitive. The policy shift appears to have improved export incentives for producers and exporters, accelerating grain and oilseed flows just as global demand conditions stabilized. The export jump underscores how quickly Argentina’s agricultural trade can respond to changes in tax and trade policy — an important signal for global grain markets watching South American supply dynamics heading into 2026. — Xi signals confidence as China targets 5% growth in 2025Manufacturing rebound and $51B in early public spending underscore Beijing’s push to sustain momentum Xi Jinping said China is on track to hit its key economic goals in 2025, projecting growth of “about 5%” as fresh data point to a recovery in the manufacturing sector. The upbeat outlook was reinforced by Beijing’s announcement of roughly $51 billion in initial public spending commitments aimed at bolstering growth next year. — Brussels presses ahead with carbon border levy, brushing off global trade pushbackEU’s CBAM will start charging imports for embedded emissions, escalating tensions with major exporters as climate policy collides with trade rules The European Union is moving forward with its landmark carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), despite sustained opposition from key trading partners who argue the policy risks distorting trade and penalizing developing economies, the Financial Times reports. Under the plan, importers of carbon-intensive goods into the European Union — including steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizers, electricity and hydrogen—will be required to purchase certificates reflecting the carbon emissions embedded in those products. The price of those certificates will be linked to the EU’s internal carbon market, effectively extending the bloc’s climate costs to foreign producers. Shielding EU industry — and raising trade tensions. EU officials argue CBAM is essential to prevent “carbon leakage,” where production shifts abroad to countries with weaker climate rules, undermining Europe’s emissions targets and disadvantaging domestic manufacturers already paying under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). But the measure has drawn criticism from a wide range of trade partners, including emerging economies and major exporters of steel and fertilizers, who say the levy functions as a de facto tariff. Several governments contend it could violate World Trade Organization principles if not applied with sufficient flexibility or support for lower-income countries. According to the FT, Brussels has acknowledged the political sensitivity but insists the mechanism is legally robust and environmentally necessary. EU officials maintain that CBAM is non-discriminatory because it mirrors costs already borne by European producers and is rooted in climate policy rather than protectionism. Phased rollout, bigger impact ahead. CBAM is currently in a transitional phase, requiring importers to report emissions without paying a charge. Full financial obligations are set to begin in 2026, with costs rising gradually as free carbon allowances for EU producers are phased out. That timing is already shaping global supply chains. Exporters to Europe are facing pressure to document emissions more precisely, invest in cleaner production, or risk losing competitiveness in one of the world’s largest markets. Why this matters beyond Europe. The EU’s decision is being closely watched by policymakers elsewhere. Supporters see CBAM as a template for aligning trade with climate goals; critics warn it could trigger retaliatory measures or fragment global trade rules at a time when geopolitical and economic strains are already high. As the Financial Times notes, the clash over CBAM underscores a growing reality: climate policy is no longer confined to environmental regulation — it is rapidly becoming a central fault line in global trade and industrial competition. — ACA/ObamaCare subsidy cliff arrives as Congress remains deadlocked on extensionEnhanced Affordable Care Act premium assistance expires, setting up higher 2026 health costs amid stalled House–Senate negotiations Enhanced premium subsidies under the Affordable Care Act expire at the end of today, setting the stage for sharply higher health insurance premiums for millions of Americans in 2026. The lapse removes the expanded financial assistance first enacted during the pandemic, which capped premiums and extended help to middle-income households that previously did not qualify. Democrats are expected to push a three-year extension when the U.S. House of Representatives returns in January, but prospects remain uncertain. Even if the House advances the bill, it faces long odds in the U.S. Senate, where bipartisan agreement has so far proven elusive. The stalemate follows a turbulent fall in Washington. Democratic lawmakers earlier refused to fund the federal government without renewing the subsidies, triggering a record-long 43-day shutdown that dragged on until mid-November. That impasse ended only after leaders agreed to allow a Senate vote on health care subsidies. However, in mid-December, both Democratic and Republican health care proposals failed to clear the chamber, underscoring the depth of disagreement. Without congressional action, insurers are expected to price 2026 plans assuming the subsidies are gone, potentially locking in higher premiums even if lawmakers later reverse course. For consumers, particularly older adults and moderate-income families, the expiration raises the risk of coverage losses or forced plan downgrades just as the 2026 election cycle begins to intensify pressure on lawmakers to revisit the issue. — Winter cold snap poised to drive up power and gas billsElectricity and natural gas users face the steepest increases, while propane and heating oil offer limited relief despite high overall costs in colder regions Plunging winter temperatures are set to push heating bills higher for many U.S. households — especially those that rely on electricity or natural gas — according to new estimates from federal and state energy analysts. Electric heating costs this winter are projected to rise 5% to 12% from last year, bringing average five-month bills (October–March) to $1,144–$1,223, based on forecasts from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and the National Energy Assistance Directors Association. Analysts cite surging electricity demand from AI data centers, higher utility costs tied to California wildfire risks, and elevated natural gas prices as key drivers. Natural gas users are also expected to see increases, with winter heating bills rising 3% to 8.4% to an estimated $671–$704, depending on weather and regional supply conditions. The impact on households is already drawing concern from consumer advocates. NEADA Executive Director Mark Wolfe warned that the increases could be “devastating” for families already under financial strain, noting that millions are falling deeper into utility debt and edging closer to service shutoffs as they struggle to keep homes warm. Not all heating fuels are moving higher. Prices for propane and heating oil are expected to fall by as much as 4%, according to EIA, supported by ample propane inventories and lower crude oil prices. However, relief may be limited in practice. Homes using propane and heating oil — common in the coldest parts of the country, including rural areas of the Midwest, Maine, and New Hampshire — are still projected to face the highest overall heating bills this winter, averaging about $1,291 for propane and $1,453 for heating oil. Bottom Line: Even with modest price declines for some fuels, colder weather and rising electricity and gas costs mean many households should brace for a more expensive winter heating season. |
| FINANCIAL MARKETS |
— Equities today: U.S. futures are lower along with global markets after a mostly quiet night of news. Today, there is one final noteworthy economic report before the end of the year: Jobless Claims (E: 218K) and investors will be looking for a Goldilocks print to shore up soft-landing expectations. Additionally, the Treasury will hold auctions for 4-Week, 8-Week and 4-Month Bills at 11:30 a.m. ET and markets will want to see healthy demand to support dovish Fed policy expectations for 2026. Finally, there are no Fed speakers today and the bond market will close early (2:00 p.m. ET) ahead of the New Years Holiday as markets cap off another solid year of stock market returns. In Asia, Japan closed. Hong Kong -0.9%. China +0.1%. India +0.7%. In Europe, at midday, London -0.3%. Paris -0.5%. Frankfurt closed.
— Equities yesterday:
| Equity Index | Closing Price Dec. 30 | Point Difference from Dec. 29 | % Difference from Dec. 29 |
| Dow | 48,367.06 | -94.87 | -0.20% |
| Nasdaq | 23,419.08 | -55.27 | -0.24% |
| S&P 500 | 6,896.24 | -9.50 | -0.14% |
— Wall Street nears a rare triple crown
Stocks poised for a third straight year of double-digit gains, defying tariffs, geopolitics and shutdown fears
U.S. equities are on the cusp of an uncommon achievement: three consecutive years of double-digit gains. If current trends hold, 2025 would mark only the sixth time since the 1940s that the market has pulled off such a streak.
The S&P 500 is on track to climb about 17% this year, building on a 23% advance in 2024 and a 24% surge in 2023. The rally has persisted despite persistent concerns over tariffs, elevated geopolitical tensions, and the longest government shutdown on record.
Analysts say the market’s resilience has been driven by a potent mix of strong corporate earnings, sustained enthusiasm around artificial intelligence, and growing optimism that the Federal Reserve could begin cutting interest rates, easing financial conditions and extending the bull run into 2026.
| Dow is up 13.7%.S&P 500 up 17.3%.Nasdaq up 21.3%.Small cap-focused Russell 2000 up 12.1%.Gold up 66.1%.Silver up 166.5%.U.S. 10-year Treasury note down 13.1%.Dollar index down 9.5%.WTI crude oil down 19.2%.Bitcoin down 5.8%. |
— Fed minutes expose narrow margin behind December cut
Inflation persistence, tariff effects, and labor uncertainty keep policymakers split heading into 2026
Minutes from the Dec. 9–10 meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) show a Federal Reserve that remains sharply divided, even after agreeing to a quarter-point rate cut. While the decision formally passed with broad support, the discussion makes clear that more officials were close to favoring no change than the final vote count suggested.
Inflation risks still dominate the debate. Participants broadly agreed inflation remained above the Fed’s 2% target and had not shown convincing progress over the past year. Many cited upward pressure on core inflation from tariffs boosting goods prices, even as some noted housing services inflation had cooled to levels last seen when inflation was closer to target. A majority warned inflation could stay “somewhat elevated” in the near term, with uncertainty around how quickly tariff effects would fade or how fully they would be passed through to consumers. Several officials stressed that prolonged above-target inflation risks unanchoring longer-run expectations.
Labor market outlook soft but unclear. With key government data delayed by the shutdown, officials relied on private data and anecdotal reports. Most saw continued cooling in employment conditions, though some indicators — such as jobless claims and job postings — pointed to greater stability. While many expect the labor market to stabilize in 2026 under appropriate policy, uncertainty remains high and most judged risks to employment as tilted to the downside.
A finely balanced rate decision. The minutes reveal that beyond the two officials who explicitly opposed a cut, several others were on the fence. A “few” who ultimately supported easing said the choice was finely balanced and that they could have backed holding rates steady. Those favoring the cut argued that downside risks to employment had increased and that inflation risks had diminished or stabilized since earlier in 2025. By contrast, officials inclined toward no change emphasized the lack of clear progress toward the 2% inflation goal and the need for greater confidence before easing further.
Notably, Governor Stephen Miran again stood out as the only official advocating for larger cuts, underscoring how isolated that view remains within the Committee.
What comes next. As Fed Chair Jerome Powell has suggested in recent remarks, incoming data will be decisive. Several participants said the substantial flow of labor and inflation data ahead of the Jan. 27–28, 2026, meeting would be critical, even as policymakers remain cautious about distortions tied to shutdown-related data gaps.
For now, markets are pricing in a pause in January. The minutes reinforce that outlook — but also highlight just how data-dependent and closely contested the next policy call will be.
| AG MARKETS |
— More U.S. soybean purchases by China confirmed in weekly USDA update. USDA weekly Export Sales data for the week ended Dec. 18 included more activity for 2025/26 to China, including net reductions of 128,440 MT of wheat (132,000 MT was cancelled via the daily export sales reporting system), net sales of 188,000 MT of sorghum, 617,012 MT of soybeans, and 8,008 running bales of upland cotton. For 2025, there was no activity reported for beef but net sales of 2,842 MT of pork with another 7,821 MT for delivery in 2026. The data puts total soybean export commitments to China at 6,026,027 MT, with 659,027 MT already shipped. Including daily sales announced since the week ended Dec. 18, total export commitments to China are at 6,493,027 MT.
— China’s feed reform isn’t cutting soybean imports — at least not yet
New analysis finds Beijing’s push to lower soymeal use has delivered only modest gains, leaving global soybean trade flows largely intact
China’s high-profile effort to curb dependence on imported soybeans by reducing soybean meal use in livestock feed has so far produced limited results, according to a new analysis from the University of Illinois’ farmdoc daily (link). While official Chinese data point to a sharp decline in soymeal inclusion rates, alternative estimates suggest the reduction has been smaller, uneven, and insufficient to materially dent overall soybean import demand.
The article, written by Jilang Qing, a Ph.D. student in agricultural and consumer economics, and edited by Joe Janzen, evaluates China’s “Three-Year Action Plan to Reduce Soybean Meal in Feed,” launched in 2023. The policy targets a reduction in the average soybean meal share of feed to below 13% by 2025 and 10% by 2030, primarily through lower-protein, amino-acid-balanced diets for hogs and poultry.
Difference of opinion. Official figures from China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs indicate the soymeal inclusion rate has already fallen from about 17% in 2017 to below 13% in 2023. However, when the authors compare those estimates with data from USDA and third-party industry sources, a different picture emerges. USDA-based calculations suggest soymeal inclusion rates have hovered closer to 15–16% in recent years, flattening out rather than continuing a smooth decline.
Crucially, China’s total feed production has continued to expand rapidly, roughly doubling since 2010. That growth has offset much of the impact from lower soymeal inclusion rates, keeping absolute soymeal use — and soybean imports — elevated. Both Chinese customs data and USDA figures show soybean imports surpassing 100 million metric tons in recent years, near record highs.
The authors conclude that China has made only limited progress toward soybean self-sufficiency. As a result, near-term implications for major exporters such as the United States and Brazil appear modest, despite periodic politically driven disruptions in bilateral trade. Over the longer run, however, structural changes — including wider adoption of feed reforms, potential gains from genetically modified soybeans, and slower growth in meat consumption amid population decline — could still reshape China’s soybean demand profile.
— Sugar prices slide toward multi-year lows as global supplies swell
Raw sugar posts steepest annual drop since 2017, though Thailand output risks may trim surplus
Raw sugar is heading for its sharpest annual decline in eight years as global markets brace for plentiful supplies, despite a modest rebound late in the year. Prices for the most-active New York contract have fallen about 22% in 2025 — the biggest drop since 2017 — while white sugar futures in London are down roughly 15%, marking their worst annual performance since 2018, according to Bloomberg.
The selloff has been driven by strong production from Brazil, the world’s top exporter, alongside a rebound in output from India, easing concerns that had previously tightened global balances. With demand remaining subdued, analysts see little near-term support for prices. Arnaud Lorioz, founder of brokerage Deepcore, told Bloomberg that raw sugar could extend losses toward the low-14-cent-per-pound range unless disrupted by adverse weather or an unexpected policy shift.
That downside, however, may be partially cushioned by emerging supply risks in Thailand. Production there has fallen behind last year’s pace following a delayed cane crush, prompting Covrig Analytics to cut its Thai crop estimate by 400,000 to 450,000 tons. Lead analyst Claudiu Covrig said ongoing labor shortages, incomplete mill operations, and lingering border tensions with Cambodia are weighing on output.
As a result, Covrig now sees the global sugar surplus at about 3.6 million tons, down from a prior estimate of 4.1 million tons. Still, even with Thailand’s shortfall, the overall supply outlook remains ample — keeping pressure on prices as the market closes out the year, Bloomberg reported.
— U.S. rice prices slide in 2025 as weather whipsaws acres and global supplies rebuild; early look at 2026 outlook
Heavy Delta rains drove big prevented-plant numbers — especially in Arkansas — while export headwinds and a “cheaper world” set up another tough pricing year in 2026
U.S. rice prices spent much of 2025 under pressure, with futures and cash indicators fading as global supplies recovered and U.S. export competitiveness weakened. By late year, USDA was explicitly tying the softer tone to “continued decline” in daily futures and cash prices and to sluggish export sales — especially rough rice movement into Mexico and other Latin American markets.
What happened to U.S. rice prices in 2025
Farm-level price expectations reset lower. In USDA’s December outlooks for the 2025/26 marketing year (which reflects the 2025 crop moving into market channels), USDA pegged the all-rice season-average farm price at $11.60/cwt, down $1.10/cwt from the prior forecast and 24% below a year earlier.
USDA also cut the long-grain season-average farm price to $10.50/cwt, calling it the lowest since 2016/17, citing weaker futures/cash pricing, slower export sales, and a lack of global price competitiveness.
Futures reflected the same soft tape. Rough rice futures traded near the $9–$10/cwt area at year-end (depending on contract and session), consistent with a market that spent 2025 leaning bearish rather than rationing demand.
Wholesale quotes didn’t collapse the same way. USDA’s AMS weekly market reporting still showed milled rice quotes holding in relatively steady bands late in the year (e.g., long-grain milled “Long White” ranges by region), highlighting that margins and basis behavior — not just farm prices — did a lot of the balancing.
The key market drivers in 2025
1) Export headwinds and competitiveness
USDA flagged sluggish long-grain exports (notably rough rice) as a key negative, pointing to weaker sales/shipments into Mexico and other Latin markets. The broader backdrop was also unfriendly: USDA projected record global supplies and rising stocks — conditions that generally translate into tighter pricing competition from Asia and South America.
2) Big weather volatility in the Delta
Spring and early season flooding/heavy rains became a defining feature for parts of the rice belt. Mississippi State Extension described heavy spring rains and flooding that forced replanting and pushed some producers to plant later — or switch crops — cutting into intended rice acreage in pockets of the state.
3) A large prevented-plant story (rice included)
Early in the season, analysts were floating ~200,000 to 300,000 acres of potential prevent plant across the Delta (across crops, including rice) as rains and flooding dragged on. But by mid-August, certified acreage data in Arkansas showed the prevent-plant impact for rice was far larger than many early estimates implied:
Arkansas prevented planting (rice) totaled 519,691 acres in USDA-FSA certified figures summarized by University of Arkansas extension.
The prevent-plant concentration was especially notable in Northeast Arkansas counties. For example, the same table shows prevented-plant totals of 39,273 acres in Cross County and 38,344 acres in Craighead County (rice).
Bottom Line: 2025’s rice price story wasn’t just “big crop vs. demand” — it was also “where did the acres actually get planted, and how unevenly did weather hit production risk?”
The key policy issues rice producers wrestled with in 2025
Crop insurance and prevent-plant mechanics moved to center stage. When weather is the market, prevent-plant rules (deadlines, eligibility, buy-up options, and how PP interacts with rotations and subsequent plantings) become a core risk-management topic — particularly in years like 2025 when certified prevented planting can be extremely large in major rice states.
Title I safety-net relevance rose as prices softened. With USDA projecting materially lower season-average prices for long grain and all rice, attention naturally shifts back to how well PLC/ARC parameters and reference-price math fit current cost structures — especially if 2026 also starts with burdensome global supplies.
Outlook for 2026: more supply, more trade, and a tough bar for a price rebound
Looking into calendar 2026, USDA projected:
• Record global rice supplies (730.7 million tons) and higher ending stocks (188.8 million tons), driven heavily by India’s larger stocks.
• Record global rice trade in 2026 (about 62.8 million tons, milled basis).
For U.S. rice, that backdrop usually means export competition stays intense and rallies can be hard to sustain unless weather trims production, key exporters restrict shipments, or the U.S. regains price competitiveness into core destinations. Meanwhile, after a year like 2025, the market will also watch whether prevent-plant swings reverse (adding acres back) or whether producers keep rotating away from rice on risk and profitability concerns.
One key thing to watch early in 2026: whether Delta spring weather normalizes. If planting windows cooperate and prevent-plant collapses from 2025’s levels in hotspots like Arkansas, that alone can change the supply narrative quickly — even before yield is known.
— Agriculture markets yesterday:
| Commodity | Contract Month | Closing Price Dec. 30 | Change vs Dec. 29 |
| Corn | March | $4.40 1/2 | -1 3/4¢ |
| Soybeans | March | $10.62 1/4 | -1 1/4¢ |
| Soybean Meal | March | $302.30 | -$1.00 |
| Soybean Oil | March | 49.44¢ | +15 pts |
| Wheat (SRW) | March | $5.10 3/4 | -2 1/4¢ |
| Wheat (HRW) | March | $5.22 | -5 1/4¢ |
| Wheat (Spring) | March | $5.79 1/4 | Unchanged |
| Cotton | March | 64.32¢ | -3 pts |
| Live Cattle | February | $230.475 | +$1.50 |
| Feeder Cattle | January | $349.55 | +$2.55 |
| Lean Hogs | February | $85.45 | +97 1/2¢ |
| FARM POLICY |
— USDA keeps fast-track farm loans moving, extends pilot through 2026
Agency says expedited processing is cutting wait times and could become permanent
USDA has extended its Application Fast Track (AFT) pilot program for direct farm loans through Dec. 31, 2026, or until a final rule is issued to make the program permanent. The extension is designed to give the agency more time to expand eligibility and formalize the initiative following early signs of success.
The AFT program accelerates approval for qualified direct Operating Loans (OL) and Farm Ownership Loans (FO) administered by the Farm Service Agency, targeting family farmers and ranchers. After launching in August 2023, the program was opened to all eligible customers beginning Jan. 1, 2024.
USDA said extending the pilot will allow more applicants to qualify while FSA evaluates loan performance and customer satisfaction ahead of a permanent rulemaking. According to the agency, early results show roughly 23% of applicants have qualified for fast-track processing, with average approval times shortened by about eight calendar days. “The initial results of AFT reflect a significant improvement in processing times for all customers,” USDA said, adding that feedback from both borrowers and staff continues to be monitored as the program moves toward possible permanent status.
— Spring-price math leaves disaster aid short in falling markets
Why USDA’s SDRP Stage 2 formula can erase real harvest-time losses
As farmers begin to size up potential payments under USDA’s Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) Stage 2, a recurring concern is emerging: the program’s shallow-loss formula often fails to reflect the revenue reality farmers faced at harvest when prices declined after planting.
The latest critique is laid out by Daniel Munch, (link) an economist with the American Farm Bureau Federation, who argues that the way USDA values production under Stage 2 can significantly understate real losses. “In many cases, the program’s calculation of shallow losses does not capture the change in revenue farmers experienced at harvest due to lower crop prices,” Munch writes.
Spring prices vs. harvest reality. Under SDRP Stage 2, USDA values production using spring (projected) crop insurance prices, even in years when prices fall sharply by harvest. In 2023, for example, corn production is valued at a spring price of $5.91 per bushel, despite a harvest price closer to $4.88 — a decline of about 17%.
According to Munch, that methodological choice can dramatically alter whether USDA recognizes a loss at all: “Valuing production at spring prices can shrink or eliminate shallow-loss payments for farms that experienced meaningful yield and revenue declines, particularly when losses sit near trigger thresholds.”
Why farmers expected something different. Munch notes that expectations were shaped by SDRP Stage 1, which supplemented crop insurance and NAP indemnities and was more closely aligned with harvest-season economics. As a result, many growers assumed Stage 2 would follow a similar logic.
Instead, the Stage 2 formula prioritizes administrative simplicity and budget scoring consistency — a tradeoff that Munch says comes at the expense of real-world accuracy: “The spring-price approach is easier to defend on budget scoring, but it can miss real-world revenue stress for farms whose yield loss was modest, but whose cash price environment deteriorated by harvest.”
Disadvantage for higher-coverage producers. The analysis highlights what others have noted: that producers carrying higher insurance coverage levels (80%–85%) are often the most exposed. Because Stage 2’s spring-price trigger can sit above crop insurance revenue guarantees, especially under Revenue Protection policies, there may be no mathematical space left for a shallow-loss payment.
In some scenarios, harvested production valued at spring prices appears more valuable than the insured guarantee itself, effectively wiping out eligibility for Stage 2 assistance.
Bottom Line: As summarized by the American Farm Bureau Federation, SDRP Stage 2 was intended to “address the remaining gaps” left by insurance and NAP, including shallow losses. But as Munch concludes, USDA’s reliance on spring prices means that: “Using spring prices consistently makes production appear more valuable than it was at harvest, shrinking the gap SDRP Stage 2 is designed to fill.” For farmers who endured disaster-related yield losses and a weaker price environment at harvest, the result can be smaller-than-expected payments — or none at all — despite clear financial stress.
— Farm bill after budget reconciliation leaves big gaps for Congress to fill
CRS details deeper Title I farm safety-net changes, crop insurance tweaks, and unresolved risks as reconciliation stops short of a full farm bill
The fiscal year (FY) 2025 budget reconciliation law made sweeping changes to the farm safety net but did not fully reauthorize a farm bill, leaving Congress with significant unfinished business on both mandatory and discretionary programs, according to a detailed Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis (link).
Title I: Higher reference prices and a stronger commodity safety net
CRS notes that the most consequential changes in reconciliation occurred in Title I farm commodity programs. The law reauthorized most commodity programs for five years and raised statutory reference prices—the price levels that trigger government payments when market prices fall below them. By increasing reference prices, Congress materially boosted the likelihood that Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) payments will be triggered, particularly in a prolonged low-price environment. CRS emphasizes that higher reference prices not only increase the frequency of payments but also raise their size, strengthening income protection for producers of major crops such as corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, rice, and dairy.
These reference-price increases mirror proposals debated during the 118th Congress but not enacted at that time. CRS underscores that reconciliation allowed lawmakers to enact these politically sensitive increases with a simple Senate majority, something that may have been more difficult in a traditional farm bill process.
Crop insurance: Targeted enhancements, not a full rewrite
Crop insurance also received additional mandatory funding under reconciliation, with CRS reporting nearly $6 billion in increased outlays over 10 years. However, the changes were incremental rather than structural. CRS explains that reconciliation did not fundamentally alter the design of the federal crop insurance program but instead provided targeted enhancements — such as adjustments tied to premium support, disaster assistance linkages, or administrative funding — while leaving broader policy questions unresolved.
Because reconciliation rules limit provisions to those with direct budgetary effects, many crop insurance policy debates typically addressed in farm bills — such as coverage options, prevented planting rules, or producer eligibility standards — were largely left untouched. CRS signals these issues could resurface in any follow-on farm bill legislation.
Budget impact: Farm gains offset by nutrition cuts
CRS highlights that Title I of the reconciliation law produced a net reduction of about $121 billion in federal outlays over 10 years. That total masks a sharp contrast: roughly $66 billion in increased spending for non-nutrition agriculture programs — including commodities, crop insurance, disaster assistance, and trade promotion — was more than offset by approximately $187 billion in reductions to SNAP and other nutrition provisions.
What reconciliation didn’t fix
Despite reauthorizing commodity programs through the 2031 crop year, CRS stresses that reconciliation did not extend the suspension of “permanent law,” the Depression-era statutes that could force the government to buy commodities at parity-based prices if modern programs lapse. Without congressional action, permanent law could begin affecting dairy as early as January 2027, creating severe market disruptions and multibillion-dollar costs.
CRS also points out that many mandatory programs — including conservation, trade, specialty crops, organic research, and animal health — still face expired or expiring authorities even if funding baselines exist. Meanwhile, discretionary programs across rural development, research, forestry, energy, and horticulture remain unaddressed entirely.
Bottom Line: CRS concludes that the FY 2025 reconciliation law effectively front-loaded farm safety-net gains — especially through higher reference prices and modest crop insurance boosts — while postponing harder structural and authorization questions. The result is growing pressure for Congress to pursue a follow-up “skinny farm bill” or broader reauthorization to extend expiring authorities, address crop insurance policy gaps, and prevent a reversion to permanent law.
| HPAI/BIRD FLU |
— HPAI expands in commercial poultry across more states
USDA tallies nearly 900,000 birds affected nationwide over the past month as new broiler and breeder cases are confirmed
USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has confirmed multiple new cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in commercial poultry operations across Arkansas, Maryland, and Kansas, underscoring the continued spread of the virus during late December.
APHIS reported HPAI in a commercial broiler breeder pullet flock in Cleveland County, Arkansas, involving 45,800 birds, with the initial detection dated Dec. 23.
Additional confirmations followed on Dec. 29, including a commercial broiler production flock in Queen Anne’s County, Maryland (96,200 birds) and another broiler breeder flock in Drew County, Arkansas (19,400 birds).
Separately, the agency confirmed HPAI in a commercial raised-for-release upland game bird flock in Jewell County, Kansas, affecting 13,100 birds.
According to APHIS, the virus has impacted approximately 870,000 birds in 75 flocks nationwide over the past 30 days, with 25 of those flocks classified as commercial operations, highlighting ongoing risks for the poultry sector as winter surveillance continues.
| ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY |
— Wednesday: Oil ends 2025 under pressure as oversupply trumps geopolitics
Despite wars, sanctions and tariff risks, rising output and resilient U.S. shale leave crude set for its steepest annual drop since 2020
Oil prices were little changed on Wednesday but are on track to post sharp losses for 2025, with Brent crude down nearly 18% and U.S. West Texas Intermediate headed for a roughly 19% annual decline — the weakest performance since the pandemic year of 2020.
Brent is also poised for a third consecutive yearly drop, its longest losing streak on record, as oversupply concerns outweighed persistent geopolitical risks.
The year was marked by major disruptions and tensions, including sanctions on Russia, Iran and Venezuela, the war in Ukraine, drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, a brief Iran/Israel conflict that threatened shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, and renewed instability involving Yemen. More recently, the Trump administration ordered a blockade on Venezuelan oil exports and warned of further action against Iran. Yet these shocks failed to sustain higher prices.
Instead, markets cooled as OPEC+ accelerated output increases, adding about 2.9 million barrels per day since April, while worries grew that higher U.S. tariffs would weigh on global growth and fuel demand. Most analysts now expect supply to exceed demand in 2026, with surplus estimates ranging from roughly 2 million to nearly 4 million barrels per day.
Inventory data added to the pressure, with U.S. crude and fuel stocks rising last week, according to industry estimates. Still, some analysts caution against writing off geopolitical risk. While fundamentals point to oversupply, renewed conflict or deeper OPEC+ cuts — if prices fall into the low $50s — could yet provide support heading into 2026.
— Tuesday: Oil prices steady as geopolitical risks offset oversupply concerns
Crude markets consolidate after sharp gains, with Middle East tensions and Russia/Ukraine uncertainty providing support even as surplus expectations cap upside.
Oil prices were little changed following a volatile session, as traders weighed fading hopes for a near-term peace deal between Russia and Ukraine against rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. Brent crude for February delivery edged down slightly to $61.92 per barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate settled at $57.95.
The market paused after strong gains the previous session, when both benchmarks jumped more than 2% on heightened tensions tied to Saudi Arabia airstrikes in Yemen and renewed friction between Moscow and Kyiv. Russia’s accusation that Ukraine targeted a presidential residence further complicated diplomatic efforts, reinforcing skepticism that a peace agreement is imminent. While Russian crude flows have not yet been materially disrupted, the drawn-out negotiations continue to add a modest geopolitical risk premium to prices.
Additional support came from supply-side frictions elsewhere, including ongoing limits on Venezuela’s oil exports and a temporary suspension of Caspian CPC Blend shipments due to adverse weather. These disruptions have helped cushion prices despite otherwise bearish fundamentals.
Focus also remained on the Middle East, where Saudi Arabia warned that its national security interests remain a red line amid continued strikes in southern Yemen, underscoring persistent regional instability even as the UAE signaled a drawdown of its remaining forces.
Still, analysts caution that the broader market remains structurally oversupplied. Expectations for rising global production relative to demand are likely to limit upside, with many forecasts calling for prices to trend lower into early 2026 as surplus conditions intensify.
| TRADE POLICY |
— Opinion: U.S./Canada dairy dispute is about quota mechanics, not scrapping supply management
As USMCA (CUSMA in Canadian parlance) review talks near, the real fight centers on how Canada administers dairy tariff-rate quotas — not the survival of its supply-management system
In an opinion piece (link), Shaun Haney, founder of RealAgriculture.com and host of RealAg Radio, argues that Canadian debate around U.S. dairy demands ahead of the 2026 USMCA/CUSMA review has become overheated and misdirected.
Haney contends that while dairy market access predictably appears on Washington’s list of trade grievances, the U.S. is not seeking to dismantle Canada’s supply-management system or dramatically expand quota volumes. Instead, the longstanding U.S. complaint — advanced by the dairy industry and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative — focuses narrowly on how Canada administers and allocates tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) under the agreement.
Of note: According to Haney, testimony and public comments from U.S. officials, including USTR filings and statements from Ambassador Jamieson Greer, have been consistent: the dispute is about quota allocation mechanics — who gets access, how quotas are distributed, and whether Canada’s system aligns with what the U.S. believes was negotiated under USMCA/CUSMA.
Haney acknowledges Canada’s dairy sector has resisted changes precisely because altering TRQ administration would increase U.S. exports, but he also notes that Canada’s approach has never been a secret and that creative TRQ administration is common globally. He points to U.S./Japan negotiations on rice as a relevant precedent, where Washington secured a larger share of existing quotas rather than expanded access, suggesting a similar outcome is likely for Canadian dairy.
The opinion criticizes Canadian media and political rhetoric for framing the issue as an existential threat to supply management, arguing this misrepresents the actual negotiating dynamics and complicates Canada’s position unnecessarily. Haney also cautions against conflating trade policy with campaign-style messaging from Donald Trump, urging readers to focus instead on formal USTR filings, hearings, and dispute-settlement language.
Looking ahead, Haney concludes that Canada is well positioned to accommodate U.S. demands on TRQ administration without jeopardizing supply management or the broader trade deal. With roughly $450 billion in exports and about three-quarters of Canada’s export business tied to the U.S., he characterizes dairy TRQs as a manageable irritant — especially compared with far more complex files like autos and forestry.
His Bottom Line: this is not a referendum on supply management’s survival, and treating it as such distracts from the real tradeoffs Canada faces in the upcoming USMCA/CUSMA review.
— Trade Adjustment Assistance for firms nears sunset as Congress weighs reauthorization
With new petitions barred since 2022, lawmakers face a decision on whether — and how — to revive TAAF amid shifting U.S. trade policy under the Trump administration.
The Congressional Research Service outlines the status and future considerations for the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF) program, a long-standing initiative created in 1962 to help U.S. firms harmed by import competition. Administered by the Commerce Department’s Economic Development Administration (EDA), TAAF provides technical assistance — rather than direct grants — through 11 regional Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers that help firms develop and implement recovery plans. Link to report.
Under sunset provisions enacted in the 2015 Trade Adjustment Assistance Reauthorization Act, EDA has been unable to accept new TAAF petitions since July 1, 2022. However, Congress has continued to appropriate funding — $13.5 million annually in FY 2024 and FY 2025 — to support “legacy” firms already certified before the cutoff. EDA has warned that continued appropriations through at least FY 2029 may be needed to fully wind down existing commitments.
Historically, Congress reauthorized TAAF alongside major trade-liberalization efforts, such as free trade agreements or renewal of Trade Promotion Authority. That linkage is now under scrutiny. The report notes that U.S. trade policy in 2025 has shifted away from tariff reduction toward industrial policy tools such as tariffs, quotas, and incentives to reshore manufacturing — raising questions about whether traditional Trade Adjustment Assistance programs remain relevant in their current form.
Data cited by CRS suggest TAAF participation has been associated with higher firm sales, though employment gains have been mixed. A Government Accountability Office evaluation found statistically significant sales increases among participating firms, and EDA reports that firms saw average sales rise 31% from certification to program completion, with employment recovering in the years after completion.
Looking ahead, CRS identifies several issues for Congress: whether to reauthorize TAAF at all; whether to streamline or consolidate it with other small-business programs; and whether to expand eligibility beyond import competition to include harms from retaliatory tariffs, technology shifts, or global supply-chain changes. Bills introduced in recent Congresses have explored these options, but no consensus has emerged.
| AG RESEARCH |
— USDA sets 2026 research agenda around profitability, bioenergy, and farm security
Rollins memo redirects federal ag R&D toward farmer income, market access, invasive species defense, and precision nutrition
USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins issued a new Secretary’s Memorandum establishing the Trump administration’s priorities for USDA-funded research and development in 2026, marking a sharp pivot toward farm profitability, national security, and market expansion.
The memo frames the shift as a response to what the department calls misdirected research efforts under the prior administration, arguing that an emphasis on DEI and environmental justice diluted focus on the core economic and production challenges facing U.S. farmers and ranchers. Rollins said the new agenda is designed to provide researchers with a “strategic roadmap” aligned with President Trump’s “Farmers First” approach.
Core 2026 research priorities
Boosting farm profitability.
USDA will prioritize research that directly improves producer margins, including technologies that reduce input costs, expand mechanization, and increase automation to manage volatility in farm income.
Expanding markets and new uses for U.S. commodities.
With record yields in several crops, the department wants R&D aimed at opening export markets and breaking down sanitary and phytosanitary trade barriers, while also accelerating development of new biobased products and bioenergy applications, including biofuels.
Defending U.S. agriculture from pests and disease.
Research targeting invasive species and animal and plant diseases is elevated as a national security concern, with specific reference to New World Screwworm, Spotted Lanternfly, highly pathogenic avian influenza, and citrus greening.
Soil health and long-term land productivity.
USDA will back research that improves soil health, water-use efficiency, and input reduction, positioning conservation as a productivity strategy rather than a regulatory mandate.
Human health, precision nutrition, and food quality.
The agenda calls for expanded research into precision nutrition and improving the nutritional quality of food, linking public health outcomes to stronger demand for U.S. agricultural products.
Big Picture: The memorandum signals a consolidation of USDA research dollars around applied outcomes — higher farm income, stronger export competitiveness, and biological risk management — while explicitly moving away from social-policy-driven research frameworks. For land-grant universities and USDA labs, the message is clear: future funding will hinge on demonstrable benefits to producers, consumers, and the resilience of the U.S. food system.
| FOOD POLICY & FOOD INDUSTRY |
— States move to restrict sugary foods under SNAP as Trump administration pushes nutrition overhaul
Beginning Jan. 1, five states will bar soda and candy purchases with SNAP benefits, with 13 more joining later in 2026 as USDA grants states new flexibility to curb “non-nutritious” items
Millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) will face new limits on what they can buy in 2026, as at least 18 states move to restrict purchases of soda, energy drinks, candy and other sugary items. The changes reflect a broader push by the Trump administration to reshape SNAP around nutrition and public health, according to USDA.
The first wave of restrictions takes effect Jan. 1 in Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah and West Virginia. Thirteen additional states will roll out changes throughout the year, stretching from February through October. While the exact rules vary by state, most prohibit the use of SNAP benefits for sweetened beverages and candy, with some states tying eligibility to whether items are subject to state sales tax.
USDA officials say the waivers are designed to “restore nutritional value” to the program and give states greater control over benefit design. The effort aligns with priorities championed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has argued that taxpayers should not subsidize foods that contribute to poor health outcomes, and USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, who has supported state-level flexibility.
Supporters say rising obesity rates and diet-related disease justify tighter rules.
Critics counter that the restrictions do little to make healthy food more affordable and could increase stigma, checkout confusion and hardship — particularly for unhoused or housing-insecure recipients who lack refrigeration or cooking facilities.
In terms of scale, about 1.4 million people across the first five states will be affected immediately in January, with roughly 13 million SNAP recipients seeing benefit changes across all 18 states by the end of 2026. SNAP served about 41 million Americans in 2024, underscoring the breadth of the policy shift.
2026 SNAP rollout timeline (high level):
• Jan. 1: Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah, West Virginia
• Feb.–Apr.: Idaho, Oklahoma, Louisiana; Colorado; Texas, Virginia, Florida
• July–Oct.: Arkansas, Tennessee; Hawaii, South Carolina; North Dakota; Missouri
The changes mark one of the most significant SNAP policy adjustments in years, reopening a long-running debate over whether nutrition standards — or purchasing freedom — should define the nation’s largest food assistance program.
| WEATHER |
— NWS outlook: Heavy lake-effect snow will be reinforced by an Alberta clipper heading into the new year along with the likelihood of snow squalls from the Ohio Valley to Pennsylvania and western New York… …Rain associated with an anomalous low pressure system from the tropical latitudes is forecast to bring the threat of flash flooding for southern California on New Year’s Eve into New Year’s Day… …Arctic air will be reinforced across the upper Midwest, Great Lakes and the Northeast while a quick warm-up emerges across the Great Plains.
