Supreme Court’s End-of-Term Decisions Could Reshape Immigration, Regulation, Elections &Agriculture

USDA reorganization and FAS | Oil market swings from scarcity fears to glut warnings | USDA announces daily soybean export sale to China

Link: Fed Under Warsh Charts Uncharted Course: Price Stability
         Over Policy Signals
Link: Report: Surviving the Farm Economy Downturn in 2026

Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, June 14
Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, June 14

TOP STORIES

— Juneteenth holiday schedule: U.S. equity and bond markets face altered hours today, with federal offices closed Friday, causing delays to the CFTC Commitments of Traders report and other scheduled releases.

— Supreme Court end-of-term decisions could reshape immigration, regulation, elections and agriculture: High-stakes rulings expected before June’s end on birthright citizenship, pesticide liability (Roundup/Bayer), presidential authority over federal agencies, and election rules carry major implications for farm labor, crop protection, and the 2026 political landscape.

— China corn (and wheat) purchase rumors: is Beijing ready to follow through on ag commitments? Trade desk rumors of Chinese corn and wheat buying circulated Wednesday — potentially the first meaningful purchases under the $17 billion trade framework — but no USDA flash sale confirmation for corn has emerged yet; a soybean sale to China was confirmed.

— New World Screwworm cases stabilize as surveillance continues: Total confirmed U.S. cases hold at 12 while a second case moves to inactive status; no new infections, no fly-trap detections, and an FDA emergency use authorization expands treatment options, though officials stress continued vigilance.

U.S./IRAN PEACE DEAL

— U.S./Iran peace deal opens door to oil exports, sanctions relief and a new round of diplomacy: The MOU between Washington and Tehran — featuring Iranian commitments on the Strait of Hormuz and nuclear weapons, in exchange for sanctions relief and asset access — has sharply reduced oil prices and geopolitical risk premiums, though key details on verification, toll-free shipping beyond 60 days, and nuclear enforcement remain unresolved heading into Swiss negotiations.

RUSSIA/UKRAINE WAR

— Ukraine expands deep-strike campaign as massive drone attack disrupts Moscow: One of the war’s largest drone barrages targeted Moscow-area energy infrastructure and airports, canceling 170-plus Aeroflot flights and signaling Kyiv’s growing strategy of raising economic and psychological costs inside Russia.

— Russian strikes threaten Ukraine’s grain export engine: Escalating attacks on ports, railways, and energy infrastructure could cut Ukrainian grain exports by up to one-third, with Black Sea cargo potentially falling from 6 million to 4 million metric tons monthly, pressuring global wheat and corn markets.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

— Equities today: Markets traded mixed as easing geopolitical risk from the Iran deal collided with a more hawkish Fed under Kevin Warsh, who scrapped forward guidance; futures traders now see at least one rate hike this year, possibly by October. U.S. stock futures are higher.

— Equities yesterday: Major U.S. indexes fell sharply Wednesday — the Dow dropped 507 points (-0.98%), Nasdaq lost 355 points (-1.34%), and the S&P 500 fell 91 points (-1.21%) — following the Fed’s hawkish policy signals.

— Fed holds rates steady as Warsh signals new era at the Federal Reserve: The FOMC left rates at 3.50%–3.75% for a fourth straight meeting; new chairman Warsh eliminated much of the Fed’s forward guidance, launched institutional reviews of the dot plot and communications framework, and signaled inflation remains the top priority — sending yields higher and stocks lower.

AG MARKETS

— USDA daily export sales: USDA reported flash sales of 32,000 MT of soybeans to China, 285,775 MT of corn to Mexico, and 120,000 MT of soybeans to unknown destinations, all for 2026/27.

— U.S. sorghum, cotton sales to China: Weekly export sales for the week ended June 11 showed China buying 138,289 MT of sorghum, 2,269 MT of soybeans, and 11,426 running bales of upland cotton, along with modest beef and pork activity.

— Grain markets retreat as soy complex leads overnight weakness: Improved Corn Belt weather forecasts and lower energy prices weighed on overnight futures, with July soybeans down 7¾ cents, corn off 2½ cents, and soybean oil sliding 136 points on reduced biofuel demand expectations.

— International grain markets firm as wheat and palm oil gain: Paris milling wheat futures edged higher and Malaysian palm oil advanced, with Russian FOB wheat holding steady at $238/MT — still above U.S. Chicago futures — supporting a cautiously constructive tone heading into Northern Hemisphere harvest.

— Indonesia advances to B50 biodiesel, tightening global vegetable oil supplies: Indonesia’s planned July 1 launch of a 50% palm oil biodiesel mandate would deepen domestic palm oil consumption, cut diesel imports by an estimated $8.9 billion annually, and tighten global vegetable oil availability — supportive for soybean oil and oilseed markets worldwide.

— Wednesday: grain and livestock markets rally as trade talk rumors spark buying: Wheat led with gains of 16¾–18¾ cents, corn added 7¼ cents, cotton surged 189 points to a three-week high, and soybeans rose 2 cents on rumored Chinese interest and a confirmed 372,000 MT soybean export sale; livestock was mixed.

FERTILIZER

— BHP’s potash bet hits another snag as Jansen project takes $2.3 billion write-down: Cost overruns push Jansen Stage 2 to $6.9 billion (from $4.9 billion) and delay first production to late 2031, clouding BHP’s flagship diversification strategy — though incoming CEO Brandon Craig reaffirmed the mine’s long-term strategic value for global potash markets.

ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY
 

— Thursday: oil market reprices geopolitical risk as Iran deal eases supply fears: WTI fell below $75/barrel — down roughly 38% from April highs — as traders unwound the Middle East risk premium on expectations that Hormuz traffic and Gulf crude exports will normalize, though tight Cushing inventories (~20 million barrels) could limit further downside.

— Wednesday: oil market finds footing after sharp selloff: Brent crude recovered 59 cents to $79.55 and WTI gained 74 cents to $76.79 as Trump cautioned the Iran MOU remains unfinished and renewed Lebanon clashes kept geopolitical risk alive; a 10th consecutive week of U.S. crude inventory draws also lent support.

— Oil market swings from scarcity fears to glut warnings: The IEA now projects global oil supply could grow by ~8 million barrels/day through 2027 against demand growth of only ~2 million barrels/day, potentially creating one of the largest surpluses in years — a dramatic reversal from April’s historic supply-shock fears.

— Ethanol output eases, but industry remains on strong footing: Weekly production dipped slightly to 1.102 million barrels/day but remains historically strong; inventories held steady at 24.474 million barrels, while exports ran 15–32% above year-ago levels in recent weeks, supporting corn demand.

USDA REORGANIZATION

— USDA to move bulk of Foreign Agricultural Service workforce out of Washington: Hundreds of FAS employees are slated for relocation to Kansas City and Beltsville under the broader USDA reorganization, raising concerns about brain drain and trade capacity — echoing the ~85% attrition rate seen when ERS and NIFA were moved to Kansas City in 2019.

— Bipartisan push to halt USDA field office closures amid deep staffing cuts: Kansas Reps. Sharice Davids and Derek Schmidt plan to introduce the USDA Field Office Stability Act to bar closures of FSA, NRCS, and Rural Development offices and mandate minimum staffing levels, as Kansas alone has lost more than 500 USDA employees — roughly 32% of its state workforce — since last year.

LABOR & IMMIGRATION POLICY
 

— USDA opens H-2A program to dairy producers, marking significant labor policy shift: The Trump administration clarified that year-round dairy operations are now eligible for the H-2A agricultural guest worker visa — a major shift for an industry long excluded from the seasonal program — though questions remain about housing requirements, wage rates, and administrative costs for smaller operations.

CONGRESS

— Congress faces tight legislative window before 2026 elections: With only ~55–62 legislative days remaining before Election Day, the Farm Bill 2.0, year-round E15, farmer economic assistance, disaster aid, and FY2027 appropriations must compete for extremely limited floor time — with no guarantee any major agricultural priority clears before election politics take over.

PERSONNEL
 

— Gary Blumenthal retires after three decades leading World Perspectives: Blumenthal’s departure after 33 years as president closes a chapter built on founder Carole Brookins’ vision of connecting global policy, trade, and agricultural markets; Matt Herrington, who joined the firm in 2016, assumed the presidency in 2025 and will lead the firm forward.

WEATHER

— NWS outlook: Tropical Storm Arthur remnants threaten torrential rainfall and a High Risk of excessive rainfall along the central Gulf Coast Thursday; a strong frontal system brings heavy rain and severe weather from the Mid-Atlantic to New England; heat advisories and extreme heat warnings remain in effect across the southern Plains and Southeast.

— Midwest rains recharge crops but threaten wheat harvest progress: Successive storm systems are boosting soil moisture and easing heat stress across the Corn Belt — beneficial for corn and soybeans — while repeated rainfall events slow soft red winter wheat harvest and risk expanding harvest delays into hard red winter wheat regions over the next 10 days.
 

—U.S./Iran peace deal opens door to oil exports, sanctions relief and a new round of diplomacy

Preliminary agreement aims to stabilize energy markets while shifting focus to long-term nuclear negotiations

The release of the U.S./Iran memorandum of understanding (MOU) marks the most significant diplomatic breakthrough between the two countries in years and immediately alters the outlook for global energy markets, Middle East stability, and U.S. economic policy. While the agreement is only a framework and not a final settlement, it provides a roadmap that could restore Iranian oil exports, reduce geopolitical risk premiums in crude markets, and potentially reshape regional dynamics if the parties can convert the memorandum into a binding accord over the next 60 days.

At the center of the agreement is a straightforward exchange: Iran agrees to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and commit to not procuring or developing nuclear weapons, while the United States offers a path toward comprehensive sanctions relief, access to frozen Iranian assets, and the restoration of Iran’s ability to participate more fully in global energy markets.

The immediate market significance lies in the oil provisions. By allowing Iran to resume oil sales almost immediately, the agreement introduces the possibility of additional crude supplies reaching global markets much sooner than previously anticipated. Iran possesses some of the world’s largest oil and natural gas reserves, and even a partial return of its production and exports could materially increase global supplies over the next year. That prospect helps explain why oil prices have retreated sharply from the panic highs seen during recent military tensions in the region.

The agreement also reduces concerns over disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. Roughly one-fifth of globally traded petroleum moves through the waterway. During the recent conflict, traders built a substantial geopolitical premium into crude prices amid fears of shipping interruptions. Reopening the strait and establishing a framework to avoid future disruptions removes a major source of uncertainty for energy consumers and importing nations.

Analysts remain uncertain whether commercial shipping through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz will ever return to prewar volumes. A key question is whether Iran’s commitment to waive transit tolls for 60 days, as outlined in the memorandum of understanding, will become a permanent arrangement or expire once the initial period ends. President Trump sought to ease those concerns during the G7 summit on Monday, declaring that “the strait is going to be open toll-free. And it’s toll-free beyond the 60 days.” However, when questioned about that assertion during a Tuesday press conference, Trump acknowledged that any extension beyond the 60-day period is not explicitly included in the agreement, leaving the long-term fee structure for one of the world’s most important energy shipping lanes unresolved.

Already gas prices dropped below $4 a gallon for the first time since March. Link for details.

The proposed $300 billion reconstruction fund highlights the economic dimension of the deal. While President Trump emphasized that the United States would not directly finance the initiative, the fund signals an effort by international partners and private investors to encourage economic stabilization inside Iran. Whether such financing ultimately materializes remains uncertain, but its inclusion reflects recognition that long-term security agreements often require accompanying economic incentives.

For Iran, the most valuable component of the framework is likely the sanctions relief. Decades of U.S. and international sanctions have constrained investment, limited access to global financial systems, and sharply reduced the country’s energy revenues. The MOU’s promise to waive sanctions and unfreeze assets — provided Tehran complies with nuclear commitments — creates a powerful incentive for continued negotiations.

However, significant obstacles remain. The memorandum outlines broad principles rather than detailed enforcement mechanisms. Negotiators meeting in Switzerland will now have to address difficult questions regarding verification procedures, inspection regimes, compliance standards, and potential consequences if either side violates the agreement. History suggests these details often prove more challenging than the initial political breakthrough.

The nuclear provisions are expected to dominate the next phase of talks. While Iran’s pledge not to develop nuclear weapons is politically significant, U.S. officials and international observers will likely seek rigorous monitoring and verification measures before supporting permanent sanctions relief. Those discussions could become contentious and may determine whether the framework evolves into a durable settlement or collapses under competing interpretations.

President Trump’s comments about avoiding an economic crisis also reveal the domestic political calculations behind the agreement. Lower oil prices reduce inflationary pressure, ease transportation and energy costs, and support broader economic growth. With financial markets highly sensitive to geopolitical shocks, a reduction in Middle East tensions provides an economic benefit extending well beyond the energy sector.

The political optics are equally notable. Trump’s characteristic remark that Vice President JD Vance would receive blame if negotiations fail reflects both confidence and caution. The administration clearly views the framework as a potentially major foreign-policy achievement but recognizes that the most difficult phase of diplomacy is still ahead.

For agricultural markets, the agreement’s implications extend beyond crude oil. Lower energy prices typically reduce fuel, fertilizer, transportation, and production costs throughout the farm economy. Meanwhile, reduced geopolitical uncertainty can improve overall risk sentiment across commodity markets. However, any bearish effect from increased Iranian oil exports could be partially offset if negotiations falter and tensions reemerge.

Ultimately, the memorandum represents a starting point rather than a conclusion. The agreement delivers an immediate signal that both Washington and Tehran see economic and strategic advantages in de-escalation. Whether that momentum can survive the detailed negotiations ahead will determine if this framework becomes a historic diplomatic breakthrough or merely a temporary pause in a long-running confrontation. For now, energy markets are focusing on the prospect of additional oil supplies and a reopened Strait of Hormuz, while diplomats prepare for what could be the most consequential phase of U.S./Iran negotiations in decades.

—Ukraine expands deep-strike campaign as massive drone attack disrupts Moscow

Largest wave in years signals Kyiv’s growing ability to impose costs inside Russia

Ukraine launched one of its largest drone attacks on Moscow and central Russia since the war began, underscoring Kyiv’s increasingly sophisticated strategy of taking the conflict deep into Russian territory. The overnight operation reportedly targeted key energy infrastructure, including an oil refinery that had already been struck earlier this week, while forcing temporary shutdowns at four Moscow-area airports and causing major disruptions to Russia’s aviation network. Russia’s flagship carrier, Aeroflot, canceled more than 170 flights as authorities scrambled to respond to the attack.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy defended the operation as “a fully justified response to Russian strikes on our cities,” framing the attack as part of a broader effort to deter Russia’s continuing missile and drone assaults on Ukrainian civilian and energy infrastructure.

Russia claimed its air defenses intercepted 555 Ukrainian drones across multiple regions overnight. While Moscow frequently highlights interception totals, the fact that damage was again confirmed at an oil refinery suggests that even a relatively small percentage of drones penetrating Russian defenses can have significant economic and psychological effects.

A shift in Ukraine’s strategy. The latest strike highlights a major evolution in Ukraine’s military approach. Early in the war, Ukraine focused primarily on defending territory and attacking Russian forces near the front lines. Over the past two years, however, Kyiv has invested heavily in long-range drone technology capable of reaching hundreds of miles into Russia.

Rather than seeking battlefield breakthroughs alone, Ukraine is increasingly pursuing a strategy aimed at raising the economic and political costs of the war for Moscow. Energy facilities, refineries, fuel depots, military airfields, logistics hubs, and transportation networks have become regular targets.

The repeated targeting of the same refinery this week is notable. It suggests Ukraine is attempting not only to damage infrastructure but also to complicate repair efforts and force Russia to devote additional resources to defending critical facilities.

Pressure on Russia’s economy and transportation network. The aviation disruptions may prove as strategically important as the refinery strike itself. Moscow’s airports serve as a symbol of normalcy for Russian citizens and businesses. Repeated closures, flight delays, and cancellations create visible reminders that the war is no longer confined to distant battlefields.

While the physical damage from individual drone strikes is often limited compared to missile attacks, the cumulative effect can be substantial. Frequent airport closures increase costs for airlines, disrupt commerce, and force Russian authorities to maintain heightened security measures around major population centers.

For the Kremlin, protecting vast amounts of territory from low-cost drones presents a growing challenge. Air defense systems that might otherwise support military operations closer to the front are increasingly being used to protect cities, energy facilities, and transportation hubs deep inside Russia.

The energy dimension. Ukraine’s focus on refineries reflects a calculated effort to pressure one of Russia’s most important economic sectors. Oil exports remain a critical source of revenue for Moscow despite Western sanctions. Even temporary disruptions can increase operating costs, reduce refining capacity, and force Russia to divert resources toward repairs and additional security measures.

Although Russia remains a major energy exporter and individual refinery attacks are unlikely to significantly alter global oil supply, repeated strikes raise questions about the vulnerability of domestic energy infrastructure and the long-term costs of defending it.

Implications for the war. The attack comes as both sides continue to intensify long-range drone warfare. Russia has dramatically expanded its use of drones against Ukrainian cities, ports, and power infrastructure. Ukraine, lacking Russia’s missile inventory and larger air force, has increasingly relied on domestically produced drones as a relatively inexpensive way to strike strategic targets.

The broader trend suggests that the war is entering a new phase in which both countries are seeking to exhaust each other’s economic resilience as much as military capacity. Ukraine’s growing ability to reach Moscow and other high-value targets demonstrates technological progress and operational sophistication, but it is unlikely by itself to alter the battlefield balance.

Instead, these attacks appear designed to achieve three objectives: impose economic costs on Russia, force the diversion of air-defense assets away from the front lines, and demonstrate to both domestic and international audiences that Ukraine retains the ability to strike back despite Russia’s larger military and industrial base.

As drone technology continues to improve and production increases on both sides, long-range strikes against infrastructure, transportation networks, and energy facilities are likely to become an even more prominent feature of the conflict, extending the war’s effects far beyond the front lines and deeper into the daily lives of civilians in both countries.

—Equities today: Investors welcomed the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, but a more hawkish and uncertain Federal Reserve under Kevin Warsh is creating fresh uncertainty for stocks, bonds and currencies.

Global financial markets traded mixed Thursday as investors weighed two powerful and competing forces: easing geopolitical risk following the U.S./Iran agreement and rising expectations that the Federal Reserve may raise interest rates later this year. Futures traders this morning see at least one interest rate increase this year, possibly as early as October. Fed policymakers are moving to that view, too.

Wall Street futures moved higher after a difficult session Wednesday, when major U.S. equity indexes fell in response to the Federal Reserve’s latest policy signals. The Fed left its benchmark rate unchanged at 3.50%-3.75%, but policymakers’ updated projections showed growing support for at least one rate increase before year-end. Markets have now largely abandoned expectations for rate cuts in 2026 and as noted are increasingly pricing in a tightening move by October or December.

The shift reflects the arrival of Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh, whose first FOMC meeting marked a notable departure from recent Federal Reserve communication practices. Warsh removed much of the forward guidance investors had become accustomed to and emphasized that markets should rely more on economic data than on Fed signaling. That approach has injected additional uncertainty into interest-rate expectations and contributed to volatility across equities and fixed-income markets.

Meanwhile, investors are drawing optimism from the U.S/Iran memorandum of understanding that reopened the Strait of Hormuz and reduced concerns about a prolonged disruption to global energy supplies. Oil prices have fallen sharply from the highs reached during the conflict, helping ease inflation fears that had emerged when the waterway was effectively closed. Brent crude has retreated to its lowest levels since early March, providing a potential tailwind for consumers, transportation firms and other fuel-intensive industries.

The result is a market environment defined by crosscurrents. Lower oil prices and reduced geopolitical risk are supportive for global growth and corporate earnings, while the prospect of higher interest rates weighs on equity valuations and increases borrowing costs. European markets were generally weaker, reflecting declines in energy shares as crude prices fell, while technology-related sectors showed relative strength. The U.S. dollar remained firm as investors adjusted to the possibility of a more hawkish Fed trajectory.

For agriculture and commodity markets, the reopening of Hormuz carries broader implications beyond crude oil. The strait is a critical route for fertilizer, LNG and petrochemical shipments, and the easing of supply concerns could help moderate some of the inflationary pressures that had emerged during the conflict. However, if Warsh and the Fed follow through with additional tightening, higher interest rates could strengthen the dollar and create headwinds for U.S. exports, including agricultural commodities.

The market’s challenge now is determining which force proves more influential in the second half of the year: the disinflationary effects of falling energy prices or the Fed’s renewed focus on fighting inflation. For the moment, investors appear reluctant to make large directional bets until they gain greater clarity on both the durability of the U.S.-Iran agreement and the future path of U.S. monetary policy.

In Asia, Japan +1.7%. Hong Kong -1.6%. China -0.4%. India +0.3%.

In Europe, at midday, London -1%. Paris +0.1%. Frankfurt +0.2%.

—Equities yesterday: 

—Fed holds rates steady as Warsh signals new era at the Federal Reserve

New chairman scraps forward guidance, launches policy review, and leaves markets bracing for possible rate hikes

The Federal Reserve left its benchmark federal funds rate unchanged at 3.50% to 3.75% at Wednesday’s Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, marking the fourth consecutive policy pause and the first meeting chaired by Kevin Warsh since taking over as Fed chairman in May. While the rate decision itself was widely expected, the meeting represented a significant shift in how the central bank intends to communicate with financial markets going forward. Link to our special report on Wednesday. 

Warsh used his inaugural press conference to distance the Fed from the highly transparent approach that characterized much of the Bernanke, Yellen and Powell eras. He signaled that policymakers will provide less explicit guidance about future interest-rate moves and instead expect investors to form their own judgments based on incoming economic data. The chairman argued that excessive reliance on Fed forecasts can create a feedback loop in which markets focus more on deciphering Fed signals than on evaluating underlying economic conditions.

The policy statement reflected a central bank increasingly concerned about inflation. Consumer prices have accelerated in recent months, driven in part by energy-market disruptions tied to the Iran conflict and broader geopolitical uncertainties. While the Fed kept rates unchanged, policymakers made clear that inflation remains well above the central bank’s 2% target and that further tightening remains a possibility if price pressures fail to ease.

One of the meeting’s most notable developments came from the Fed’s updated interest-rate projections. The so-called “dot plot” showed a sharply more hawkish outlook than markets had expected. Roughly half of Fed officials now anticipate at least one rate increase before year-end, while only a minority foresee rate cuts. That shift helped push Treasury yields higher and strengthened the U.S. dollar as traders rapidly repriced expectations for monetary policy. Markets are now assigning growing odds to a rate increase as early as the fall.

Warsh also delivered a surprise by declining to submit his own economic projections for the dot plot. He has long criticized the forecasting exercise, arguing it creates a false sense of precision regarding future policy decisions. During the press conference, he announced the formation of a task force to review whether the dot plot should continue in its current form, a move that underscores his desire to rethink several longstanding Fed practices.

Beyond communications, Warsh unveiled a broader institutional review that could reshape the Federal Reserve over the coming year. Multiple task forces will examine the Fed’s communications framework, balance-sheet strategy, inflation measurement methods and use of alternative data sources. The chairman repeatedly emphasized that the Fed needs access to more timely information and suggested traditional economic indicators may not fully capture real-time economic conditions. He highlighted the potential role of artificial intelligence and private-sector data in future policymaking.

Perhaps the clearest message from the press conference was Warsh’s determination to re-establish the Fed’s anti-inflation credentials. He repeatedly stressed that restoring price stability remains the central bank’s top priority and argued that strong employment and low inflation are complementary rather than competing objectives. His comment that “inflation is a choice” was interpreted by many economists as a signal that the Fed is willing to tolerate slower growth if necessary to bring inflation back under control.

For financial markets, the meeting marked the beginning of what could be a less predictable Fed. Investors have grown accustomed to detailed guidance on future policy moves, but Warsh appears intent on returning to a more data-dependent and less transparent approach reminiscent of earlier Fed eras. The result was an immediate increase in market volatility, with stocks weakening, bond yields rising and traders reassessing the possibility that the next move in rates could be upward rather than downward.

For agriculture and commodity markets, the implications are significant. A more hawkish Fed generally supports the dollar and raises borrowing costs across the economy, both of which can weigh on export competitiveness and farm-sector financing. At the same time, Warsh’s emphasis on inflation suggests the Fed will remain highly sensitive to energy prices and broader commodity inflation stemming from geopolitical developments, particularly in the Middle East.

—USDA daily export sales: 

•32,000 MT soybeans to China for 2026/27

•285,775 MT corn to Mexico for 2026/27 
•120,000 MT soybeans to unknown destinations for 2026/27

—U.S. sorghum, cotton sales to China. USDA Export Sales data for the week ended June 11 included an uptick in activity for China with net sales of 138,289 MT of sorghum (20,014 MT new sales), 2,269 MT of soybeans (2,888 MT new sales), and 11,426 running bales of upland cotton (11,736 MT new sales). Activity for 2026 included net sales of 204 MT beef and 2,121 MT of pork (4,256 MT new sales).

—Grain markets retreat as soy complex leads overnight weakness

Improved weather outlook and energy pressure weigh on corn and soybeans

Grain futures traded lower overnight, led by a sharp decline in the soybean complex as traders continued to unwind weather premium and react to weakness in vegetable oil markets. The pullback comes after recent gains in corn and soybean futures and reflects growing confidence that much of the U.S. Corn Belt will receive favorable moisture and moderate temperatures during the critical pollination and reproductive development period.

July corn futures slipped 2 1/2 cents to $4.185 per bushel. While corn has found support in recent sessions from short-covering and concerns about isolated dry areas in parts of the western Corn Belt, forecasts calling for additional rainfall across key growing regions have reduced the urgency for weather-related buying. Recent storms delivered meaningful moisture to portions of Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, while forecasts continue to call for beneficial precipitation across Nebraska and surrounding areas. With crop conditions generally favorable and pollination still ahead, traders remain reluctant to push prices substantially higher absent a significant weather threat.

The soybean complex was the weakest sector overnight. July soybeans fell 7 3/4 cents to $11.2425 per bushel, while July soybean meal declined $2.20 to $302.60 per ton. July soybean oil dropped a sharp 136 points to 70.18 cents per pound, extending recent losses. Soybean oil continues to face pressure from declining crude oil values following the U.S.-Iran ceasefire agreement and expectations that additional Middle Eastern crude supplies could return to world markets. Lower energy prices reduce support for biofuel feedstocks, including soybean oil, which has been a major driver of soybean prices this year.

The soybean market is also undergoing a reassessment following recent speculation about Chinese interest in U.S. supplies. While rumors of Chinese purchases helped fuel rallies earlier this week, traders remain cautious given the ongoing uncertainty surrounding broader U.S.-China trade relations. Export demand remains a supportive factor, but the market appears to be waiting for confirmation of additional sales before extending gains.

Wheat futures were modestly lower after strong advances earlier in the week. July Chicago soft red winter wheat fell 2 3/4 cents to $6.10 per bushel, while July Kansas City hard red winter wheat eased 1 1/2 cents to $6.51 per bushel. Wheat continues to derive underlying support from concerns about Black Sea production risks and ongoing Russian attacks on Ukrainian transportation and export infrastructure. However, improving harvest progress in portions of the U.S. winter wheat belt and profit-taking after recent gains limited upside momentum overnight.

From a broader market perspective, grain traders are balancing supportive demand and geopolitical developments against generally favorable U.S. crop conditions. Corn remains heavily dependent on summer weather, while soybeans continue to track movements in the energy sector and biofuel policy expectations. Unless forecasts turn hotter and drier across major production areas, the market may struggle to sustain significant rallies in the near term. Even so, tight global wheat supplies, uncertainty surrounding Black Sea exports, and the potential for renewed Chinese buying interest suggest downside risks remain somewhat limited despite the weaker overnight tone.

—International grain markets firm as wheat and palm oil gain

Black Sea competition remains intense, but weather and vegoil strength offer support

International grain markets were modestly firmer Thursday, led by gains in European wheat futures and stronger palm oil values, while Black Sea wheat prices remained steady. The combination points to a market that is finding underlying support despite generally favorable Northern Hemisphere crop prospects and aggressive export competition from Russia.

Paris September milling wheat futures traded €0.50 higher at €204.00 per metric ton. Using current exchange rates, that equates to roughly $235 per metric ton, or about $6.39 per bushel on a U.S. soft red winter wheat equivalent basis. The gain keeps MATIF wheat near recent lows but suggests selling pressure has eased following concerns about excessive moisture in parts of Western Europe and harvest delays in several producing regions.

Russian 12.5% protein wheat FOB for July shipment was unchanged at $238 per metric ton, maintaining Russia’s position as one of the world’s most competitive wheat suppliers. The relatively narrow spread between French wheat values and Russian export offers continues to challenge European exporters, particularly into North African and Middle Eastern destinations. Russian pricing has remained remarkably stable despite ongoing geopolitical uncertainty and logistical concerns in the Black Sea region.

Malaysian August palm oil futures closed 5 ringgits higher at 4,544 ringgits per metric ton, equivalent to approximately $1,070 per metric ton. The advance is supportive for the broader vegetable oil complex, including soybean oil. Continued concerns about weather-related production issues in parts of Southeast Asia and uncertainty surrounding India’s monsoon progress have helped underpin global vegetable oil markets. Strong palm oil values often improve the competitiveness of soybean oil and can indirectly support soybean crush margins worldwide.

From a U.S. perspective, international wheat values remain generally supportive. Russian wheat at $238 per metric ton translates to roughly $6.48 per bushel, while French wheat near $235 per metric ton equates to about $6.39 per bushel. Both remain above nearby Chicago wheat futures, indicating that world cash markets are still carrying a premium to U.S. futures values and helping limit downside pressure on U.S. wheat prices.

The broader market focus remains on Northern Hemisphere harvest results, weather developments across Europe and the Black Sea region, and demand from major importers. While global wheat supplies appear adequate, there is little evidence of burdensome stocks among key exporters, and any weather-related production concerns could quickly tighten available exportable supplies. For now, steady Russian prices, firmer European futures, and stronger vegetable oil markets suggest international agricultural markets are maintaining a cautiously constructive tone heading into the heart of the Northern Hemisphere harvest season.

—Indonesia advances to B50 biodiesel, tightening global vegetable oil supplies

July 1 launch would deepen palm oil demand, cut diesel imports, and strengthen biofuel-driven support for global vegetable oil markets

Indonesia appears set to move ahead with its ambitious B50 biodiesel mandate on July 1, marking another major step in the country’s effort to reduce dependence on imported petroleum fuels while increasing domestic consumption of palm oil. Energy Minister Bahlil Lahadalia said government testing of the higher biodiesel blend has produced encouraging results and that implementation remains on schedule despite earlier concerns about financing and logistical challenges.

The transition from the current B40 blend to B50 will require diesel fuel sold domestically to contain 50% palm oil-based biodiesel. If successfully implemented nationwide, Indonesia would further solidify its position as the world’s most aggressive biofuel user among major vegetable oil producers. Officials estimate the program could save approximately 157.3 trillion rupiah ($8.9 billion) in fuel import costs annually, exceeding the savings generated under a full-year B40 program. The government also sees the initiative as a pathway toward sharply reducing imports of conventional diesel, particularly cetane-48 gasoil.

The significance of the move extends well beyond Indonesia’s energy sector. As the world’s largest producer and exporter of palm oil, Indonesia already consumes a substantial portion of its own production through biodiesel mandates. Each increase in blending requirements diverts additional palm oil away from export markets and into domestic fuel production, tightening global vegetable oil supplies. That dynamic has become increasingly important as governments worldwide pursue renewable fuel policies and low-carbon fuel standards.

The decision is especially noteworthy because Indonesia temporarily delayed the B50 rollout earlier this year amid concerns about subsidy costs and budget pressures. However, higher crude oil prices have improved the economics of biodiesel blending, reducing the subsidy burden required to support the mandate. Indonesia finances those subsidies through export levies on palm oil shipments, creating a self-funding mechanism that becomes more sustainable when energy prices remain elevated.

From a market perspective, the B50 launch is likely supportive for palm oil prices and could have ripple effects across competing vegetable oil markets, including soybean oil, canola oil, sunflower oil, and used cooking oil feedstocks. Global vegetable oil demand has increasingly become linked to biofuel production rather than food consumption alone, and Indonesia’s policy reinforces that trend. Every additional ton of palm oil consumed domestically for fuel reduces export availability and forces international buyers to seek alternative vegetable oils.

For U.S. agriculture, the implications are mixed but generally supportive for oilseed markets. Stronger palm oil demand tends to underpin global vegetable oil values, which can spill over into higher soybean oil prices. That is particularly relevant as U.S. policymakers continue to promote renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel production, both of which rely heavily on vegetable oil feedstocks. Higher global oilseed values can improve crushing margins and support soybean demand, although they may also increase feedstock costs for domestic biofuel producers.

The broader takeaway is that Indonesia’s move to B50 highlights how biofuel policies continue to reshape global agricultural markets. While grain markets remain heavily influenced by weather and trade flows, vegetable oil markets are increasingly driven by energy policy decisions. Indonesia’s planned July launch adds another layer of structural demand to an already tightening global vegetable oil balance sheet, reinforcing the long-term linkage between agricultural commodities and energy markets.

—Wednesday: Grain and livestock markets rally as trade talk rumors spark buying

Wheat, corn and cotton lead advance while traders eye possible new Chinese demand for U.S. crops

Agricultural futures posted broad gains Wednesday, led by wheat, corn and cotton, as traders engaged in aggressive short covering and bargain hunting while also circulating fresh rumors that China may be in the market for additional U.S. soybeans — and potentially U.S. corn. While no major Chinese purchases have been officially confirmed, the talk was enough to help underpin grain prices and extend a recovery that has been building over the past several sessions.

The stronger tone came despite largely favorable U.S. crop weather, suggesting that speculative funds may be becoming less comfortable maintaining large bearish positions after months of pressure across the grain complex.

Corn finds support despite nearly ideal weather. July corn futures closed up 7¼ cents at $4.21 per bushel, finishing near the session high as short covering accelerated throughout the day. Corn has struggled to gain traction recently amid expectations for another large U.S. crop, but traders appeared willing to step in at current price levels.

The market continues to wrestle with two competing forces. On one side is generally favorable weather across much of the Corn Belt, supporting expectations for strong yield potential. On the other is growing speculation that export demand could improve if China returns more aggressively to the U.S. market.

Rumors circulated Wednesday that Chinese buyers are evaluating U.S. corn purchases. While those reports remain unconfirmed with actual sales announcements, they come at a time when global corn supplies outside the United States face increasing weather concerns. Drought stress in parts of Europe and questions surrounding Black Sea production have encouraged some traders to reassess downside risk.

Even so, weather remains the dominant factor. Unless forecasts turn hotter or drier during the critical pollination period, rallies may continue to face resistance from expectations for a large U.S. harvest.

Soybeans extend three-day recovery. July soybeans gained 2 cents to close at $11.32, reaching a two-week high during the session. The market has now posted gains for three consecutive sessions, suggesting traders may be attempting to establish a near-term price floor.

Support came from USDA’s announcement of a daily export sale of 372,000 metric tons of U.S. soybeans to unknown destinations. Market participants immediately speculated the sale could ultimately be linked to China or another major Asian importer.

The rumors fit a broader narrative that U.S. soybeans have become increasingly competitive in world markets. Brazilian soybean values have strengthened in recent weeks, narrowing the price advantage that Brazil had enjoyed for much of the year.

Meanwhile, China’s soybean buying strategy remains a key question. Beijing has previously made substantial commitments to increase purchases of U.S. agricultural products, but Chinese importers have often timed purchases to maximize leverage during trade negotiations. Some traders believe Chinese buyers may prefer to wait for additional clarity on broader U.S./China trade discussions before making large-scale commitments.

Soybean product markets were mixed. July soybean meal closed unchanged at $304.80 per ton, while July soybean oil fell 138 points to 71.54 cents per pound and reached a six-week low. Weakness in soybean oil continues to reflect concerns about renewable fuel demand and broader vegetable oil competition.

Wheat stages technical breakout. The strongest performance among the grains came from wheat. July Chicago wheat rose 16¾ cents to $6.12¾, while July Kansas City wheat gained 18¾ cents to $6.52½. September Minneapolis spring wheat added 13¼ cents to close at $6.48¼.

The wheat market’s rally appears increasingly technical in nature, analysts noted. Recent price action has broken established downtrends on daily charts, encouraging fresh buying from momentum traders and forcing bearish traders to cover positions.

There are also fundamental concerns supporting wheat prices. Excessive rainfall continues to slow harvest activity across portions of the Southern Plains and Midwest, while drought concerns remain present in parts of Europe and other global producing regions.

Many analysts believe wheat may have established a seasonal low, with the market now beginning to focus more heavily on global production risks rather than harvest pressure.

Cotton bulls re-emerge. July cotton futures surged 189 points to 76.90 cents per pound, reaching a three-week high.

Cotton has been one of the more heavily sold agricultural markets in recent months, leaving the market vulnerable to sharp short-covering rallies. Wednesday’s advance reflected both technical buying and bargain hunting by traders who view current price levels as undervalued relative to longer-term demand prospects.

The move also reflected improving risk appetite across commodity markets following recent declines in energy prices and easing geopolitical tensions.

Livestock futures were mixed Wednesday. 

August live cattle slipped 35 cents to $248.85 after reaching a four-week high earlier in the session. The modest decline appeared to be little more than profit-taking following recent gains.

August feeder cattle managed to add 55 cents to $367.425, continuing to benefit from strong cash market fundamentals and historically tight cattle supplies.

The broader cattle market remains supported by limited herd expansion, strong beef demand and restricted feeder cattle availability.

Lean hog futures posted a stronger performance, with August hogs gaining $1.45 to $96.50. The rally was largely attributed to short covering after an extended decline.

Despite Wednesday’s gains, hog futures continue to display bearish chart patterns, and traders remain concerned about seasonal demand trends and ample pork supplies. However, the market appears increasingly vulnerable to additional corrective rebounds as speculative short positions have grown.

Market outlook: Wednesday’s gains reflected a market increasingly willing to look beyond favorable U.S. weather and focus on improving demand prospects. The combination of rumored Chinese interest, confirmed soybean export sales, weather concerns in competing producing regions and heavy speculative short positions provided fertile ground for a broad-based rally.

The key question moving forward is whether rumors of additional Chinese soybean and corn purchases evolve into confirmed sales. If they do, grain markets could find additional support at a time when many traders remain heavily positioned for lower prices. If not, favorable U.S. crop conditions may once again become the dominant influence and limit upside potential. For now, the technical picture has improved considerably, particularly in wheat and soybeans, suggesting the grain complex may be attempting to carve out seasonal lows heading into the heart of the summer growing season.

Agriculture markets yesterday:

Note: Soybean oil and cotton quoted in cents/lb; soybean oil change in points (0.01¢). Cattle/hogs in $/cwt.

—BHP’s potash bet hits another snag as Jansen project takes $2.3 billion write-down

Cost overruns and delays cloud a cornerstone diversification strategy as Mike Henry prepares to hand over the reins

Mining giant BHP has taken a fresh financial hit on its flagship Canadian potash project, announcing a $2.3 billion impairment charge after sharply increasing cost estimates for the second phase of its massive Jansen development in Saskatchewan. The write-down comes just weeks before Chief Executive Mike Henry steps down, making it one of the final major strategic developments of his six-year tenure. 

BHP said the cost of Jansen Stage 2 has climbed to $6.9 billion from the $4.9 billion approved in 2023, while first production has been pushed back to late fiscal 2031. The company attributed the increase to inflation, engineering modifications, lower-than-expected construction productivity, and higher labor and material requirements.

The announcement follows earlier cost increases at Jansen Stage 1, whose budget has already risen to about $8.4 billion — nearly 50% above the original estimate approved in 2021 — although that phase remains on track to begin production in mid-2027.

For agriculture and fertilizer markets, the development is significant because Jansen is expected to become one of the world’s largest potash operations. Once both stages are fully ramped up, BHP estimates the mine could account for roughly 10% of global potash production, making it a major competitor to established producers such as Nutrien and other Saskatchewan-based suppliers.

The setback is particularly notable because Jansen has been the centerpiece of Henry’s effort to reshape BHP beyond its traditional dependence on iron ore and coal. Since becoming CEO in 2020, Henry has argued that future demand growth would be driven by copper, potash, and other commodities linked to global population growth and the energy transition. Potash, a key ingredient in crop fertilizer, was viewed as a long-term growth market supported by rising food demand and limited high-quality reserves.

However, execution has proven difficult. The project has suffered repeated budget increases and scheduling delays since BHP accelerated development following the Russia/Ukraine conflict, when many analysts expected sustained disruptions to global fertilizer supplies and higher potash prices. Instead, increased exports from Russia and Belarus, softer fertilizer demand in some periods, and construction challenges in Saskatchewan have complicated the investment case.

From an agricultural perspective, the long-term implications remain important. North America already dominates global potash production, and BHP’s eventual entry could increase supply competition and potentially help moderate fertilizer costs over time. Yet the latest delay means that additional volumes from Jansen will arrive later than many market participants had anticipated, reducing any near-term impact on global potash availability.

Investors are likely to view the write-down as a reminder that large-scale mining projects remain vulnerable to inflation, labor shortages, and engineering complexity. Even so, BHP is continuing with Stage 2, signaling that management still believes the mine’s decades-long production potential outweighs the current cost overruns. Incoming CEO Brandon Craig has already indicated that Jansen remains a strategic asset capable of generating returns over a projected operating life that could exceed 60 years.

Looking ahead, the key question is whether BHP can finally stabilize costs and deliver the project on its revised timetable. For fertilizer markets, Jansen remains one of the most consequential new supply developments in the world. For BHP shareholders, however, the project has become a costly reminder that even the largest miners can struggle when entering a new commodity sector.

—Thursday: oil market reprices geopolitical risk as Iran deal eases supply fears

Strait of Hormuz reopening sparks sharp selloff, but tight inventories could limit further downside

WTI crude oil extended its steep decline Thursday, falling below $75 per barrel in early trading for the first time since early March as traders rapidly unwound the geopolitical risk premium that had been built into prices during the U.S./Iran conflict. December crude futures fell to nearly $70/barrel. Brent crude oil declined to around $78.30 The market’s focus has shifted from concerns about supply disruptions to the prospect of a significant increase in global oil availability if the agreement between Washington and Tehran holds and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz returns to normal.

The drop marks a dramatic reversal from April, when crude prices surged to four-month highs amid fears that military escalation could severely disrupt exports from the Persian Gulf. Since then, prices have fallen roughly 38%, underscoring how quickly energy markets can swing from shortage concerns to oversupply fears when geopolitical conditions change.

At the center of the market reaction is the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil transit chokepoint. Roughly one-fifth of global petroleum consumption typically moves through the narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to international markets. During the conflict, shipping disruptions removed significant volumes from global trade flows and raised concerns about prolonged shortages. Now, early evidence that commercial traffic is resuming has reassured traders that those barrels could return much sooner than expected.

President Trump said an interim agreement has been signed and that efforts are underway to fully reopen the shipping route. Reports of Saudi crude tankers, LNG carriers, and refined-product vessels departing Gulf ports have reinforced expectations that exports from the region are beginning to normalize.

The implications for global supply are substantial. If Hormuz remains open and security concerns continue to ease, major Gulf producers such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq could restore millions of barrels per day of production and exports that had been curtailed during the conflict. Combined with OPEC+ members already holding significant spare capacity, the market is beginning to contemplate a scenario in which supply growth outpaces demand growth later this year.

That prospect has renewed discussion of a potential oil surplus in 2027, a theme that only weeks ago appeared unlikely amid fears of a broader Middle East conflict. The speed of the shift highlights how geopolitical developments can overwhelm traditional supply-and-demand fundamentals in the short run.

Still, there are reasons to believe the price decline may encounter resistance. Physical inventories remain historically tight. Stocks at Cushing, Oklahoma — the delivery point for U.S. WTI futures — have fallen to approximately 20 million barrels, a level many analysts consider operationally low. U.S. commercial crude inventories have also been drawing down for several weeks, reflecting strong refinery demand and relatively restrained domestic production growth.

Those low inventory levels provide a cushion against further sharp declines because they leave the market vulnerable to any renewed supply disruptions or unexpected demand strength. In addition, questions remain about how quickly Iranian exports can increase, whether all parties will comply with the agreement, and how rapidly shipping activity can return to pre-conflict levels.

For now, however, the market’s message is clear: traders are betting that diplomacy will succeed where military confrontation threatened to create a prolonged supply shock. The result has been a rapid repricing of risk, with oil moving from a scarcity narrative toward one increasingly focused on the possibility of abundant supplies returning to the market. The next several weeks — particularly the pace of traffic through Hormuz and the progress of U.S./Iran negotiations—will determine whether crude stabilizes near current levels or continues its slide toward prices not seen since before the conflict began.

—Wednesday: oil market finds footing after sharp selloff

Traders reassess Iran deal risks as supply concerns continue to linger

Crude oil prices staged a modest recovery Wednesday after suffering steep losses in the previous two sessions, as traders began to question whether the recently announced U.S./Iran agreement will deliver a lasting resolution to tensions in the Middle East.

Brent crude futures settled up 59 cents at $79.55 per barrel, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) gained 74 cents to close at $76.79. The rebound followed a sharp selloff earlier in the week that had been driven by hopes the agreement would reduce geopolitical risk and ease concerns about disruptions to global energy supplies.

The market’s mood shifted after President Donald Trump cautioned that the memorandum of understanding with Iran remains unfinished and warned that military operations could resume if negotiations falter. Those remarks injected fresh uncertainty into expectations that the ceasefire framework would quickly stabilize the region and ensure uninterrupted traffic through the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz.

Additional support for oil prices came from renewed clashes in southern Lebanon between Israeli forces and Hezbollah, underscoring concerns that regional instability could persist even if Washington and Tehran make progress toward a broader settlement. While the proposed agreement reportedly includes measures aimed at reducing Hezbollah-related hostilities, traders remain skeptical that geopolitical risks have been fully removed from the market.

Fundamental supply data also lent support. The Energy Information Administration reported that U.S. crude inventories declined for a tenth consecutive week, extending a remarkable streak of stockpile drawdowns and leaving inventories at historically low levels. The continued decline suggests refinery demand remains strong and that supply disruptions tied to Middle East tensions are still influencing global balances.

The inventory data reinforce a key reality facing the market: even if geopolitical tensions ease, rebuilding depleted stocks and restoring normal supply chains will take time. Commercial inventories and strategic reserves have helped cushion the impact of reduced production and shipping disruptions, but replenishment efforts could take months.

Still, the broader outlook for oil remains less supportive. Earlier this week, the International Energy Agency warned that global oil markets could face a significant supply surplus in coming years as production growth from major producers outpaces demand gains. That longer-term forecast helped trigger the recent selloff and continues to limit the market’s upside potential.

For agriculture and the broader economy, the recent volatility highlights how quickly energy market sentiment can shift. Just days ago, traders were pricing in severe supply risks tied to Middle East conflict. Now attention is increasingly turning toward the possibility of expanding global production and an eventual rebuilding of inventories. The result is a market caught between near-term geopolitical uncertainty and a longer-term outlook that points to ample supplies and potentially lower prices ahead.

The key question for traders is whether the U.S./Iran agreement ultimately proves durable. If negotiations hold and energy flows normalize, oil prices could face renewed downward pressure. However, any signs of renewed conflict or disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz could quickly revive the geopolitical premium that has supported crude markets throughout the crisis.

—Oil market swings from scarcity fears to glut warnings

IEA says Middle East peace could unleash supply surge, underscoring how quickly the global energy outlook has changed

Recently, energy markets were gripped by fears of a prolonged supply crisis after disruptions in the Middle East and restrictions on traffic through the Strait of Hormuz triggered what the International Energy Agency (IEA) called the largest oil supply disruption in history. Now, following a tentative U.S./Iran peace framework and the gradual reopening of regional energy flows, the IEA is warning that the world could face an oil glut as early as next year.

The dramatic shift highlights how rapidly energy market sentiment can change. During the height of the conflict, traders worried about the loss of more than 14 million barrels per day of Middle Eastern production and exports, sending Brent crude as high as $126 per barrel. Today, Brent has retreated below $80 as attention shifts from supply shortages to the prospect of oversupply.

According to the IEA’s latest outlook, the agency expects a gradual recovery in oil flows through the remainder of 2026, followed by a much sharper rebound in production capacity in 2027. Global oil supply is projected to increase by roughly 8 million barrels per day over the next year, while demand is expected to grow by only about 2 million barrels per day. That imbalance could create one of the largest surpluses seen in years.

From energy panic to excess supply. The turnaround is remarkable given the prevailing narrative only a few months ago. Governments were releasing emergency oil reserves, refiners were scrambling for replacement supplies, and concerns about inflationary pressure from higher energy costs were dominating economic forecasts. The IEA warned at the time that the conflict represented the greatest threat to global energy security in modern history.

Now, the same agency sees the possibility of replenished inventories and excess production capacity if peace holds. OECD commercial oil stocks have fallen to historically low levels, and a future surplus would allow those inventories to be rebuilt.

Supply growth is coming from multiple sources. The potential glut is not solely an Iran story. The IEA notes that several major producers are positioned to increase output simultaneously. Saudi Arabia could rapidly restore production that was curtailed during the conflict, while the United Arab Emirates is pursuing aggressive expansion plans after leaving OPEC and could lift production above 5 million barrels per day in 2027. Meanwhile, production growth continues in the United States, Brazil, and Venezuela.

The UAE’s strategy is particularly noteworthy because it reflects a broader shift among some producers toward maximizing production capacity while long-term demand prospects become increasingly uncertain.

Demand questions remain. Global demand growth appears less robust than many producers anticipated. China — the world’s largest crude importer — has seen slowing oil consumption growth amid expanding electric vehicle adoption and broader economic adjustments. Japan’s imports have also weakened, while efficiency gains continue to reduce petroleum demand growth across many developed economies.

That demand backdrop is crucial. The IEA’s forecast suggests the market’s problem may shift from insufficient supply to insufficient consumption growth, especially if lower oil prices fail to stimulate a significant increase in demand.

Implications for agriculture and the broader economy. For agriculture, a sustained decline in energy prices would generally be viewed as positive. Lower crude oil prices tend to reduce diesel and transportation costs, ease inflation pressures, and can eventually lower some fertilizer production costs tied to natural gas and energy markets. Lower energy costs also help consumers, potentially supporting food demand.

However, cheaper oil can create headwinds for biofuel markets. If crude prices continue falling, ethanol and renewable diesel economics could face additional pressure, depending on policy support and feedstock values.

The broader economic implication is that one of the largest inflation risks of early 2026 may be fading faster than expected. Just as markets were preparing for a prolonged period of elevated energy costs, traders are now debating whether the next challenge will be managing excess supply.

That reversal serves as a reminder that energy markets often move from shortage fears to surplus concerns much faster than policymakers, producers, or investors anticipate. Only months after warnings of a historic supply shock, the conversation has shifted to whether the world is heading toward another period of abundant oil and downward pressure on prices.

—Ethanol output eases, but industry remains on strong footing

Stable inventories and resilient export demand continue to support corn-based fuel demand despite a modest production slowdown

U.S. ethanol production softened slightly during the week ended June 12, averaging 1.102 million barrels per day, down 0.5% from the prior week and 0.6% below the same week a year ago. While the decline suggests some moderation in plant operating rates, production remains historically strong and well above the 2026 EIA forecast average of roughly 1.07 million barrels per day. Ethanol inventories held steady at 24.474 million barrels, indicating that domestic demand and export movement continue to absorb available supplies.

The production pullback was concentrated in the Midwest, where output slipped from 1.049 million barrels per day to 1.041 million barrels per day. The Midwest remains the dominant ethanol-producing region and accounts for nearly 95% of total U.S. production.

From a corn demand perspective, the report is largely neutral to supportive. Production above 1.1 million barrels per day continues to imply strong corn grind rates, helping underpin USDA’s current outlook for ethanol use. The lack of a significant inventory build is also encouraging, as rising stocks often signal weakening fuel demand or slowing exports.

Exports remain an important factor for the market. Recent EIA data showed ethanol exports running well above year-earlier levels, with shipments rising sharply during late May and early June. Export volumes increased 32% in the week ended May 29 and were up another 15% in the week ended June 5, highlighting continued international demand for U.S. ethanol despite economic uncertainty and trade tensions in several regions.

That export strength is particularly important because domestic gasoline consumption growth has been relatively limited. Foreign buyers, including markets in Canada, the United Kingdom, South Korea and emerging Asian economies, have increasingly helped balance the U.S. ethanol market over the past several years.

The inventory number may be the most important figure in the report. At 24.474 million barrels, stocks remain comfortable but not burdensome. The absence of a weekly increase suggests that production and demand are largely in balance. Had exports slowed or gasoline blending weakened significantly, inventories likely would have risen given production levels above 1.1 million barrels per day.

Looking ahead, ethanol margins will remain sensitive to corn prices, gasoline demand, and export competitiveness. Lower crude oil prices following easing Middle East tensions could weigh somewhat on ethanol blending economics. However, strong export demand and steady domestic consumption continue to provide a cushion for the industry.

For corn producers, the latest data reinforce a familiar theme: ethanol demand is no longer expanding rapidly, but it remains a dependable source of consumption. Production levels above 1.1 million barrels per day and stable inventories suggest the sector continues to provide a solid foundation for corn demand as the market enters the heart of the summer driving season.

—USDA to move bulk of Foreign Agricultural Service workforce out of Washington

Relocation to Kansas City and Beltsville raises questions about trade operations and employee retention

USDA announced Wednesday that it plans to relocate much of the Washington, D.C.-based workforce of the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) to Kansas City, Missouri, and Beltsville, Maryland, as part of a broader departmental reorganization. While USDA said key trade policy and diplomatic functions will remain in the nation’s capital, the move could affect hundreds of employees and represents one of the most significant structural changes to the agency in decades.

According to USDA, some Washington-based employees will move to an “operational support hub” in Kansas City, while others will be reassigned to the George Washington Carver Center in Beltsville. The department said employees involved in agency leadership, trade policy, market-access negotiations, cooperator programs, congressional affairs and interagency engagement will continue to operate from Washington.

USDA emphasized that the FAS effort does not include any reduction in force and focuses entirely on domestic headquarters functions; no overseas staff or diplomatic posts are affected.

The FAS serves as USDA’s international arm, overseeing export promotion programs, agricultural trade negotiations, foreign market development efforts and a global network of agricultural attachés stationed at U.S. embassies around the world. The agency plays a critical role in supporting U.S. farm exports, which routinely exceed $170 billion annually.

While USDA did not disclose how many employees would be affected, public workforce data indicate that FAS employed roughly 739 people worldwide as of 2024, including about 615 employees based in the Washington metropolitan area. Because USDA described the relocation as affecting “much of” the Washington workforce, the move could potentially impact several hundred employees.

Part of a sweeping USDA reorganization. The FAS announcement is the latest phase of a sweeping USDA reorganization with a slated completion date at the end of the 2026 calendar year, launched by Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins’ July 24, 2025, reorganization memo. In total, the broader plan will see 2,600 employees shifted from the capital region into new regional hubs around the country — including Kansas City, Salt Lake City, Raleigh, N.C., Fort Collins, Colo., and Indianapolis.

USDA’s workforce has decreased from approximately 91,000 employees in FY 2025 to around 71,000 as of February 2026, and since January 2025, more than 24,600 USDA employees — local and D.C.-based — have left the department, with the highest percentage of departures occurring in the District of Columbia and Maryland.

The FAS move also follows other high-profile relocation actions. USDA previously announced it would move its U.S. Forest Service headquarters, and 260 employees, to Salt Lake City. The Food Safety and Inspection Service is sending two-thirds of its D.C.-area headquarters staff to a new National Food Safety Center in Urbandale, Iowa, and a Science Center in Athens, Georgia. ERS and NIFA employees are being sent to Kansas City for the second time in seven years, while the National Agricultural Statistics Service is moving some staff to St. Louis and other locations.

Congressional opposition and legal questions. The reorganization is proceeding over significant congressional and legal objections. The fiscal year 2026 appropriations law explicitly prohibited USDA from using appropriated funds to reorganize or relocate any offices or employees without prior notice and approval from Congress. Nevertheless, USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden — who in his previous role as USDA’s general counsel during the first Trump administration argued that the USDA secretary “has the requisite legal authority to relocate” employees — has pressed forward, with Democrats warning the matter may end up in court.

Negative sentiment. Of the tens of thousands of public comments submitted to the reorganization process, the overwhelming majority — 82% — expressed negative sentiment, with key themes including concerns over the loss of oversight and expertise, the reduction in personnel and resources, and closures and funding cuts for agricultural research.

USDA workers and some lawmakers have warned that the reorganization efforts could lead to a massive loss in institutional knowledge. “Breaking apart FAS is a foolish move that will decrease efficiency and lead to further brain drain from the agency,” said Collin Bradley, president of AFSCME Local 3976, the union that represents FAS workers. “We are already running on a skeleton crew, and this will make things worse.”

Déjà vu: warning signs from 2019. The announcement immediately revives memories of USDA’s controversial 2019 relocation of the Economic Research Service and National Institute of Food and Agriculture to Kansas City. That move resulted in about 85% of impacted employees quitting their jobs or retiring rather than relocating. Union officials warn a similar outcome is likely this time. An internal survey by AFGE Local 3403, which represents USDA researchers, found that 76% of its members have indicated they are not planning to relocate, and the union expects to see a “brain drain” within the department.

Adding a financial dimension to the retention concerns, USDA authorized agency heads in late May to use a “lump sum” payment model for moving costs rather than the traditional process of calculating individual employee expenses — a shift AFGE estimated could push $9,000 to $14,000 in moving costs onto employees relocating from D.C. to Kansas City, depending on household size and lease situation.

Implications for FAS. For FAS, workforce retention may prove especially important. Unlike many USDA agencies, FAS relies heavily on personnel with specialized expertise in international trade, foreign policy, market access issues, sanitary and phytosanitary regulations, export promotion and diplomatic engagement. The agency works closely with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, State Department, Commerce Department and foreign governments on issues ranging from tariff disputes to market-access barriers affecting U.S. agricultural exports.

The National Pork Producers Council, in comments submitted on the reorganization, raised concerns about not having USDA employees in Washington available to work with D.C.-based agriculture industry associations, as well as the ability of relocated employees to work directly with members of Congress, other federal agencies and foreign embassies on trade issues.

USDA appears to have recognized some of those concerns by keeping trade negotiators and policy officials in Washington. Maintaining those functions in close proximity to other federal agencies, Congress and foreign embassies should help preserve the agency’s ability to participate in trade negotiations and coordinate international policy.

However, separating operational staff from policy staff could present challenges. FAS traditionally relies on close coordination among analysts, program managers, overseas personnel and trade officials. Geographic dispersion could complicate communication and workflow, particularly if large numbers of experienced employees choose not to relocate.

The broader argument. Supporters of the reorganization contend that Kansas City has emerged as one of USDA’s major operational centers and offers significantly lower costs than Washington. Deputy Secretary Vaden has framed the moves in terms of quality of life and mission alignment, arguing: “When you combine shrinking budgets, the increasing cost of living in Washington, D.C., and the needs of a department that is focused not on urban America but rural America, it makes the most sense to get the largest number of our employees to places where they can have the quality of life that they deserve on a government salary.”

Critics, however, contend that agencies involved in international trade policy derive significant value from being located in Washington, where employees can interact regularly with policymakers, foreign diplomats, congressional staff and industry representatives. They also warn that relocation efforts often result in the loss of experienced personnel whose expertise can take years to replace.

The relocation announcement comes amid broader USDA restructuring efforts and a wider push by the administration to reduce the federal government’s concentration in Washington. It also arrives at a time when U.S. agriculture faces intense global competition from major exporters including Brazil, Argentina and the Black Sea region, making export market development and trade policy increasingly important for farm income.

Ultimately, the success of the move may depend less on where employees are located and more on whether USDA can retain the expertise that has made FAS one of the federal government’s most influential trade agencies. With approximately 615 employees currently based in the Washington region, the reorganization has the potential to reshape the agency’s operations for years to come and will be closely watched by farm groups, exporters and trading partners around the world.

—Bipartisan push to halt USDA field office closures amid deep staffing cuts

Kansas lawmakers seek to preserve rural access to USDA programs as workforce shrinks

A bipartisan pair of Kansas lawmakers is moving to shield local USDA offices from closure and ensure minimum staffing levels as the department continues to grapple with significant workforce reductions. Representatives Sharice Davids (D-KS-03) and Derek Schmidt (R-KS-02) plan to introduce the USDA Field Office Stability Act, legislation designed to prevent the loss of critical county-level agricultural services that many farmers and ranchers rely on for disaster assistance, conservation programs, farm loans, and technical support.

The bill comes as USDA faces one of the largest workforce contractions in recent memory. According to the lawmakers, Kansas has lost more than 500 USDA employees since last year — roughly 32% of the state’s USDA workforce — while nationwide more than 24,000 employees have departed since January 2025. The result has been growing concern that many local offices, particularly those staffed by only one or two employees, could become unable to function effectively or face consolidation.

Under the proposal, USDA would be prohibited from closing or relocating county and field offices operated by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Farm Service Agency, and USDA Rural Development, except in limited circumstances. Exceptions would include offices located within 20 miles of another USDA office or relocations within the same county. The legislation would also establish minimum staffing requirements to ensure offices remain open during normal business hours.

The measure reflects growing unease across farm country that USDA staffing reductions could impair the delivery of farm programs at a time when producers face heightened risks from weather, trade uncertainty, and animal disease threats. Local USDA offices serve as the primary point of contact for producers enrolling in conservation programs, applying for farm loans, reporting acreage, securing disaster assistance, and accessing technical expertise.

Supporters argue that staffing shortages are already affecting service delivery. Donn Teske, president of the Kansas Farmers Union, said county-level staffing shortages have hindered program implementation under multiple administrations and warned that cuts to FSA, NRCS, and other USDA agencies have weakened their ability to fulfill their mission. The organization opposes office downsizing, consolidation, relocation, and closures, while calling for increased funding, hiring, training, and compensation for USDA employees.

The timing of the legislation is particularly noteworthy given USDA’s current efforts to combat the spread of the New World Screwworm. The department recently approved more than $100 million in projects aimed at strengthening surveillance, sterile-fly production, and response capabilities. Critics of staffing cuts argue that reducing personnel at USDA offices while confronting emerging animal health threats creates operational vulnerabilities and could slow emergency response efforts.

Politically, the bill highlights a growing area of bipartisan agreement. While Congress remains divided over broader agricultural spending and the next farm bill, lawmakers from both parties have increasingly voiced concerns about USDA’s ability to administer programs efficiently following workforce reductions. Rural lawmakers, regardless of party affiliation, tend to hear directly from constituents when local service centers become understaffed or face closure.

The legislation’s prospects remain uncertain. Fiscal conservatives may question federal mandates requiring staffing minimums, while supporters will argue that maintaining local USDA infrastructure is essential to delivering congressionally authorized farm programs. The debate could also become intertwined with broader discussions over federal workforce reductions and agency reorganization efforts.

For agricultural producers, however, the issue is less ideological than practical. As farm programs grow more complex and weather-related disasters become more frequent, access to knowledgeable USDA personnel often determines how quickly farmers can secure assistance. The Davids-Schmidt proposal seeks to ensure that access remains available regardless of ongoing efforts to reduce the federal workforce.

If enacted, the measure would mark one of Congress’s most direct attempts to limit USDA’s flexibility in consolidating offices and reducing staffing levels, underscoring the importance many lawmakers place on maintaining a physical federal presence in rural America.

—USDA opens H-2A program to dairy producers, marking significant labor policy shift

Trump administration expands access to foreign agricultural workers for year-round dairy operations

The Trump administration has clarified that dairy producers are now eligible to utilize the H-2A agricultural guest worker program, a move that could significantly reshape labor management across one of the nation’s most labor-intensive agricultural sectors. Link to USDA release. 

The announcement addresses a longstanding point of contention for dairy producers, who historically have been largely excluded from the H-2A program because the visa was designed for temporary or seasonal agricultural work. Dairy farming, by contrast, requires year-round labor since cows must be milked and cared for every day regardless of season.

The clarification is being viewed by dairy groups as one of the most consequential labor policy developments for the industry in years. Labor shortages have become a chronic challenge for dairy operations, particularly in major producing states such as California, Wisconsin, Idaho, Texas, New York, and Michigan. Many farms have relied heavily on immigrant labor, often operating under uncertainty as immigration enforcement and labor regulations evolved.

The administration’s action appears to reflect a broader recognition that modern agriculture no longer fits neatly into the seasonal framework envisioned when the H-2A program was originally established. Dairy operations increasingly compete for workers with manufacturing, construction, warehousing, and service-sector employers, particularly in rural communities where labor pools are limited.

From an economic standpoint, the change could help stabilize labor availability at a time when dairy producers continue to face tight profit margins, elevated operating costs, and pressure from fluctuating milk prices. Labor is one of the largest expenses on dairy farms, and worker shortages can directly affect milk production, herd management, animal health, and overall productivity.

The move also comes as the broader agricultural sector continues to grapple with labor challenges. Growers and livestock producers have repeatedly argued that the U.S. immigration system does not adequately reflect the realities of modern agriculture, particularly for industries requiring year-round employees. Dairy, livestock feeding operations, poultry, and certain specialty crop sectors have long sought either reforms to H-2A or the creation of a separate year-round agricultural worker visa.

Supporters argue that expanding H-2A access could reduce labor uncertainty, improve compliance with labor laws, and provide a legal pathway for farms to secure workers. Industry groups have frequently noted that labor shortages can result in lost production, reduced herd expansion plans, and in some cases farm closures.

However, the policy is unlikely to end the debate over agricultural labor reform. Dairy organizations have generally supported broader legislative efforts that would create a permanent year-round visa category rather than relying on interpretations of an existing seasonal program.

Questions also remain regarding housing requirements, transportation obligations, wage rates, and administrative costs associated with H-2A participation. Many smaller dairy operations may still find the program expensive or cumbersome compared to their labor needs.

Politically, the decision reflects an effort by the administration to balance its tougher immigration enforcement posture with concerns from agricultural constituencies that depend on foreign-born labor. Agriculture groups have repeatedly warned policymakers that labor shortages pose risks not only to farm profitability but also to domestic food production and supply chain stability.

Looking ahead, the clarification could increase H-2A participation among dairy producers, particularly larger operations that have struggled to recruit domestic workers. It may also renew pressure on Congress to revisit broader agricultural labor legislation, an issue that has remained unresolved despite years of bipartisan negotiations. For the dairy industry, the administration’s decision represents a meaningful step toward addressing one of its most persistent operational challenges, even if it falls short of the comprehensive workforce reforms many producers continue to seek.

—Congress faces tight legislative window before 2026 elections

Farm Bill, E15, farmer aid, nominations and government funding compete for limited floor time

Congress returns from the Juneteenth holiday facing a remarkably compressed legislative calendar before lawmakers leave Washington for the final stretch of the 2026 midterm elections. Based on current House and Senate schedules, the Senate is expected to be in session for roughly 62 calendar days between June 18 and Election Day, while the House is scheduled for approximately 55 days. Those figures underscore a reality confronting congressional leaders: there is far more unfinished business than there are legislative days available to address it.

For agriculture, the limited calendar creates both urgency and uncertainty. Farm-state lawmakers have assembled a lengthy list of priorities, including a comprehensive Farm Bill 2.0 package, year-round nationwide E15 sales, additional economic assistance for struggling farmers, disaster aid provisions, animal health funding, and Fiscal Year 2027 appropriations bills. The challenge is that each of those items must compete for floor time alongside broader national priorities such as defense funding, tax issues, immigration, health care, and spending debates.

The Senate’s schedule illustrates the constraints. After the current work period, senators leave Washington from June 29 through July 10, return for a month-long legislative stretch, and then depart again for an extended August recess. Following a brief September work period, lawmakers are scheduled to adjourn in early October and remain away until after the election. The House calendar is even tighter, with a longer August district work period and a planned departure on Oct. 1.

Against that backdrop, Farm Bill 2.0 remains the centerpiece of the agricultural agenda. The current farm bill has been extended multiple times, and both parties acknowledge that producers need greater certainty regarding commodity programs, crop insurance, conservation initiatives, nutrition assistance and trade promotion programs.

The economic environment facing producers has intensified pressure for action. Corn, soybean, wheat  and other crop producers continue to confront a combination of lower commodity prices, elevated input costs and shrinking margins. Many agricultural groups argue that reference prices and safety-net programs no longer reflect current production realities.

Yet the prospects for passing a comprehensive Farm Bill 2.0 before Election Day remain uncertain. While congressional agriculture leaders continue negotiations, the bill’s cost, disagreements over nutrition spending, and broader budget pressures make a large package difficult to move quickly. As a result, lawmakers increasingly discuss a strategy that could combine targeted farm policy updates with additional producer assistance rather than attempting to complete every aspect of a full farm bill before Nov. 3.

Year-round E15 legislation is viewed as one of the more achievable agricultural priorities. The measure enjoys bipartisan support from many Midwestern lawmakers and strong backing from the ethanol industry. Advocates argue that allowing permanent nationwide summertime E15 sales would provide certainty for fuel retailers while creating additional demand for corn. Although E15 has repeatedly gained momentum only to stall amid competing legislative priorities, supporters see the limited pre-election calendar as a reason to attach the provision to a larger legislative vehicle rather than pursue it as a standalone measure.

Farmer economic assistance represents another issue gaining urgency. Farm groups continue pressing USDA and Congress for additional aid as commodity prices remain below profitable levels for many operations. Discussions include potential supplemental assistance for crop producers, expanded disaster programs and targeted relief tied to weather-related losses. While lawmakers from both parties recognize the financial pressures facing agriculture, the debate centers on how much assistance can be provided amid concerns about federal spending and deficits.

Disaster aid may ultimately prove politically easier than broader economic assistance. Large portions of farm country have experienced drought, flooding, hurricanes, wildfires and other weather-related losses over the past two years. Congressional leaders frequently find bipartisan support for disaster packages, particularly when they can be linked to broader emergency spending legislation. Agricultural groups are expected to continue pressing lawmakers to replenish disaster accounts and strengthen USDA response programs before the end of the year.

Perhaps the most immediate challenge is Fiscal Year 2027 appropriations. Congress must accelerate work on the annual spending bills that fund USDA and the rest of the federal government. The appropriations process is already complicated by ongoing debates over agency staffing, USDA reorganization efforts, conservation funding, nutrition programs and agricultural research budgets. If lawmakers fail to complete the bills before the fiscal year begins on Oct. 1, another continuing resolution becomes increasingly likely.

The appropriations debate will also serve as a vehicle for numerous agricultural policy riders. Issues such as E15, livestock disease response funding, biofuel policies, conservation spending and rural development programs could all become part of the broader government funding negotiations. Historically, when standalone legislation struggles to advance, appropriations packages often become the preferred route for moving agricultural priorities.

The political calendar further complicates matters. As Election Day approaches, lawmakers become increasingly reluctant to cast difficult votes that could become campaign issues. That dynamic typically favors bipartisan, narrowly focused measures while making large, controversial legislation harder to advance. Farm Bill negotiations, which involve both farm programs and nutrition assistance, often fall into the latter category.

Bottom line: Congress has roughly two months of meaningful legislative time remaining before election politics dominate the agenda. Whether lawmakers can use those limited days to advance Farm Bill 2.0, secure year-round E15, provide additional farmer assistance and complete appropriations work will determine whether agriculture enters 2027 with new policy certainty or faces another round of extensions, temporary fixes and unfinished business. For producers already navigating tight margins and uncertain markets, the next 55 to 62 legislative days may prove among the most consequential of the year.

—Gary Blumenthal retires after three decades leading World Perspectives

Retirement closes a chapter that began with founder Carole Brookins’ vision of connecting global policy, trade, and agricultural markets

The retirement of Gary Blumenthal after 33 years at World Perspectives marks a significant transition for one of Washington’s most influential agricultural trade and policy consulting firms. Blumenthal, who has served as president of the consulting firm since 1993, helped build on the foundation established by the firm’s founder, Carole Brookins, transforming World Perspectives into a respected source of analysis for agribusinesses, commodity organizations, policymakers, and international clients. 

The firm’s roots trace back to 1980, when Brookins left a successful career on Wall Street to launch World Perspectives in Washington. A pioneer for women in the financial sector, Brookins had risen to become vice president of E.F. Hutton’s commodity department before deciding there was a critical disconnect between policymakers and agricultural markets. She later explained that the Carter administration’s grain embargo against the Soviet Union exposed a major information gap between government officials and the grain trade, inspiring her to create a firm dedicated to bridging that divide.

From the outset, World Perspectives distinguished itself by taking a broader view of agriculture than traditional market advisory firms. Brookins emphasized that agricultural markets could not be understood solely through supply-and-demand statistics; they also required an understanding of trade policy, geopolitics, infrastructure, regulation, and economic development. That approach proved increasingly valuable as globalization accelerated during the 1980s and 1990s.

Brookins herself became a prominent figure in international economic policy. She served on numerous government advisory panels, was appointed by President George H.W. Bush to the President’s Export Council, and later represented the United States as executive director at the World Bank from 2001 to 2005. Throughout those roles, she maintained close ties to agriculture and international trade.

When Blumenthal joined World Perspectives and assumed leadership in 1993, he brought his own extensive government experience, having served in the George H.W. Bush White House, USDA, the Air Force, and on Capitol Hill. His background complemented Brookins’ vision, helping expand the firm’s influence during a period when agricultural trade was becoming increasingly global and politically complex.

Under Blumenthal’s leadership, World Perspectives guided clients through many of the defining developments in modern agricultural trade, including the implementation of NAFTA, China’s emergence as a dominant agricultural importer, multiple World Trade Organization negotiations, biofuels expansion, food security crises, and rising geopolitical competition.

The firm’s analysis became particularly valued for connecting political developments in Washington and foreign capitals with their practical implications for commodity markets and farm profitability.

A hallmark of both Brookins’ and Blumenthal’s leadership was the belief that agriculture is inseparable from broader economic and geopolitical forces. That philosophy has become even more relevant in recent years as trade disputes, supply chain disruptions, climate concerns, and national security considerations increasingly shape global food and agricultural markets.

The transition also represents a generational shift. Brookins, who died in 2020 after a distinguished career spanning Wall Street, international development, and global agriculture, built World Perspectives into a unique institution at the intersection of markets and policy. Blumenthal then spent more than three decades expanding that legacy and helping clients navigate an increasingly interconnected world.

World Perspectives is expected to continue operating under the leadership of Matt Herrington, who became president and assumed full leadership of the Washington-based consulting and market analysis firm in 2025. Herrington joined the company in 2016 and has overseen the expansion of its consulting operations while modernizing its daily analytical products. The transition reflects a succession plan that was already underway before Blumenthal’s retirement announcement.

Randy Russell of the Russell Group said: “I had the great pleasure of knowing and working with both Carole and Gary… and both were the consummate professionals. Throughout my career reading and following World Perspectives was a must. Their report was full of timely information about issues and events not just in the U.S. but also around the world that impacted U.S. ag. But the best part of their reports was their analysis… insightful and thought provoking. Gary, building on Carole’s passion for agriculture and trade, continued her legacy with top notched reporting and analysis that so many of us relied upon. Both Carole and Gary helped many of us sound a hell of a lot smarter each day because we had read World Perspectives….”

As World Perspectives enters its next chapter, it does so with a legacy forged by two leaders who understood that agricultural markets are influenced as much by decisions made in Washington, Beijing, Brussels, and Brasília as by weather and crop conditions. In an era of growing geopolitical uncertainty, that perspective may be more valuable than ever.

— NWS outlook: The remnants of Tropical Storm Arthur to bring torrential rainfall across the central Gulf Coast, with a High Risk of excessive rainfall on Thursday… …A strong frontal system will bring heavy rain and severe weather from the Mid-Atlantic to New England on Thursday… …Heat advisories and extreme heat warnings in effect for portions of the southern Plains and the Southeast.

—Midwest rains recharge crops but threaten wheat harvest progress

Successive storm systems boost soil moisture across key growing areas while cooler temperatures reduce crop stress

A series of powerful storm systems is reshaping the agricultural outlook across much of the Corn Belt and Plains, delivering much-needed moisture to drought-stressed regions while simultaneously creating new concerns for wheat harvest delays and fieldwork interruptions.

Recent thunderstorms dumped more than two inches of rain in portions of Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, producing localized flooding and ponding in low-lying fields. While the rainfall provided an important boost to soil moisture reserves during a critical stage of crop development, it has temporarily slowed field operations and raised concerns about saturated soils in some areas.

Attention is now turning to another significant weather system expected from Saturday night through Sunday night. Forecast confidence is high that Nebraska will receive at least one inch of rainfall, a welcome development for areas that have been battling persistent dryness. The storm could also benefit portions of northwestern Iowa, southern Minnesota and southeastern South Dakota, although forecasters caution that the precise track remains uncertain, leaving questions about whether some dry pockets will receive meaningful precipitation.

For corn and soybean producers, the broader pattern remains largely favorable. Timely rains combined with a notable moderation in temperatures are reducing crop stress across major production areas. The intense heat that recently gripped the Southern Plains has eased dramatically, with temperatures falling roughly 20 degrees in some locations. Across the Great Lakes region and portions of the eastern Corn Belt, temperatures are expected to average about six degrees below normal during the next 10 days, helping preserve soil moisture and supporting crop development.

The biggest agricultural challenge may be for wheat producers. Repeated rainfall events are slowing soft red winter wheat harvest activities across the eastern Corn Belt, where combines have already faced interruptions from wet field conditions. Forecasts suggest the wet pattern will persist and gradually expand into hard red winter wheat regions of the Mid-South and Southern Plains over the next week to 10 days. Continued rainfall during harvest can reduce grain quality, increase disease risks and limit opportunities for producers to move quickly through mature fields.

Looking beyond the next 10 days, weather models indicate a gradual warming trend during the 11-to-15-day period. However, forecasters do not currently see a dominant high-pressure ridge establishing itself across the central United States. That is important because it reduces the risk of widespread extreme heat during a key portion of the growing season. Instead, the atmosphere appears favorable for continued “ridge-rider” storm systems that track along the northern edge of the heat dome, periodically delivering rainfall across the Corn Belt and Northern Plains.

Overall, the weather pattern remains supportive for row crops, particularly in areas that entered summer with moisture deficits. Yet the same active storm track that is improving crop prospects is increasingly becoming a headwind for wheat harvest progress, setting up a growing divide between favorable growing conditions for corn and soybeans and more challenging conditions for producers trying to bring winter wheat to market.