Farm Groups Confront USDA Secretary Rollins at Commodity Classic
Wholesale inflation picks up in January as core prices accelerate | China removes tariffs on Canadian canola meal and lobsters | Wheat futures jump as short-covering, weather risks and global crop concerns align | RVO/SRE debate moves to White House — biofuel markets brace for policy extremes
| LINKS |
Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Feb. 22
Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Feb. 22
| Updates: Policy/News/Markets, Feb. 27, 2026 |
| UP FRONT |
TOP STORIES
— USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins addresses farmers at 2026 Commodity Classic — Rollins used the Commodity Classic stage to push a USDA modernization agenda (“One Farmer, One File”) while acknowledging tight farm economics and pledging action to cut red tape and improve service delivery.
— Commodity groups press Rollins after Commodity Classic — Corn, soybean, wheat, and sorghum leaders privately pressed USDA for a stronger farm safety net, clearer trade direction, and faster economic/disaster relief, while warning modernization must reduce — not shift — paperwork burdens.
— China removes tariffs on Canadian canola meal and lobsters — Beijing’s rollback signals a targeted easing with Canada that could normalize canola-meal and seafood flows, support crush and feed-market dynamics, and hint at selective tariff relief tied to diplomacy.
— Lutnick meets Goyal in India as U.S./India trade deal faces tariff uncertainty — A high-level meeting kept momentum alive, but the interim pact remains slowed by post–Supreme Court tariff uncertainty as both sides wait for a clearer U.S. tariff framework.
— Importers ask Supreme Court to revisit Section 301 tariff expansion — The HMTX petition seeks to curb USTR’s ability to massively expand tariffs via “modification” authority, with major implications as the administration pivots toward new Section 301 actions.
— ITC launches dual probes on China trade status and biotechnology practices — The ITC will model the economic effects of revoking PNTR and separately examine China’s biotech support and pricing, building analytical groundwork for future trade and supply-chain actions.
— USDA moves to delay Biden-era poultry grower payment rule — USDA sent a delay proposal to OMB for the poultry contract-payment and capital-disclosure rule, signaling the Trump administration may pause, rewrite, or potentially unwind the regulation.
FINANCIAL MARKETS
— Equities today — Futures are modestly lower on mixed tech earnings, with attention turning to the delayed January PPI print as the key near-term inflation test for risk sentiment.
— Equities yesterday — U.S. stocks were mixed, with the Nasdaq lagging while the Dow was marginally higher and the S&P 500 slipped.
— Wholesale inflation picks up in January as core prices accelerate — Hotter PPI and especially core PPI reinforced expectations the Fed holds steady through at least mid-year, putting added weight on the next jobs report for the policy outlook.
AG MARKETS
— USDA daily export sale: 257,000 MT corn — A sizable corn sale to unknown destinations adds incremental demand support for the 2025/26 marketing year.
— Wheat futures jump as short-covering, weather risks and global crop concerns align — March wheat’s surge was driven by fund short-covering, amplified by U.S./Black Sea weather premiums and renewed concern that Indian heat could trim yields.
— Northern Brazil rains raise new soybean quality concerns — Persistent harvest-time moisture is raising downgrade risk and logistical friction, potentially shifting more beans toward domestic crush versus export channels.
— Cotton AWP rises again — A higher AWP further shrinks the effective LDP, limiting near-term support from that program channel.
— Agriculture markets yesterday — Most row-crop contracts were mixed, with wheat firmer and the livestock complex weaker on the day.
FARM POLICY
— USDA launches “One Farmer, One File” to streamline farm program access — USDA’s Palantir-backed effort aims to unify producer records across agencies, reduce duplicate paperwork, and modernize program delivery on a multi-year timeline.
— USDA reauthorizes Dairy Forward Pricing Program through 2026 — DFPP is extended as a risk-management option with no major structural changes, continuing forward contracting for Classes II–IV (not Class I).
— Farmdoc: Now would seem like a good time to think seriously about the CRP — Farmdoc daily argues CRP modernization could function as a proactive “release valve” amid trade/legal volatility by reducing overproduction risk and stabilizing farm income dynamics.
HPAI/BIRD FLU
— Pennsylvania battles escalating avian influenza outbreak — Rapidly rising depopulations in Pennsylvania (and emergency action in Colorado) underscore intensifying operational and supply-chain strain as HPAI spreads.
ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY
— Friday: Oil prices jump as Iran nuclear talks extend — Crude rallied on geopolitical risk as talks continued, with markets pricing a meaningful risk premium despite signs diplomacy may persist.
— Thursday: Oil prices swing on Iran talks — Headline-driven volatility persisted, but gains were capped by bearish U.S. inventory data and expectations of potential OPEC+/Saudi supply responses.
— RVO/SRE debate moves to White House — biofuel markets brace for policy extremes — Uncertainty over RIN treatment, reallocation, and foreign feedstocks — plus likely litigation — is keeping soybean crush margins elevated as the market hedges a wide range of outcomes.
TRADE POLICY
— Crapo, Wyden revive specialty crop trade bill aimed at export barriers — The bipartisan CROP Act would sharpen USDA’s specialty-crop trade reporting to better identify foreign barriers and outline actions, signaling a push for more targeted market-access strategy.
WEATHER
— NWS outlook — A weekend snow band from the Northern High Plains to the Great Lakes and storms in the Southeast keep near-term U.S. weather risks in focus.
| TOP STORIES — USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins addresses farmers at 2026 Commodity ClassicRollins unveils major modernization initiative and pledges action on farm challenges At this week’s Commodity Classic in San Antonio, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins — in front of a record crowd of producers — laid out several key messages on the state of U.S. agriculture and the USDA’s priorities: • “One Farmer, One File” modernization. Rollins announced a new “One Farmer, One File” initiative designed to create a single, streamlined digital record for producers that works across USDA agencies, reducing repetitive paperwork and improving service delivery. She framed the effort as part of a broader USDA modernization push to make the department more efficient, customer-focused, and supportive of farmers and ranchers. (For details, see the Farm Program section below.) • Acknowledging farm economic pressures. Speaking to the challenges facing producers, Rollins noted sharply higher input costs in recent years — including significant increases in fuel, seed, fertilizer, labor, and interest expenses — and acknowledged farmers’ frustrations over profitability. • Broader priorities and engagement. Throughout the event, she emphasized USDA’s commitment to cutting red tape, improving customer service, and strengthening support for agriculture. Rollins also spent time on the floor meeting with producers and highlighting USDA efforts to ease administrative burdens and enhance program delivery (see next item). — Commodity groups press Rollins after Commodity ClassicBehind closed doors, farm leaders signaled urgency on farm bill support, trade certainty, and economic relief What producer told Rollins. After USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins’ remarks at this week’s Commodity Classic, leaders representing major commodity organizations met with USDA officials and used the opportunity to deliver a clear message: producers want stronger policy certainty as Congress prepares for farm bill decisions and as trade uncertainty continues to weigh on the farm economy. Farm groups met directly with Rollins following her remarks. Commodity Classic organizers and USDA officials confirmed that Rollins met with leaders representing corn, soybean, wheat, and sorghum producers after her public appearance. The meetings followed her speech outlining USDA modernization efforts — including the “One Farmer, One File” initiative — and discussions about economic and disaster relief delivery. While the tone remained mostly collaborative, industry leaders used the discussions to elevate concerns that have intensified across the sector amid tight margins and policy uncertainty. What farm groups were really signaling to USDA: 1) Farm bill support must remain strong. The clearest message from commodity groups was that USDA and lawmakers need to maintain — or strengthen — the farm safety net as Congress debates farm bill provisions. Groups emphasized:• Pressure from lower commodity prices and higher financing costs• Rising input expenses squeezing cash flow• The need for predictable support programs, including crop insurance and commodity programs “We’re now seven years removed from the last farm bill, and much of the information policymakers are working with is outdated while our cost structure has fundamentally changed,” said Jed Bower, president of the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) and an Ohio farmer. “We have to get something done — rural America cannot continue to be overlooked.” The underlying signal: producers want USDA aligned with Congress in protecting risk-management tools and avoiding cuts that could weaken farm balance sheets heading into another volatile marketing year. 2) Trade certainty is becoming a top priority. Commodity leaders also signaled concern that ongoing trade disputes, tariff shifts, and uncertainty around U.S. trade policy are creating planning challenges for growers. Behind the scenes, the message was clear:• Export markets remain essential for row-crop profitability• Policy shifts tied to tariffs or negotiations can quickly impact prices• USDA should continue pushing aggressively for market access and stable trade relationships This reflects broader concern that policy turbulence — even when aimed at broader economic goals — can translate directly into farm-gate volatility. 3) Economic strain is driving urgency. Farm groups underscored that current economic conditions are shaping producer sentiment:• Thin margins for many row-crop producers• Elevated interest rates increasing borrowing costs• Uncertainty around future revenue support Rollins acknowledged these pressures in her remarks, echoing industry concerns that the current farm economy remains challenging despite strong demand in some sectors. The Takeaway: commodity organizations want quicker execution of relief programs and clearer signals about USDA’s economic priorities. 4) USDA modernization — welcomed, but cautiously. While groups generally welcomed efforts like “One Farmer, One File,” the message to USDA was that modernization must improve service rather than create additional hurdles. Commodity leaders signaled that:• Technology changes should reduce paperwork — not shift burdens onto producers• Program delivery timelines remain critical during periods of financial stress• USDA staffing and regional service capacity still matter despite digitization efforts In short, efficiency gains are welcome — but support delivery remains the benchmark. The political subtext ahead of major decisions. Behind the policy discussions, commodity leaders were signaling several broader themes to USDA:• Farm bill negotiations are approaching a pressure point — and producer groups want USDA visibly aligned with maintaining a strong safety net.• Trade policy must consider farm impacts upfront, especially as new tariff or trade strategies emerge.• Economic relief and program delivery speed will shape producer confidence going into the 2026 crop year. The overall message was less about criticism of any single action and more about urgency — a reminder that farmers need predictability at a time when markets, policy, and global trade remain in flux. Bottom Line: Commodity groups used post-speech meetings with Secretary Rollins to send a clear signal: USDA must pair modernization efforts with tangible support on farm policy and trade stability. As farm bill negotiations advance and trade decisions continue to evolve, producer organizations are emphasizing that policy certainty — not just modernization — will be key to stabilizing the agricultural economy in the months ahead. The comments underscore a broader message emerging from Commodity Classic — growers are increasingly pressing Washington for updated farm policy while simultaneously demanding greater accountability and flexibility from agricultural suppliers as margins tighten across the sector. — China removes tariffs on Canadian canola meal and lobstersMove eases trade tensions and reopens key agricultural channels following high-level diplomacy China has agreed to eliminate tariffs on Canadian canola meal and lobsters, a move that signals a partial thaw in agricultural trade relations between the two countries and could help stabilize commodity flows that had been disrupted by political and trade frictions. The decision follows Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to China in January, which Bloomberg reported helped restart economic dialogue between the two sides. What changed. China’s decision to drop the tariffs removes a significant barrier that had reduced Canadian exports of canola meal — a key livestock feed ingredient — and seafood products such as lobster. The tariffs had added costs for Chinese importers and reduced competitiveness for Canadian suppliers, pushing some buyers toward alternative origins. For Canadian agriculture, the change is meaningful because:• Canola meal is a major value-added product from Canada’s oilseed sector, tied closely to crushing margins and feed demand.• Lobster exports represent a high-value seafood trade segment that is particularly sensitive to tariff policy and consumer prices.• Removing the duties could help normalize trade volumes and improve export revenue for producers and processors. Why this matters for agricultural markets. The move is being interpreted by analysts as a targeted easing rather than a broad reset in China-Canada trade relations. Still, it carries several market implications:• Oilseed balance sheet support: More consistent Canadian canola meal exports could support crush demand and processing margins.• Feed market shifts: Chinese buyers may rebalance feed rations, especially if canola meal becomes more price-competitive relative to soymeal alternatives.• Signal to global traders: The decision suggests Beijing is willing to selectively reduce trade frictions when diplomatic relations improve. Political and diplomatic context. The tariff rollback comes after Prime Minister Mark Carney’s January visit, which Bloomberg reported helped reduce tensions and reopen channels for economic cooperation. While broader strategic differences remain, both countries appear to be pursuing pragmatic steps aimed at stabilizing trade in specific sectors. For China, easing tariffs on agricultural imports also aligns with broader goals of diversifying feed and food supply chains while containing food inflation pressures. What to watch next. Market participants will be monitoring:• How quickly Chinese buyers return to Canadian supplies.• Whether canola meal export volumes recover to pre-tariff levels.• If additional agricultural products could see similar tariff relief.• Potential impacts on competing exporters in the oilseed and seafood markets. Bottom Line: The tariff removal represents a focused but meaningful easing of agricultural trade tensions — a development likely to benefit Canada’s canola processing and seafood sectors while offering China greater flexibility in feed and food sourcing. — Lutnick meets Goyal in India as U.S./India trade deal faces tariff uncertaintyHigh-level talks continue while both governments reassess strategy after U.S. Supreme Court tariff ruling U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick met with India’s Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal in New Delhi during an unannounced visit, signaling continued engagement between Washington and New Delhi even as uncertainty clouds a proposed interim trade agreement between the two countries. The meeting — which also included U.S. Ambassador to India Sergio Gor — came just days after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a major pillar of President Donald Trump’s tariff program, forcing both governments to reassess how a new U.S. tariff regime could affect the deal currently under negotiation. Talks continue but timeline slows. According to statements from Indian officials, the discussion focused on expanding economic ties, with Goyal describing the exchange as “very fruitful.” The U.S. Embassy in India echoed that tone, emphasizing the strong bilateral relationship and highlighting a long-term goal of reaching $500 billion in bilateral trade. However, behind the positive messaging, progress on the interim trade pact has slowed. A planned Indian delegation trip to Washington — intended to finalize language for the agreement — was postponed as both sides evaluate the implications of the Supreme Court ruling and evolving U.S. tariff policy. Indian officials have said negotiations will resume once there is clearer direction on U.S. tariffs, reflecting concern over the policy reset following the court’s decision. Tariff policy remains the key obstacle. The trade framework had contemplated a significant reduction in U.S. tariffs on Indian goods — reportedly from roughly 50% to about 18% — in exchange for Indian commitments to purchase more U.S. products. Some of the previous duties included penalties tied to India’s purchases of Russian oil. With the prior tariff structure invalidated, the U.S. is now moving toward a new system that initially sets global tariffs at around 10%, with the possibility of increases as the administration attempts to recreate elements of the earlier program under different legal authorities. That uncertainty has made it difficult for negotiators to lock in final terms. U.S. officials have indicated that only minor issues remain unresolved, but both governments appear cautious about signing a deal until the new tariff framework is more defined. Domestic political pressure grows in India. The developing agreement has also become politically sensitive in India. Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has criticized the government’s handling of the talks, calling for renegotiation and arguing that India should wait for greater clarity following the U.S. court ruling before advancing the pact. Outlook: The Lutnick–Goyal meeting suggests both sides still want the deal to move forward, but the near-term trajectory depends largely on how quickly the U.S. finalizes its revised tariff policy. Until then, negotiations are likely to remain in a holding pattern, with technical teams continuing to refine language while broader strategic questions remain unresolved. — Importers ask Supreme Court to revisit Section 301 tariff expansionHMTX petition challenges USTR’s authority to dramatically broaden China tariffs, as administration prepares new Section 301 actions following the Court’s recent IEEPA ruling Importers are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to step into a major trade dispute that could reshape how future administrations use tariff authority — just as the White House prepares a new round of Section 301 investigations following the Court’s recent ruling striking down tariffs imposed under emergency powers. Petition targets 2019 expansion of China tariffs. Plaintiffs in HMTX Industries et al. v. United States filed a petition for certiorari on Feb. 20 seeking reversal of an appellate ruling that upheld the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) 2019 decision to dramatically broaden tariffs on China. The case centers on USTR’s use of Section 307 of the Trade Act of 1974 to expand earlier Section 301 duties — moving from roughly $50 billion in covered Chinese imports to about $370 billion. Importers argue that this was not a simple adjustment but a sweeping escalation that exceeded congressional intent. Core legal argument: limits on “modification” authority. The dispute hinges on how broadly USTR may interpret Section 307, which allows the agency to “modify or terminate” existing trade actions. Importers contend Congress intended only limited or modest changes under this provision. They argue USTR effectively sidestepped the extensive procedural safeguards required under Section 301 — including consultations, investigations, and formal findings — by using the more streamlined Section 307 process to massively expand tariffs after the fact. A Federal Circuit appeals panel rejected that argument last year, ruling that the term “modify” contains no inherent limit on the degree of change, thereby granting USTR substantial flexibility. Why the timing matters now. The petition arrives at a pivotal moment. The Supreme Court recently invalidated tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), and administration officials have since signaled plans to rely more heavily on Section 301 to reconstruct similar tariff policies. USTR Jamieson Greer has said new Section 301 investigations are underway targeting “most major trading partners,” potentially setting up new country-specific tariffs designed to replace those struck down by the Court. Importers argue this makes their case urgent, warning that without Supreme Court intervention, USTR could use Section 307 as a loophole — initiating relatively narrow Section 301 tariffs and later expanding them dramatically with fewer procedural checks. Major questions doctrine back in play. The plaintiffs also rely on the “major questions doctrine,” which requires clear congressional authorization when executive agencies take actions with major economic or political consequences. They claim the tariff expansion was unprecedented and economically significant — asserting it broadened duties to cover virtually all trade with China and imposed large costs on the U.S. economy. The appeals court rejected that argument, saying Congress already granted USTR broad discretion under Section 301. But the issue remains unsettled given the Supreme Court’s recent split in the IEEPA ruling, where justices disagreed sharply over when the major questions doctrine applies — especially in trade and national security contexts. What’s next. The Supreme Court must now decide whether to hear the case. If the justices take it up, the decision could clarify:• How far USTR can go when “modifying” tariffs under Section 307• Whether streamlined procedures can be used for large-scale tariff expansions• How the major questions doctrine applies to trade policy and executive tariff authority The outcome could have major implications not just for China tariffs, but for any future effort by an administration to redesign trade policy using Section 301 investigations. — ITC launches dual probes on China trade status and biotechnology practicesInvestigations will assess economic impacts of revoking PNTR and examine Chinese state support in biotech sectors The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has opened two separate fact-finding investigations tied to China — one focused on the potential economic impact of revoking China’s permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) status, and another examining Chinese state support and pricing practices in the biotechnology sector. PNTR investigation: modeling trade and tariff impacts. The first probe, launched under Section 332(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, will evaluate how ending China’s PNTR status could affect the U.S. economy, domestic industries, and global product sourcing over a six-year period. The inquiry stems from guidance in a House Appropriations Committee report tied to legislation enacted in January. Lawmakers requested detailed analysis of how higher tariff rates — specifically the Column 2 duty rates under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule — would impact trade flows, production, and prices across industries most exposed to Chinese imports. Under current trade rules, countries with normal trade relations face lower “Column 1” duty rates, while countries without that status — such as Cuba, North Korea, Russia, and Belarus — face significantly higher “Column 2” tariffs. Lawmakers also asked the ITC to analyze an alternative scenario that phases in tariffs over five years on a subset of national-security-sensitive products. Because of the accelerated timeline, the ITC said it will not hold a public hearing for this investigation but will accept written comments through April 13. The final report is expected by Aug. 21, 2026. Biotechnology probe targets Chinese state support. In a separate Section 332 investigation, the ITC will examine how Chinese government support and pricing strategies in biotechnology may be affecting the competitiveness of U.S. firms. The investigation follows guidance from the Senate Appropriations Committee and will focus on sectors including:• Genomic sequencing• Synthetic biology• Active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) manufacturing The commission will assess whether state-backed pricing or industrial policies are shifting market share away from U.S. producers and service providers. A public hearing is scheduled for May 27, 2026, and the ITC expects to publish its findings by Jan. 22, 2027. Why it matters. These probes do not create immediate policy changes, but they often serve as analytical foundations for future congressional or administration trade actions. The PNTR study could shape debate around tariff restructuring and broader U.S.–China trade policy, while the biotech investigation aligns with growing scrutiny of supply-chain security and strategic industries. Together, the investigations signal continued congressional interest in reassessing China’s role in U.S. trade and industrial competitiveness — particularly in sectors viewed as critical to economic and national security. — USDA moves to delay Biden-era poultry grower payment ruleProposed action sent to OMB suggests Trump administration may reconsider or rewrite the regulation USDA has sent a proposed rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that would delay implementation of the “Poultry Grower Payment Systems and Capital Improvement Systems” rule, which is currently scheduled to take effect July 1. The filing indicates the administration is seeking additional time, though no specific length for the delay has been announced. Background. The rule — finalized in the closing days of the Biden administration — requires live poultry dealers to ensure that grower payment systems do not unfairly disadvantage contract producers and mandates clearer disclosure requirements related to capital improvements requested of growers. The proposed delay comes as part of a broader regulatory review environment under the Trump administration, including a government-wide regulatory freeze that has affected late-term Biden rules. The pause would give USDA time to determine whether to modify the regulation or potentially withdraw it altogether. The move signals continued uncertainty for poultry growers and integrators, who have been preparing for potential compliance changes tied to payment formulas and investment disclosures. Industry observers say a delay would effectively reopen policy debates over how aggressively USDA should regulate poultry contract arrangements going forward. |
| FINANCIAL MARKETS |
— Equities today: U.S. equity futures are modestly lower following mixed technology earnings. Results showed some notable beats — including Dell and Autodesk — but these were offset by several misses, such as CrowdWorks and Intuit. Overall, earnings failed to ease concerns about AI-related disruption risks.
Overseas economic data was also mixed. Japanese retail sales came in stronger than expected, while industrial production disappointed. In Germany, both the unemployment rate and CPI matched forecasts.
Today’s focus shifts to inflation data with the delayed January PPI report due for release. Consensus expectations are for 0.3% month-over-month and 2.8% year-over-year. A softer-than-expected reading could help alleviate concerns about sticky inflation and provide support for risk assets.
In Asia, Japan +0.2%. Hong Kong +1%. China +0.4%. India -1.2%.
In Europe, at midday, London +0.4%. Paris -0.1%. Frankfurt +0.2%.
— Equities yesterday:
| Equity Index | Closing Price Feb. 26 | Point Difference from Feb. 25 | % Difference from Feb. 25 |
| Dow | 49,499.20 | +17.05 | +0.03% |
| Nasdaq | 22,878.38 | -273.69 | -1.18% |
| S&P 500 | 6,908.86 | -37.27 | -0.54% |
— Wholesale inflation picks up in January as core prices accelerate
Stronger PPI readings reinforce expectations for steady Fed policy through at least mid-year, with labor market data now the next key test
U.S. Producer Price Index — Final Demand (PPI-FD) data for January showed a 0.5% increase from December, coming in above December’s revised 0.4% gain. On an annual basis, wholesale inflation rose 2.9%, slightly below the 3.0% pace recorded the previous month.
The core reading — which excludes more volatile components — climbed 0.7% month over month, notably stronger than December’s 0.4% increase, pushing the annualized core rate to 4.2%, up sharply from 3.7% the prior month.
The firmer inflation figures further reinforced market expectations that the Federal Reserve will hold interest rates steady at the March 17–18 Federal Open Market Committee meeting, with investors also leaning toward no policy change through at least the June meeting.
Attention now shifts to the upcoming February employment report (March 6), which could play a pivotal role in shaping the next phase of the policy outlook. A stronger hiring pace compared with January would help ease labor-market concerns among investors and some Fed officials, potentially supporting the case for maintaining the current rate path.
| AG MARKETS |
— USDA daily export sale: 257,000 MT corn to unknown destinations for 2025/26
— Wheat futures jump as short-covering, weather risks and global crop concerns align
March wheat rises 14¢ as funds cover shorts, U.S. and Black Sea weather add risk premium — while heat threats to India’s crop strengthen bullish sentiment
March CBOT wheat futures climbed about 14 cents, driven primarily by aggressive short covering as traders exited large bearish positions, but the rally also reflected growing weather risk across several major production regions and rising unease about global supply prospects. Some analysts note U.S./Iran tensions for the rise in wheat futures.
Short-covering fuels the move. The biggest immediate catalyst behind the rally was positioning. Funds entered the session heavily net-short wheat, and once prices began to firm, short covering accelerated gains as traders bought back contracts to limit exposure. This type of mechanical buying often amplifies price moves beyond what fundamentals alone might justify, turning modest support factors into a sharper rally.
Weather premium builds in the U.S. and Black Sea. Weather also added support as markets monitor:
• Dryness in parts of the U.S. Plains heading toward spring green-up, raising early questions about yield potential.
• Continued uncertainty around the Black Sea region, where supply availability and farmer selling patterns remain uneven.
While no major crop losses have been confirmed, futures markets tend to price in risk before damage becomes clear, adding a modest weather premium.
India heat risk adds global support. Concerns about the Indian wheat crop also helped underpin sentiment. India — the world’s second-largest wheat producer — is forecast to experience an unusually warm March, with above-average temperatures expected in key wheat-growing states during the critical grain-filling phase. Weather officials have warned that sustained heat could trim yields if forecasts verify.
India is not consistently a major wheat exporter, but its size means production shortfalls can still influence global balances. Traders remember that heat-related crop losses in past seasons led India to restrict exports, tightening global availability and supporting world prices.
At this stage, India’s weather concerns are viewed as a supportive secondary factor, not the primary driver of the rally — but they reinforce the idea that global supply risks may be rising rather than easing.
Technical momentum adds upside. Once wheat futures pushed through key resistance levels, momentum and algorithmic trading helped extend gains. The move reflected a broader shift from heavily bearish positioning toward more neutral risk exposure.
Market takeaway. The 14-cent jump appears to be less about a confirmed supply shortage and more about a repricing of risk:
• Fund short covering provided the immediate lift.
• U.S. and Black Sea weather worries added support.
• India’s heat outlook strengthened the global bullish narrative.
Traders will now watch Plains moisture forecasts, Black Sea export pace, and updates on India’s March temperatures to see whether the rally can build into a more sustained trend or fades once short covering subsides.
— Northern Brazil rains raise new soybean quality concerns
Excess moisture delays harvest pace and increases risks of quality downgrades in key producing regions
Heavy and persistent rains across northern Brazil are beginning to influence soybean quality, adding a new layer of market uncertainty just as harvest activity expands across the country’s main producing regions.
Weather impact on bean quality. Excessive moisture during harvest can reduce overall soybean quality by increasing the risk of:
• Mold and fungal development, especially when pods remain wet for extended periods.
• Higher moisture content, which can lead to storage and transport challenges if drying capacity is limited.
• Discoloration and damaged beans, potentially lowering grades and export premiums.
• Delayed harvest timing, raising the possibility of additional field losses or shattering.
Traders and agronomists closely watch northern areas because weather disruptions there can slow the early flow of beans into export channels and affect near-term supply availability.
Regional dynamics matter. While northern zones have seen repeated rainfall events, some central and southern regions have experienced more balanced conditions — meaning the national crop outlook is now increasingly dependent on regional harvest progress rather than one single weather narrative.
Key market considerations include:
• Whether prolonged rains lead to meaningful downgrades or remain isolated.
• The extent to which farmers can accelerate harvest between weather windows.
• Impacts on logistics, especially truck movement and port scheduling as volumes build.
Market implications. Quality issues do not always reduce overall production totals, but they can shift the value of the crop:
• More beans may be directed toward crush rather than export if quality slips.
• Exporters could face tighter supplies of higher-grade soybeans.
• Basis levels and spreads may respond if end users compete for higher-quality cargoes.
For futures markets, the situation is being monitored alongside South American weather elsewhere — particularly dryness in southern Brazil — creating a mixed signal environment where quality risk in the north and yield risk in the south are both influencing trade sentiment.
Bottom Line: Rains in northern Brazil are not yet viewed as a nationwide production threat, but they are introducing localized quality concerns that could influence export flows, basis structure, and short-term price volatility as harvest accelerates.
— Cotton AWP rises again. The Adjusted World Price (AWP) for cotton moved up to 51.84 cents per pound, effective today (Feb. 27), up from 50.05 cents per pound the prior week. The upward move in the LDP all but eliminates an LDP as the current rate would be just 0.16 cent per pound. The LDP level for 2025/26 production has so far been no higher than 2.61 cents per pound.
— Agriculture markets yesterday:
| Commodity | Contract Month | Closing Price Feb. 26 | Difference vs Feb. 25 |
| Corn | May | $4.43 1/2 | +1 1/2¢ |
| Soybeans | May | $11.63 1/2 | -1 1/2¢ |
| Soybean meal | May | $318.70 | -$0.90 |
| Soybean oil | May | 61.76 | +109 pts |
| SRW wheat | May | $5.74 1/2 | +4 3/4¢ |
| HRW wheat | May | $5.62 1/4 | -2¢ |
| Spring wheat | May | $5.98 3/4 | +1 3/4¢ |
| Cotton | May | 65.36¢ | -81 pts |
| Live cattle | April | $236.90 | -$3.375 |
| Feeder cattle | March | $361.65 | -$4.65 |
| Lean hogs | April | $95.725 | -47 1/2¢ |
| FARM POLICY |
— USDA launches “One Farmer, One File” to streamline farm program access
New USDA/Palantir partnership aims to unify producer records, reduce paperwork, and modernize agency program delivery
USDA is moving ahead with a major modernization effort designed to simplify how farmers interact with federal farm programs, announcing a partnership with Palantir Technologies under its “One Farmer, One File” initiative.
At the center of the effort is the creation of a single digital record that follows producers across USDA agencies — replacing the patchwork of legacy systems that currently operate independently. Farmers often work with multiple USDA offices, such as the Farm Service Agency (FSA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and Risk Management Agency (RMA), each of which has historically maintained separate records and requirements.
Why USDA says the change is needed. For years, producers and farm organizations have complained that differing data systems create duplicated paperwork and inconsistent program experiences. The new platform is intended to:
• Establish one unified producer record across USDA programs
• Reduce administrative and documentation burdens on farmers
• Improve efficiency and processing times for program enrollment
• Allow USDA staff to access consistent data across agencies
• Lower long-term federal IT costs by consolidating multiple systems
USDA began development work in 2025 and expects the program to accelerate during 2026, with a target completion date of 2028. The long timeline reflects the complexity of integrating decades of systems and data structures that were built separately over time.
What this means for farmers. If successful, the change could significantly alter how producers apply for conservation, disaster, commodity, or risk-management programs. Instead of repeatedly providing the same farm information at different offices, a single record would follow the producer through multiple programs and years.
Potential benefits include:
• Faster sign-up and approval processes
• Fewer duplicate reporting requirements
• Less back-and-forth between USDA offices
• Better coordination among programs tied to the same operation
For operations that use multiple programs — increasingly common as producers combine crop insurance, conservation incentives, and commodity support — the system could reduce administrative friction.
Bigger picture: USDA modernization push. The “One Farmer, One File” project fits into a broader USDA modernization effort aimed at improving service delivery while reducing costs tied to outdated technology platforms. Many USDA data systems date back decades and were developed independently by agencies with different missions, creating longstanding compatibility issues.
Partnering with Palantir signals USDA’s intent to move toward more integrated data infrastructure capable of handling large datasets and cross-agency workflows — something agency officials say is needed as farm programs become more complex and data-driven.
What to watch going forward
• Implementation milestones: USDA says progress will accelerate this year, with phased updates expected before final completion in 2028.
• Farmer onboarding: Early pilot programs will likely reveal how easily existing producer data can be migrated.
• Privacy and oversight questions: As with any large federal data initiative, stakeholders will watch how producer data is protected and governed.
• Program delivery impacts: Producers will be watching closely for whether promised efficiency gains translate into faster payments and reduced paperwork in practice.
Overall, USDA’s move reflects a long-requested attempt to fix one of producers’ biggest administrative headaches — navigating multiple agencies with multiple files — by building a single system intended to make participation in farm programs simpler and more consistent.
— USDA reauthorizes Dairy Forward Pricing Program through 2026
Updated rule extends contract authority while keeping program structure unchanged
USDA has issued a final rule reauthorizing the Dairy Forward Pricing Program (DFPP) under the 2026 appropriations and extensions legislation, allowing milk handlers to enter into new forward-pricing contracts through Sept. 30, 2026, with all contracts expiring no later than Sept. 30, 2029.
The update mainly extends the program’s timeline — USDA said all other provisions remain unchanged — giving dairy handlers and cooperatives continued flexibility to manage price risk in volatile milk markets.
Under the DFPP, milk handlers may negotiate prices directly with producers or cooperative associations for milk used in non-fluid classes (Classes II, III, and IV) rather than paying the minimum blend prices set under the Federal Milk Marketing Order (FMMO) system. The program is designed to provide producers with price certainty and more customized marketing arrangements.
Importantly, the rule maintains a key limitation: Class I (fluid) milk cannot be forward contracted under the DFPP, preserving the federal minimum pricing structure for beverage milk.
Overall, the reauthorization is viewed largely as a technical extension, ensuring the risk-management option remains available without changing how the program operates.
— Farmdoc: Now would seem like a good time to think seriously about the CRP
Farmdoc daily analysis argues trade turmoil and tariff uncertainty make CRP reform a key policy tool for stabilizing farm markets
In a Feb. 26 farmdoc daily policy analysis (link), author Jonathan Coppess, of the Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics at the University of Illinois, argues that recent trade and legal disruptions — particularly the Supreme Court’s decision striking down the Administration’s tariff actions under the International Economic Emergency Protection Act (IEEPA) — are creating conditions that could destabilize U.S. crop markets and pressure farm incomes.
Coppess contends that Congress should revisit and modernize the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) as a preventative tool to help farmers avoid a potential cycle of overproduction and falling prices in the wake of trade uncertainty.
Key takeaway: The article’s core argument is that CRP — originally designed both for conservation and commodity-market stabilization — could once again serve as a policy “release valve” by temporarily taking acres out of production or expanding flexible enrollment options during a volatile market period.
Why this discussion is happening now. Coppess links the policy debate directly to recent tariff turmoil. After the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose broad tariffs, market uncertainty increased, leaving farmers exposed to rapidly shifting trade conditions just ahead of planting decisions.
The analysis argues that:
• Trade disruption and legal uncertainty may encourage producers to maximize planting decisions individually.
• Historically, those individual choices can collectively lead to oversupplied markets and lower prices.
• Proactive policy steps, rather than emergency ad hoc payments later, could reduce long-term costs and economic damage.
CRP’s historical role — conservation and supply management. The article emphasizes that CRP, created in the 1985 Farm Bill, was not solely a conservation initiative. Congressional intent also included:
• reducing surplus commodity production,
• supporting farm income, and
• stabilizing markets through acreage reduction.
Enrollment caps have shifted over time — reaching as high as 45 million acres — demonstrating that Congress historically adjusted the program based on economic conditions.
Current limitations. According to the farmdoc daily analysis:
• The current CRP enrollment cap is approximately 27 million acres, near existing participation levels.
• Modern CRP acres are increasingly enrolled in partial-field conservation or grazing practices rather than fully idling land, reducing earlier concerns about broad production losses.
Coppess argues that this evolution weakens the rationale for strict acreage limits and suggests the program now functions more like a “working lands” conservation system.
Potential policy options suggested. The article outlines several relatively simple adjustments Congress could consider:
• Increase the overall CRP acreage cap
• Apply acreage caps only to whole-field enrollments
• Create separate enrollment limits for general vs. continuous practices
While these ideas could raise federal costs upfront, Coppess argues they may reduce future emergency spending and prevent deeper harm to farm communities if commodity prices collapse.
Legislative outlook. The piece notes that the pending Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 would reauthorize CRP but maintain the existing acreage cap, leaving little room for flexibility if markets deteriorate further.
Bottom Line: In this farmdoc daily column, Jonathan Coppess argues that policymakers are facing a narrow window to use CRP proactively rather than reactively. With trade policy uncertainty, potential tariff ripple effects, and planting decisions underway, the article frames CRP reform as a historically proven — yet politically challenging — strategy to prevent a repeat of past overproduction cycles and protect farm financial stability.
| HPAI/BIRD FLU |
— Pennsylvania battles escalating avian influenza outbreak
USDA reports millions of birds culled as state and federal teams mobilize; Colorado also declares emergency amid rising infections
Pennsylvania is facing one of its most severe avian influenza outbreaks to date, with USDA data showing another commercial flock infected this week, requiring the culling of approximately 160,000 birds. Over the past 30 days, at least 14 commercial flocks and eight backyard flocks have tested positive, leading to the depopulation of roughly 7.6 million birds, with the largest concentration of losses centered in Lancaster County.
State and federal authorities have escalated response efforts. Gov. Josh Shapiro has deployed additional resources, including at least 42 USDA employees, alongside 55 state veterinarians and staff, four Penn State Extension specialists, and members of the Pennsylvania National Guard to help contain the outbreak.
Industry leaders say the situation is straining producers and support networks. PennAg Industries Association Executive Vice President Chris Herr described recent weeks as among the most challenging of his nearly four-decade career.
Nationally, the pace of spread has accelerated. More than 10 million birds have been affected so far this year — a sharp increase compared with roughly 2 million birds impacted during the final two months of 2025 — underscoring growing pressure on poultry operations and supply chains.
Out West: Colorado declares emergency. Colorado is also grappling with a major outbreak, with more than one million birds affected. Lt. Gov. Dianne Primavera declared a state of emergency in Weld County to unlock additional resources aimed at slowing the spread and supporting containment efforts.
Overall, officials in multiple states are intensifying surveillance, biosecurity measures, and response staffing as avian influenza continues to pressure commercial poultry operations across the U.S.
| ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY |
— Friday: Oil prices jump as Iran nuclear talks extend
Geopolitical tension lifts crude nearly 3% amid supply-risk fears despite signs of diplomatic progress
Oil markets rallied sharply Friday, with crude prices rising roughly 3% as traders weighed the risk of potential supply disruptions tied to ongoing U.S.–Iran nuclear negotiations.
Brent crude rose $2.13 (+3%) to about $72.88 per barrel.
U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) climbed $2.31 (+3.5%) to roughly $67.52 per barrel.
Both benchmarks reached their highest levels since mid-2025 and were on track for modest weekly gains.
Geopolitical risk driving the market. Analysts said the move was largely driven by uncertainty around the outcome of renewed U.S.–Iran talks in Geneva. Markets briefly surged on reports that negotiations stalled over Washington’s demand for zero uranium enrichment, though prices later eased after mediators said progress had been made.
Traders remain focused on the possibility of military escalation if diplomacy fails. President Donald Trump previously warned that Iran must reach a deal quickly or face severe consequences.
Analysts estimate a $8–$10 per barrel “geopolitical risk premium” has already been priced into crude amid concerns about supply disruptions.
A key risk point is the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20% of global oil supply flows. Any conflict affecting that shipping route would have immediate global supply implications.
Talks to continue — but uncertainty remains. Negotiations will continue with technical-level discussions scheduled for next week in Vienna. Market analysts say this keeps both diplomatic resolution and escalation scenarios on the table, sustaining volatility.
Some analysts see renewed talks as a hopeful sign for avoiding conflict. Others warn that military risk has not been removed, keeping traders defensive.
Producers positioning for potential disruption. Supply-side responses are already emerging:
• Saudi Arabia is reportedly increasing oil production and exports to cushion potential supply shocks.
• OPEC+ is expected to consider a modest output increase of about 137,000 barrels per day at its upcoming March 1 meeting after previously pausing production hikes.
Market Takeaway: Friday’s rally reflects a classic geopolitical risk move — prices are being driven less by immediate supply shortages and more by uncertainty over whether diplomacy can prevent conflict. With negotiations ongoing and producers preparing contingency output increases, oil markets are likely to remain headline-driven in the near term.
— Thursday: Oil prices swing on Iran talks
Diplomacy headlines drive volatility as supply signals cap gains
Crude prices moved sharply as headlines from indirect U.S.–Iran talks in Geneva shifted sentiment. Oil climbed early after reports negotiations had stalled but later pared gains after Oman’s foreign minister said “significant progress” had been made and talks will continue, with technical discussions scheduled in Vienna next week.
Markets remain focused on geopolitical risk, with fears that failed talks could disrupt exports from Iran — OPEC’s third-largest producer — supporting prices. Analysts estimate up to $10 per barrel of risk premium may be built into current crude levels.
Gains were limited by bearish supply signals, including a 16-million-barrel jump in U.S. crude inventories reported by the Energy Information Administration. Saudi Arabia is also said to be preparing contingency plans to raise production if regional supplies are disrupted, while OPEC+ may consider higher output.
— RVO/SRE debate moves to White House — biofuel markets brace for policy extremes
Uncertainty over RIN allocation, foreign feedstocks, and legal risk keeps crush margins firm
The Renewable Volume Obligation (RVO) and Small Refinery Exemption (SRE) debate has moved to the center of the policy landscape after the EPA advanced key decisions to the White House, leaving markets trying to price in a wide range of possible outcomes. The resulting uncertainty has created what traders describe as a “policy spectrum” — with each endpoint carrying sharply different implications for biofuel demand, soybean oil usage, and crush economics.
At one extreme, the framework could assign no Renewable Identification Number (RIN) value to foreign feedstocks while forcing 100% reallocation of waived blending obligations onto larger refiners.
At the opposite end is a scenario with full RIN eligibility for imported feedstocks and little to no reallocation, which would significantly reduce compliance pressure and blunt demand signals for domestic biofuels.
Market chatter has recently centered on a possible compromise — roughly half RIN value for foreign feedstocks (as EPA initially proposed) paired with about 50% reallocation of exempted volumes. While that midpoint would soften the impact on both refiners and biofuel producers, traders say the lack of clarity continues to inject volatility into the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) complex. EPA’s proposed levels for biomass based biodiesel were a major increase from the level in place for 2025, contributing to the crush margin situation and the expectation for increased domestic demand for soybean oil in particular.
Legal risk slows implementation. Regardless of which policy path emerges, the program is expected to face immediate legal challenges. Lawsuits are already being discussed by industry stakeholders, a factor that could delay implementation and prolong market uncertainty. That legal overhang is important for commodity markets because it effectively freezes compliance expectations, forcing obligated parties and biofuel producers to hedge against multiple possible outcomes simultaneously.
This means the policy may not become operational anytime soon — extending the window in which markets trade on expectation rather than confirmed regulation.
Why crush margins stay elevated. The RVO/SRE debate is feeding directly into soybean complex pricing. Markets are increasingly pricing in stronger domestic demand for feedstocks as refiners and biofuel producers attempt to prepare for tighter compliance scenarios.
Several dynamics are reinforcing high crush margins:
• Policy-driven demand risk: If foreign feedstocks lose some or all RIN eligibility, demand could shift heavily toward U.S.-sourced soybean oil.
• Supply limitations: A full “no-RIN” outcome for foreign feedstocks would likely require more domestic oil than the current system can realistically produce in the short term.
• Compliance uncertainty: Refiners hedge by securing feedstock supply early, supporting soybean crush economics.
• Delayed implementation: Court action prolongs uncertainty, keeping risk premiums embedded in margins.
As a result, crushing incentives remain strong — and market expectations are increasingly leaning toward margins staying high and potentially widening if policy tightens around domestic feedstocks.
Market implications to watch:
• For refiners: Compliance costs and RIN exposure remain the central variable; reallocation percentages will determine the financial burden.
• For soybean markets: Any reduction in foreign feedstock eligibility would likely strengthen domestic crush demand and tighten soybean oil balances.
• For biofuel producers: A more restrictive framework could strengthen margins, but prolonged litigation may delay investment decisions.
• For policymakers: The balancing act remains politically delicate — supporting domestic agriculture and biofuels while limiting fuel price impacts and legal vulnerability.
Bottom Line: The RVO/SRE process has shifted from a routine regulatory update into a major market-moving catalyst. With policy outcomes ranging from minimal change to aggressive domestic preference — and a probable court fight ahead — traders are pricing in continued tightness in the soybean crush space. Unless clarity emerges quickly, elevated and potentially widening crush margins are likely to remain a defining feature of the market landscape.
| TRADE POLICY |
— Crapo, Wyden revive specialty crop trade bill aimed at export barriers
Bipartisan CROP Act would expand USDA reporting requirements to spotlight tariffs, non-tariff barriers, and planned trade actions
Senate Finance Committee leaders Mike Crapo (R-Id.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have reintroduced legislation designed to strengthen federal reporting on trade barriers facing U.S. specialty crop exporters. The measure — titled the Specialty Crops Reporting on Opportunities and Promotion (CROP) Act — would overhaul USDA’s annual Specialty Crops Trade Issues Report to focus more directly on foreign trade restrictions and the federal response.
Under the proposal, USDA’s report — mandated under the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 — would be expanded to include a detailed analysis of tariff and non-tariff barriers that hinder U.S. specialty crop exports, along with a description of actions the administration has taken or plans to take to resolve those obstacles. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative would be required to consult on the report, reinforcing its trade-policy relevance.
What counts as specialty crops. USDA defines specialty crops as fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and horticultural and nursery crops, including floriculture. For purposes of the trade report, wine has also been included in the category.
Lawmakers say these sectors face increasingly complex trade barriers — from tariffs and quotas to labeling rules and other regulatory hurdles — that can limit export opportunities.
Expanded reporting requirements. The bill would amend current law to require USDA and USTR to:
• Identify and analyze foreign acts, policies, and practices that significantly restrict U.S. specialty crop exports.
• Assess the economic impact of those barriers on U.S. competitiveness.
• Evaluate whether barriers violate international agreements involving the U.S.
• Include details on executive branch actions taken during the prior year — or anticipated — to remove or reduce those trade restrictions.
The proposal would also require public input and consultation with the Agricultural Trade Advisory Committee for Trade in Fruits and Vegetables, and make the report publicly available, while still allowing a classified annex if necessary.
Bipartisan support and co-sponsors. Beyond Crapo and Wyden, Senate co-sponsors include:
• Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
• Jim Risch (R-Id.)
• Susan Collins (R-Maine)
• Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.)
• Angus King (I-Maine)
A companion House measure was introduced by Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) and David Valadao (R-CA).
Lawmakers frame bill as response to mounting trade pressures. Crapo said the measure is intended to help producers respond to restrictive foreign policies, arguing that high tariffs and burdensome regulations overseas are limiting export growth for U.S. growers. Wyden emphasized the need for clearer identification of unfair trade practices and more defined plans to address them.
A summary of the bill highlights continuing U.S./China trade tensions and rising global competition as factors narrowing access to export markets. Lawmakers argue that stronger reporting and transparency could help diversify export opportunities beyond China and support rural economies reliant on specialty crops.
Industry groups back proposal. The bill has drawn support from commodity and specialty crop organizations, including:
• North American Blueberry Council
• National Potato Council
• Northwest Horticultural Council
Industry leaders say persistent tariff and non-tariff barriers are reducing competitiveness abroad and that improved federal reporting could better guide policy solutions and market-access strategies.
Bottom Line: The bipartisan CROP Act is not a direct trade enforcement measure, but lawmakers are positioning it as a framework tool — one aimed at improving transparency, sharpening trade strategy, and equipping Congress and the administration with clearer data to target export barriers affecting specialty crop growers.
| WEATHER |
— NWS outlook: A band of snow extending from the Northern High Plains to the Great Lakes on Saturday… …Showers and thunderstorms over the Southeast.
