Trump Team Extends Jones Act Waiver, Mulls Other Options to Reshore Fertilizer Production
Sen. Daines to lead bipartisan delegation ahead of Trump/Xi meeting
| LINKS |
Link: USDA Restructures Food Safety and Research Operations, Shifting
Workforce Beyond Washington
Link: Monette Group Restructuring Extends into U.S. Farm Sector
Link: Fertilizer Squeeze Intensifies as Rollins Outlines Emergency
Measures and Long-Term Reshoring Push
Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, April 17
Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, April 17
| Updates: Policy/News/Markets, April 24, 2026 |
| UP FRONT |
TOP STORIES
— Trump administration moves to extend Jones Act waiver amid energy/fertilizer disruptions: Temporary shipping flexibility is being extended to ease fuel and fertilizer logistics strains caused by Iran-related supply disruptions, helping stabilize domestic energy flows and prices.
— U.S. fertilizer expansion push hinges on broader policy package: Analysts say boosting domestic fertilizer production will require a full policy overhaul — including permitting reform, energy alignment, and trade clarity — beyond basic incentives.
— China farmland purchases raise national security concerns amid reciprocity debate: Concerns are growing that Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland poses security risks and reflects broader economic and geopolitical tensions.
— Trump shares controversial podcast clip, sparking international backlash: Trump faced global criticism after sharing inflammatory podcast remarks about China and India, drawing a formal rebuke from India.
— Daines to lead bipartisan delegation to China ahead of Trump/Xi summit: Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) will lead a delegation to China to test diplomatic waters ahead of a high-stakes Trump/Xi meeting.
— Panda diplomacy resurfaces ahead of Trump Beijing visit: China is sending pandas to the U.S. as a symbolic goodwill gesture, though underlying tensions remain unchanged.
— U.S. escalates Iran pressure as blockade tightens and ceasefire holds: The U.S. is intensifying its blockade strategy against Iran, driving oil prices higher while diplomacy remains fragile.
— U.S./China tensions flare over seized Iranian vessel: Beijing rejected U.S. claims linking China to a seized Iranian ship, adding friction to an already tense geopolitical environment.
FINANCIAL MARKETS
— Equities today: Global markets are mixed as geopolitical risks and oil price gains offset strong tech earnings.
— Equities yesterday: Stocks declined amid rising oil prices and uncertainty tied to the Iran conflict.
— U.S. escalates financial offensive against China’s global influence: Commentary argues Washington is targeting China’s financial system to curb its support for adversarial regimes.
AG MARKETS
— Link to the video that rallied KC wheat yesterday: Market chatter and technical factors continue to support wheat price movements.
— Another rise in cotton AWP: Cotton’s adjusted world price rose again, signaling strengthening global pricing dynamics.
— Brazil tests higher biodiesel blends as energy security concerns rise: Brazil is evaluating a shift to B20 biodiesel to reduce reliance on fossil fuels amid global energy disruptions.
— Protein boom offers lifeline for struggling U.S. farmers: Rising demand for protein-rich crops like pulses is helping offset weak grain markets and high input costs.
— Agriculture markets yesterday: Mixed commodity price movements reflect ongoing volatility across grains, livestock, and inputs.
FARM POLICY
— Farm Bill 2.0 faces procedural hurdles and political fractures ahead of possible floor vote: More than 300 amendments and internal divisions are complicating the path to a House vote.
— Farmdoc daily analysis: federal farm payments reveal deep regional imbalances and policy distortions: New data shows federal farm payments are highly concentrated, raising concerns from farmdoc daily, again, about equity and policy design.
USDA REORGANIZATION
— USDA moves to close historic Beltsville research hub, sparking legal clash: USDA’s plan to shut down the Beltsville center is triggering legal and political pushback from lawmakers.
ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY
— Friday: Oil surges as Iran escalation fears and Hormuz disruption tighten markets: Oil prices jumped sharply as supply risks persist despite a ceasefire.
— Thursday: Oil extends gains as Iran tensions drive volatility: Continued geopolitical instability is sustaining a strong risk premium in oil markets.
— Oil production from Persian Gulf countries is running about 14.5 million barrels per day below prewar levels this month: Output remains sharply constrained, with recovery expected to take months.
— Diesel shock ripples through global economy as war disrupts supply chains: Diesel shortages are hitting transportation, agriculture, and industry harder than gasoline.
— Data centers and farmland collide in rural America: Rapid data center expansion is increasing competition for land, water, and energy in agricultural regions.
TRADE POLICY
— U.S. sugar prices under pressure from over-quota imports: Rising imports are depressing domestic sugar prices and undermining federal support programs.
CHINA
— Shifting leverage in a global economic war: Analysts argue China’s long-term strategy is giving it an advantage as global tensions escalate.
CONGRESS
— Grown in America Act gains traction as farm and food groups push domestic sourcing incentives: Bipartisan legislation aims to boost demand for U.S.-grown commodities through tax credits.
POLITICS & ELECTIONS
— Trump disapproval hits second-term high as economic anxiety mounts: Rising gas prices and economic concerns are driving Trump’s approval ratings lower.
— Rating changes expand Senate battleground as Democrats eye broader map: New analysis shows key Senate races tightening in Ohio, Nebraska, and South Carolina.
— MAHA coalition shows cracks as voter frustration builds: Fractures within Trump’s health-focused coalition could impact turnout and political dynamics.
— MAGA allies float plan to reabsorb Arlington into Washington, D.C.: A controversial proposal seeks to redraw political boundaries and reshape electoral dynamics.
WEATHER
— NWS outlook: Severe storms and fire weather risks are expected across key U.S. regions.
— Corn Belt weather swings stall planting, but drier window ahead: Heavy rains are delaying planting, though improved conditions are expected soon.
— Weak monsoon threatens India with dual economic shock: Below-average rainfall could hit both agricultural output and economic growth in India.
TOP STORIES—Trump administration moves to extend Jones Act waiver amid energy/fertilizer disruptionsShipping flexibility seen as critical to stabilizing U.S. fuel flows and prices during Iran conflict The Trump administration extended a key shipping waiver that allows foreign-flagged vessels to transport oil, gasoline, and other energy commodities between U.S. ports. The 90-day extension is aimed at easing supply disruptions and moderating fuel prices as the war involving Iran continues to constrain global energy flows, particularly through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. The waiver — an exemption from the century-old Jones Act — was announced this morning, ahead of its current May 17 expiration. It temporarily lifts requirements that goods shipped between U.S. ports must travel on American-built, -owned, and -crewed vessels. Officials say the policy has already enabled roughly 9 million barrels of domestic crude to be redistributed across the country, offering early relief to refiners navigating tight supply conditions. At the core of the administration’s decision is a growing imbalance in global oil logistics. With shipments through the Strait of Hormuz — which typically handles about 20% of global crude flows — severely restricted, markets have increasingly relied on pre-war inventories that are now being drawn down. The waiver has helped offset these disruptions by allowing more flexible routing of U.S. energy supplies, including crude oil, refined products, and even fertilizer inputs critical to agriculture. Industry groups have strongly backed the extension, arguing it reduces logistical bottlenecks and improves access to fuel, particularly in regions dependent on waterborne deliveries. Lawmakers cite the “dual constraint” of limited global supply and insufficient domestic shipping capacity. Hawaii, in particular, remains heavily reliant on imported fuels and has been especially exposed to recent disruptions. Meanwhile, the policy carries broader political and economic implications. President Donald Trump has made lowering energy prices a central objective, but the persistence of elevated oil and gasoline costs — driven in part by geopolitical tensions — poses a risk heading into the November midterm elections. Voter sentiment around cost-of-living pressures is expected to play a decisive role in determining control of Congress. The waiver is one of several emergency measures deployed by the administration to stabilize energy markets. Others include temporary adjustments to fuel specifications and selective sanctions relief for certain shipments, including some Russian crude. Together, these steps reflect a broader effort to maintain supply continuity during what officials describe as a global energy shock. Still, the Jones Act extension is not without controversy. Supporters of the Jones Act — including maritime unions and shipbuilders — argue that relaxing the law undermines U.S. shipping capacity and long-term national security. Administration officials have countered that the waiver is temporary and narrowly targeted, insisting it will not materially impact domestic shipbuilding. Meanwhile, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins today will visit a Missouri farm and announce several short- and long-term initiatives regarding fertilizer. Rollins said the Trump administration is actively considering reviving a Biden-era initiative aimed at boosting domestic fertilizer production, as the economic fallout from the ongoing Iran war intensifies pressure on U.S. farmers during a critical planting window. The program under review — the Fertilizer Production Expansion Program — was originally created in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to stabilize fertilizer supplies, encourage domestic manufacturing, and reduce reliance on imports in a highly concentrated global market. Now, with fertilizer and fuel costs surging again due to disruptions tied to the Iran conflict, administration officials see the framework as a potential near-term tool to ease input price volatility.Reviving the Fertilizer Production Expansion Program could provide grants, financing, and technical support to accelerate new production capacity in the United States, aligning with broader administration goals to strengthen supply chain resilience. However, questions remain about how quickly such a program could deliver meaningful relief, given the long lead times required to build or expand fertilizer facilities. Rollins’ openness to reinstating the program signals that the administration is looking for immediate levers to stabilize the farm economy, even if it means revisiting and repurposing policies developed under the previous administration. As refiners begin securing cargoes for summer delivery, the continuation of the waiver could prove pivotal in shaping fuel availability and price trends in the months ahead, particularly if disruptions in the Middle East persist. —U.S. fertilizer expansion push hinges on broader policy packageIndustry analysts say incentives alone won’t be enough without reforms to energy, trade, and permitting frameworks Agriculture and fertilizer industry analysts say the United States is on the right track in identifying the core tools needed to expand domestic fertilizer production, but warn that a much broader and more coordinated policy approach will be required to meaningfully increase output. The commonly cited framework — built around tax incentives, grants, expanded loan guarantees, and faster permitting — reflects the foundational steps needed to spur investment, yet industry experts argue those measures must be paired with changes across energy, trade, and regulatory policy to deliver lasting results. At the center of the discussion are financial incentives aimed at offsetting the high cost of building fertilizer facilities. New ammonia and nitrogen plants, for example, can require billions of dollars in upfront capital, making tax incentives and grants critical to improving project economics. Analysts say loan guarantees are also essential, though many in the industry contend existing programs administered by USDA are too cumbersome and slow to meet the needs of large-scale industrial projects. They point instead to more flexible financing models used elsewhere in the federal government as a better template. Permitting reform is widely viewed as the most immediate constraint. Fertilizer plants must navigate a complex web of federal, state, and local environmental reviews that can stretch for years, delaying or deterring investment. Industry stakeholders argue that without a streamlined and more predictable permitting process, even generous financial incentives will have limited impact. Meanwhile, analysts emphasize that fertilizer production — particularly nitrogen — is deeply tied to natural gas markets, making energy policy a critical piece of the equation. Ensuring reliable and affordable access to natural gas, along with expanded pipeline infrastructure, is seen as essential to maintaining cost competitiveness for U.S.-based production. Without alignment between fertilizer and energy policy, experts say domestic capacity growth will remain constrained. Trade policy is another area drawing increased attention. Some analysts argue that revisiting duties on key fertilizer imports, particularly phosphates, could help stabilize supply in the near term while domestic production ramps up. At the same time, long-term investment decisions are influenced by the need for predictable trade rules that do not shift abruptly with changing market or political conditions. Infrastructure limitations also factor into the broader discussion. Even if new production comes online, fertilizer must be efficiently transported to major agricultural regions. That has led to calls for expanded rail capacity, improvements to inland waterways, and additional storage and terminal infrastructure, particularly across the Midwest. Meanwhile, the evolving role of carbon policy is shaping investment decisions, especially for ammonia production. Analysts note that clarity around federal incentives tied to carbon capture and low-emissions hydrogen could accelerate development of so-called “blue” and “green” ammonia projects, which are increasingly viewed as part of both the fertilizer and energy markets. Industry participants also point to the importance of regulatory certainty beyond permitting timelines. Companies weighing multi-billion-dollar investments want clear and consistent standards governing emissions, water use, and environmental compliance. Uncertainty in these areas, they argue, can be as much of a deterrent as high costs or lengthy approvals. Some policymakers and analysts have also floated more aggressive approaches, including the potential for a strategic fertilizer reserve or government-backed purchase agreements to guarantee baseline demand. While still largely conceptual, such ideas reflect growing concern about supply vulnerability following recent global disruptions. Ultimately, analysts say the push to expand U.S. fertilizer production will depend on whether policymakers move beyond a narrow set of incentives and adopt a more comprehensive industrial strategy. Meanwhile, the key constraints remain clear: permitting delays, energy costs, and policy uncertainty continue to shape investment decisions and will likely determine how quickly — and how significantly — domestic production can grow. —China farmland purchases raise national security concerns amid reciprocity debateChina watcher warns of food supply risks, espionage threats, and economic weakness in China In a Fox Business interview with Larry Kudlow, Gordon Chang, senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, raised sharp concerns about Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland, arguing that the issue extends beyond investment into the realm of national security. Chang pointed to the proximity of some Chinese-owned land to U.S. military installations as a potential red flag, suggesting the pattern is unlikely to be coincidental and may reflect strategic direction from entities aligned with the Chinese Communist Party. Chang emphasized that recent incidents involving researchers allegedly bringing pathogens into the United States add another layer of concern. He cited multiple cases over the past 10 months involving biological materials capable of affecting crops, livestock, and even humans, warning that such developments could signal attempts to target the U.S. food supply. He also referenced broader risks, including the introduction of invasive species and illicit activities such as illegal marijuana cultivation tied to foreign actors operating on agricultural land. A central theme of Chang’s argument was the lack of reciprocity between the United States and China. He noted that Americans are effectively barred from owning land in China, where all land is state-owned and only long-term leases are permitted. Meanwhile, Chinese entities can purchase U.S. farmland, raising questions about fairness and strategic vulnerability. Chang framed this imbalance as both an economic and security issue, urging policymakers to reassess current policies.  Beyond agriculture, Chang also addressed China’s economic outlook, linking reduced oil demand to broader industrial weakness. He noted that Chinese refinery utilization rates have fallen below 70%, levels not seen since 2022, suggesting that declining demand stems from underperforming factories rather than supply constraints. According to Chang, this points to a deeper economic slowdown in China than is widely acknowledged, with implications for global markets and energy demand. Overall, the interview underscored growing concerns among some policymakers and analysts that Chinese activity in U.S. agriculture — combined with economic and geopolitical tensions — may pose a multifaceted challenge requiring closer scrutiny.—Trump shares controversial podcast clip, sparking international backlashIndia Rebukes remarks as ‘inappropriate,’ as criticism spreads across Asia and the U.S.President Donald Trump drew sharp criticism after sharing a transcript and video clip from The Savage Nation, a right-wing podcast hosted by Michael Savage, on his Truth Social account. In the segment, Savage described China and India as “hellhole” places and argued that recent immigrants from those countries had not assimilated in the same way as “European Americans.” Trump posted the material without adding any commentary of his own.The response was immediate. India’s government issued a public rebuke on X, calling the remarks “obviously uninformed, inappropriate and in poor taste,” though it did not mention Trump by name. The episode triggered backlash across both Asia and the United States, underscoring broader unease with the rhetoric. —Daines to lead bipartisan delegation to China ahead of Trump/Xi summitSCMP exclusive: Visit underscores rising pressure on Beijing even as backchannel engagement ramps up A bipartisan U.S. Senate delegation led by Steve Daines (R-Mont.) is set to visit China beginning May 1, according to an exclusive report from the South China Morning Post, signaling renewed congressional engagement just weeks before President Donald Trump is scheduled to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. The five-member delegation will travel to Shanghai and Beijing as Washington simultaneously intensifies pressure on China over trade imbalances, artificial intelligence competition, and Beijing’s ties to Iran. The trip — long in the works and delayed from March — comes at a sensitive moment, with the Trump–Xi summit now slated for May 14–15 following postponement tied to the Iran war. Daines, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, has framed the visit as an opportunity to assess China’s “innovation ecosystem” and infrastructure, including firsthand exposure to its high-speed rail network. The Montana Republican has emerged over the past decade as a key intermediary between Washington and Beijing, drawing on his prior experience living in China while working for Procter & Gamble and his involvement in past trade negotiations. The delegation’s exact composition has not been publicly disclosed, though sources in the article indicated several lawmakers may be visiting China for the first time. Analysts view the trip as a potential effort to “test the waters” ahead of Trump’s visit, particularly as geopolitical tensions and the Iran conflict complicate U.S. leverage. Meanwhile, broader U.S./China tensions continue to escalate. The White House this week accused Chinese entities of “industrial scale” theft of American artificial intelligence technology, allegations Beijing has rejected as unjustified suppression. Additional friction has emerged over trade, cybersecurity, and U.S. claims linking China to Iranian military support — all issues likely to loom over the upcoming summit. Despite these flashpoints, officials on both sides are signaling that the Trump/Xi meeting may focus on less sensitive economic issues, including trade flows and efforts to address the bilateral imbalance. Against that backdrop, Daines’s visit could play a quiet but strategic role in shaping the agenda — and gauging Beijing’s posture — before the two leaders meet face-to-face. —Panda diplomacy resurfaces ahead of Trump Beijing visitChina sends two giant pandas to U.S. zoo as symbolic goodwill gesture amid strained bilateral ties China will send two giant pandas to the United States in the lead-up to President Donald Trump’s planned visit to Beijing May 14-15, a move framed as a diplomatic overture despite ongoing tensions between the two countries, according to reporting by Shi Jiangtao in the South China Morning Post. The China Wildlife Conservation Association confirmed that a male panda, Ping Ping, and a female panda, Fu Shuang, will be loaned to Zoo Atlanta under a new 10-year conservation agreement, reviving a longstanding symbol of cooperation between Washington and Beijing. Chinese officials described the transfer as part of a broader effort to strengthen biodiversity collaboration and people-to-people ties. Foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun emphasized that giant pandas serve as “ambassadors” of friendship, highlighting their role in fostering international goodwill and advancing conservation efforts. Zoo Atlanta officials echoed that sentiment, noting the partnership will support research and public engagement around one of the world’s most recognizable endangered species. The move comes at a sensitive moment in U.S./China relations, which remain strained over trade disputes, security concerns, and broader geopolitical competition. Analysts view the panda transfer as a calculated act of “panda diplomacy,” a strategy Beijing has used for decades to signal goodwill. Historically, such exchanges have coincided with major diplomatic milestones, including the normalization of relations in the 1970s. However, experts caution that the symbolic gesture is unlikely to materially shift the trajectory of bilateral ties. While panda diplomacy has long served as a soft-power tool, underlying tensions between the U.S. and China remain deeply entrenched. As one observer noted, such gestures may help create a more positive atmosphere around high-level visits, but they offer only limited influence over the broader strategic rivalry shaping the relationship. The arrival of Ping Ping and Fu Shuang will also mark the revival of Zoo Atlanta’s panda program, which began in 1999 and concluded in 2024 after producing multiple cubs and contributing to global conservation research. Their return underscores both the enduring appeal of panda diplomacy and its continued use as a subtle instrument of international relations. —U.S. escalates Iran pressure as blockade tightens and ceasefire holdsNaval crackdown in Strait of Hormuz drives oil surge while diplomacy remains fragile The Trump administration is intensifying its economic and military pressure campaign against Iran, tightening a naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz while attempting to force Tehran back to the negotiating table. President Donald Trump has authorized more aggressive enforcement actions — including orders to target vessels suspected of laying sea mines — following the interception of Iranian-linked supertankers attempting to bypass restrictions. The blockade is central to Washington’s strategy of choking off Iran’s oil exports, a key source of foreign currency, with administration allies suggesting production shutdowns could begin within weeks. However, analysts warn the effort may take longer and is already showing signs of leakage, as some vessels continue to transit the strait despite heightened enforcement. Meanwhile, oil markets are reacting sharply. Brent crude has climbed above $107 per barrel, rising more than 18% this week and roughly 48% since the conflict began, underscoring growing concerns that sustained disruptions in the waterway — which normally carries about one-fifth of global oil and LNG flows — could trigger broader economic fallout. Despite the military escalation, diplomatic prospects remain uncertain. Some U.S. officials believe Trump’s confrontational messaging is complicating negotiations, with Iranian counterparts reportedly viewing the rhetoric as undermining trust and reducing incentives to engage. On the regional front, a potential stabilizing factor has emerged. Trump announced that Israel and Lebanon are set to extend their ceasefire by three weeks, easing one pressure point in the broader conflict. The truce, which began in mid-April, has largely held despite mutual accusations of violations, and is viewed as a key condition for advancing wider peace talks involving Iran. Still, the overall situation remains highly volatile. The blockade’s effectiveness is being questioned by analysts who warn that an incomplete enforcement regime could dilute its intended economic impact while prolonging tensions. With maritime flows constrained, oil prices rising, and diplomacy stalled, the risk of renewed escalation — and deeper global economic consequences — remains elevated. —U.S./China tensions flare over seized Iranian vesselBeijing rejects Trump’s claim of Chinese involvement as maritime confrontation escalates China on Friday pushed back against accusations from President Donald Trump that a seized Iranian cargo vessel was a “gift from China,” dismissing the claim as baseless and warning against interference in global trade. The dispute adds a new layer of geopolitical friction amid the ongoing U.S./Iran maritime standoff. The clash follows a U.S. military operation in which forces intercepted and fired upon an Iranian-flagged cargo ship attempting to evade Washington’s blockade of Iranian ports. Tehran condemned the action as “armed piracy” and warned of retaliation, escalating tensions in already fragile shipping lanes tied to the Strait of Hormuz. Speaking earlier this week, Trump suggested the vessel — identified as the Touska — may have originated from China carrying suspicious cargo, implying possible Chinese involvement. Beijing swiftly rejected the allegation, with foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun stating that China “opposes any accusations and associations that lack a factual basis” and emphasizing that legitimate international trade should not be disrupted. Meanwhile, maritime security sources cited by Reuters indicate the ship may have been transporting so-called dual-use goods—materials with both civilian and military applications—fueling U.S. concerns over their potential destination and use. The episode underscores the widening geopolitical risks tied to enforcement actions in the region, where military confrontations, contested shipping, and competing narratives are increasingly colliding with global trade flows. |
| FINANCIAL MARKETS |
—Equities today: Futures U.S. equity futures are mixed despite strong tech earnings and a three-week extension of the Israel/Lebanon ceasefire.
Another U.S. aircraft carrier arrived in the Middle East, while President Trump said he has ordered the navy to “shoot and kill” any boat laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices rose for the fourth consecutive session.
In Asia, Japan +1%. Hong Kong +0.2%. China -0.3%. India -1.3%.
In Europe, at midday, London -0.6%. Paris -1%. Frankfurt -0.4%.
—Equities yesterday: Stocks pulled back on Thursday, led by a drop in software and higher oil prices, as investor uncertainty toward the trajectory of the Iran war hovered over the market.
| Equity Index | Closing Price April 23 | Point Difference from April 22 | % Difference from April 22 |
| Dow | 49,310.32 | -179.71 | -0.36% |
| Nasdaq | 24,438.50 | -219.06 | -0.89% |
| S&P 500 | 7,108.40 | -29.50 | -0.41% |
—U.S. escalates financial offensive against China’s global influence
Commentary argues Trump administration is targeting Beijing’s banking system to disrupt funding of adversarial regimes
A new commentary by James Gorrie in the Epoch Times (link) argues that the Trump administration has shifted from traditional trade disputes with China to a more aggressive financial strategy aimed at weakening Beijing’s global influence, particularly by targeting its state-linked banking system and its role in funding countries such as Iran.
Gorrie frames the initiative, dubbed “Operation Economic Fury,” as a deliberate effort to cut off the financial lifelines that support both China’s geopolitical ambitions and the activities of U.S. adversaries. The strategy focuses on imposing secondary sanctions that would effectively force Chinese financial institutions to choose between maintaining access to the U.S. dollar system or continuing transactions with sanctioned regimes like Iran and Russia.
A central argument in the piece is that China’s purchase of the vast majority of Iranian oil provides critical funding for Tehran’s military programs, including nuclear development and proxy conflicts across the Middle East. By targeting the financial channels behind these transactions, the U.S. aims to indirectly constrain Iran’s capabilities while raising the cost for Beijing’s continued involvement.
The commentary also dismisses China’s oft-cited threat to sell off its U.S. Treasury holdings as counterproductive, arguing that such a move would harm China’s own economic interests by driving up interest rates and reducing the value of its remaining assets. Similarly, efforts by Beijing to promote alternatives to the dollar through BRICS partnerships are portrayed as structurally weak, constrained by lack of trust among member nations and limited convertibility of the yuan.
Gorrie further contends that China’s broader global strategy is encountering resistance, citing setbacks in regions like Panama and Venezuela where U.S. pressure and actions have disrupted Chinese investments and influence. These developments, he argues, signal a broader shift in global dynamics, with Washington increasingly willing to use both financial and military tools to counter Beijing.
The article concludes that China’s dependence on the dollar-based financial system remains its greatest vulnerability, and that U.S. efforts to exploit this reliance mark a turning point in economic statecraft.
| AG MARKETS |
—Link to the video that rallied KC wheat yesterday. Many of the comments noted in the video have been discussed by traders, analysts, weather watchers and ag radio programs the past few weeks.
—Another rise in cotton AWP. The Adjusted World Price (AWP) for cotton moved to 65.26 cents per pound, effective today (April 24), up from 61.61 cents per pound the prior week. This marks the second week the AWP has been 60 cents or more and is the highest AWP since the week of April 12, 2024, when it was 65.43 cents per pound.
—Brazil tests higher biodiesel blends as energy security concerns rise
Pilot program to evaluate B20 viability could accelerate shift away from fossil fuels
Brazil is preparing to test higher biodiesel blending levels in diesel fuel, according to reporting from Reuters, as global energy disruptions tied to the U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict push policymakers to reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels and strengthen domestic biofuel capacity.
Researchers at the Maua Institute of Technology will begin trials in May to assess the technical and environmental feasibility of increasing the biodiesel blend from the current mandated 15% (B15) to 20% (B20). Brazil already stands as a global biofuels leader, leveraging abundant soybean and sugarcane production, with existing mandates that include 30% ethanol blending in gasoline.
The initial phase of testing will involve running engines on both B15 and B20 blends over 300 hours to evaluate performance factors such as filter clogging, fuel injection behavior, and injector durability. Fuel shipments for the tests are expected to arrive in late May, with the first engine installations scheduled shortly thereafter.
A second phase will focus on emissions testing across a broader range of blends, including B7 and B25, though long-term durability trials will remain centered on B15 and B20. The goal is to generate a comprehensive dataset that can inform future regulatory decisions on increasing blend mandates.
Industry stakeholders, including Brazil’s vegetable oil and biofuels sectors, are backing the initiative. The Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries (Abiove) said the testing framework is robust and could pave the way for higher mandated blends, with B20 seen as a realistic near-term target.
If successful, the program would mark a significant step in Brazil’s strategy to expand biofuel usage, enhance energy security, and potentially reshape global biodiesel demand—particularly for soybean oil, a key feedstock.
—Protein boom offers lifeline for struggling U.S. farmers
Rising demand for pulse crops offsets weak grain prices, high input costs, and trade pressures
A surge in demand for protein-rich foods — fueled by GLP-1 weight-loss drugs and social media diet trends — is emerging as a rare bright spot for U.S. farmers grappling with low crop prices, high input costs, and trade disruptions, according to reporting by Reuters.
The broader farm economy remains under pressure, with a grain oversupply, tariff-related trade tensions, and elevated fertilizer and diesel costs squeezing margins. U.S. farmers are now facing a fourth consecutive year of low-to-negative profitability, even as government support remains near record levels. Meanwhile, farm bankruptcies jumped 46% from 2024 to 2025, underscoring the severity of the downturn.
Against that backdrop, pulses — including peas, lentils, and chickpeas — are gaining traction as a more profitable alternative. Farmers are shifting acreage away from wheat toward pulses, citing significantly better margins. One Montana farmer estimates losses of roughly $35 per acre on wheat compared to profits of about $8 per acre on lentils, highlighting the growing economic divergence between traditional grains and protein crops.
The appeal of pulses extends beyond pricing. These crops require relatively low fertilizer inputs due to their natural nitrogen-fixing properties — a key advantage as the U.S./Iran conflict disrupts global fertilizer supplies and drives up costs. Industry leaders argue this structural benefit positions pulses to outperform in a high-input-cost environment.
Demand is being driven in part by a broader shift in consumer behavior. Food manufacturers are increasingly incorporating pea protein and lentil-based ingredients into mainstream products, from cereals and pasta to beverages and snack foods. This innovation wave has accelerated since the pandemic, supported by health trends and aggressive marketing around protein consumption.
However, some nutrition experts warn that the protein boom may be overhyped. Research suggests that most Americans already consume sufficient protein, and critics argue that “protein-maxxing” trends promoted on platforms like TikTok may be more about marketing than actual dietary need.
Still, for farmers facing mounting financial strain, the shift toward pulses is less about dietary debates and more about survival. With domestic consumption rising — even as exports of yellow peas have dropped sharply — producers are increasingly betting that protein demand will remain strong enough to stabilize incomes in an otherwise challenging agricultural economy.
—Agriculture markets yesterday:
| Commodity | Contract Month | Closing Price April 23 | Change from April 22 |
| Corn | July | $4.63 3/4 | +0.01 |
| Soybeans | July | $11.74 3/4 | -0.0475 |
| Soybean Meal | July | $316.50 | +0.20 |
| Soybean Oil | July | 71.05 cents | +0.05 |
| Wheat (SRW) | July | $6.20 1/4 | +0.1325 |
| Wheat (HRW) | July | $6.79 1/4 | +0.2925 |
| Spring Wheat | July | $6.91 1/2 | +0.105 |
| Cotton | July | 79.45 cents | +0.81 |
| Live Cattle | June | $243.50 | +0.425 |
| Feeder Cattle | May | $358.875 | +0.45 |
| Lean Hogs | June | $103.45 | +0.825 |
| FARM POLICY |
—Farm Bill 2.0 faces procedural hurdles and political fractures ahead of possible floor vote
Rules Committee signals momentum, but amendment battles, E15 uncertainty, and pesticide disputes threaten timing and support
House leaders are moving forward with plans to bring the farm bill to the floor as early as next week, but mounting political divisions and a flood of amendments are creating significant uncertainty around both timing and passage. The House Rules Committee announced the legislation will be one of four bills considered Monday afternoon — a key procedural step that signals leadership is still aiming for a near-term vote despite competing priorities and internal disagreements.
At the center of the delay risk is the sheer volume of proposed changes. More than 300 amendments have been filed, many targeting controversial provisions in the bill. House Ag Chairman GT Thompson (R-Pa.) indicated that the Rules Committee will likely block a substantial number of these proposals from reaching the floor, saying many will not be “made in order.” That gatekeeping process will be critical in shaping the final package — and in determining whether enough lawmakers can be brought on board.
Timing pressures are also building outside the farm bill itself. House Republicans are simultaneously preparing to address the extension of a key surveillance law set to expire next week, potentially consuming valuable floor time and pushing the agriculture package further down the calendar. While leadership continues negotiations through the weekend, some lawmakers and aides have warned for weeks that a late-April vote could slip until after the early May recess.
Meanwhile, policy divisions within the bill remain sharp. One flashpoint is year-round E15 gasoline sales, where uncertainty persists over whether an amendment will even be allowed. Thompson said he has not received guidance from leadership on whether a waiver will permit the provision. Biofuels advocates — including the National Corn Growers Association — are pressing lawmakers to include E15, arguing it is critical for rural economies and fuel affordability, while opposition from segments of the energy sector continues to complicate consensus.
Pesticide policy has emerged as another major fault line. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) expressed skepticism that her bipartisan amendment to strip GOP-backed pesticide language will be considered, despite growing backlash tied to the “Make America Healthy Again” movement. The issue has already fractured Republican support, with members such as Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) publicly opposing the bill over the provision.
On the Democratic side, divisions are also evident. Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) — one of a handful of Democrats who supported the bill in committee — is now warning he could oppose final passage if it includes language undermining California’s Proposition 12 animal welfare standards. That provision, tied to the “Save Our Bacon Act,” has become a major sticking point for California Democrats and could cost the bill critical swing votes.
Complicating matters further, House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) is actively urging Democrats to oppose the legislation, arguing that amendments cannot fix what she describes as a fundamentally flawed bill. With Republicans already divided over key provisions, leadership may need support from centrist and rural Democrats to secure passage — a path that is becoming increasingly narrow as policy disputes intensify.
Taken together, the procedural bottlenecks and policy disagreements underscore the fragile path forward for the farm bill. While the Rules Committee’s action keeps the timeline alive, the outcome will hinge on whether leadership can navigate internal party fractures, limit contentious amendments, and assemble a coalition broad enough to pass a deeply contested package.
—Farmdoc daily analysis: federal farm payments reveal deep regional imbalances and policy distortions
New Policy Design Lab data highlights concentration of subsidies, raising questions about equity, incentives, and political power in farm policy
A new analysis (link) by Jonathan Coppess in farmdoc daily finds that federal farm payments remain highly concentrated geographically and structurally uneven, with updated county-level data from the University of Illinois’ Policy Design Lab offering a detailed look at how programs like ARC and PLC distribute billions in taxpayer support across U.S. agriculture.
The report shows that while 97% of U.S. counties received some form of farm program payments between 2014 and 2023, the largest sums are heavily concentrated in a small number of counties. According to the map visualization on page 2, only 24 counties received more than $100 million in payments over the period, underscoring the narrow distribution of the highest benefits.
Regional disparities are a defining feature of the data. As detailed in the table, the author notes that Southern counties dominate the top recipients of ARC and PLC payments, accounting for 18 of the top 25 counties and receiving significantly higher payments per base acre. This creates uneven income outcomes, as farmers planting similar crops can receive markedly different total revenues depending on how federal payment formulas interact with base acreage.
Meanwhile, a separate ranking of counties by base acreage shows a different geographic pattern, with none of the top 25 counties located in the South. This contrast highlights a key structural issue: total payments alone do not fully explain program benefits — the number of base acres and how payments are calculated per acre are equally critical.
Program design differences further amplify disparities. The author details that PLC payments generally deliver higher returns per base acre than ARC-CO, with Southern counties dominating PLC benefits while Midwest counties lead in ARC-CO payments. More than half of the top PLC counties received over $100 million, while none of the top ARC-CO counties reached that level.
The analysis also points to the cumulative impact of multiple federal support mechanisms. In Gaines County, Texas — the largest recipient — farmers received roughly $169.6 million in ARC and PLC payments, alongside nearly $795 million in crop insurance benefits, bringing total federal support close to $1 billion for fewer than 600 farmers. This concentration, Coppess argues, raises concerns about efficiency, equity, and long-term policy outcomes.
Beyond the numbers, the report frames these payment patterns as a reflection of political economy. Concentrated financial benefits can reinforce political power, which in turn helps sustain and expand those benefits. The result, Coppess suggests, is a feedback loop where policy design prioritizes capturing federal payments over adapting to market conditions, potentially distorting production decisions and stifling innovation.
Ultimately, the updated Policy Design Lab data provides the author’s views of how farm policy operates — not just as an economic support system, but as a mechanism shaped by regional interests, institutional design, and political incentives.
Perspective: This is how one farm policy contact responded to the analysis: “I’ve read a lot of Jonathan Coppess’ work over the years. He always seems to be against everything and for nothing as it relates to agriculture policy but his laissez faire principles only apply to farmers. Otherwise, government can’t be big enough. He’s always used a bait and bleed approach to farm policy. Try to sow discord amongst the varying groups, often north/south in hopes of bringing down the entire farm safety net.”
Another farm policy contact responded: “His lack of self-awareness in this case is stunning. He helped design ARC, was warned repeatedly of its shortcomings, and now complains about the outcomes. Far more importantly: he regularly ignores the economic and political impact of the government-imposed ethanol mandate in his regional analysis. Nothing to see there! If you are a supporter of Congress mandating year-round E15, the best thing you could hope for at this point is that Jonathan Coppess would just stop talking.”
| USDA REORGANIZATION |
—USDA moves to close historic Beltsville research hub, sparking legal clash
Democrats argue shutdown violates federal law as agency pushes nationwide research realignment
USDA is moving to decommission the Henry A. Wallace Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, triggering an immediate backlash from Maryland Democrats who say the plan violates the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024. Lawmakers contend Congress explicitly required the facility to remain operational and be upgraded, setting up a potential legal and appropriations fight over USDA’s authority.
USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) framed the decision as part of a broader effort to modernize its national research footprint, arguing that relocating programs across the country would better align federal science with regional agricultural needs. The agency said the roughly 1,000 employees at the Beltsville site will not be laid off, though some could be required to relocate.
Maryland’s congressional delegation — including Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks, along with Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), and others — sharply disputed that rationale. In a joint statement, they said shuttering the facility would “break the law,” waste taxpayer dollars, and undermine agricultural innovation, pledging to block the move and ensure USDA complies with congressional intent.
The Beltsville center, spanning roughly 6,600 acres and more than a century old, has been a cornerstone of U.S. agricultural research. Its work has included breakthroughs in honeybee health, livestock genetics — including mapping the cow genome — and disease-resistant dairy production. Lawmakers emphasized that Congress had already recognized the site’s importance by mandating its continuation and modernization in bipartisan legislation.
USDA, however, pointed to aging infrastructure — with hundreds of outdated or underutilized buildings — as a key driver behind the decision. The agency argued that redistributing research programs would improve safety, enhance collaboration with farmers and industry, and ensure continuity of work while upgrading facilities elsewhere.
The dispute now hinges on whether USDA’s restructuring authority can override specific congressional directives — a question that could escalate into a broader battle over federal research priorities, appropriations control, and the future footprint of USDA science nationwide.
| ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY |
—Friday: Oil surges as Iran escalation fears and Hormuz disruption tighten markets
Prices post sharp weekly gains as ceasefire uncertainty and blocked shipping routes fuel risk premium
Oil prices climbed Friday as renewed concerns over military escalation involving Iran and continued disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz reinforced supply fears, keeping markets on edge despite an ongoing ceasefire.
Brent crude rose $1.93, or 1.8%, to $107 per barrel.
U.S. West Texas Intermediate gained 0.8% to $96.61.
The weekly surge — up 18% for Brent and 15% for WTI — marks one of the largest gains since the war began, underscoring how geopolitical risk is rapidly rebuilding a premium into energy markets.
The rally follows reports that Iranian forces boarded cargo ships in the Strait, highlighting persistent instability and the inability of the U.S. to fully secure the critical waterway. Before the conflict, the Strait handled roughly 20% of global oil flows, but transit remains effectively blocked, constraining supply chains and amplifying volatility.
Meanwhile, signs of internal tensions within Iran’s leadership and recent air defense activity over Tehran have deepened concerns that the current ceasefire may be temporary. Analysts increasingly view the pause in fighting as a potential staging period rather than a path to de-escalation.
President Donald Trump said Iran may have used the ceasefire to reposition military assets, while emphasizing that the U.S. could neutralize those capabilities quickly if needed. He also indicated that the ceasefire would be extended indefinitely to allow more time for negotiations, though he declined to set a timeline for a broader agreement.
Market analysts warn that without tangible progress in peace talks by the end of April, a renewed escalation could push oil prices to new highs for the year. With shipments from the region still constrained, elevated energy costs are expected to ripple across global commodities and inflation.
The broader takeaway for markets is increasingly clear: even without active escalation, the combination of restricted flows, fragile diplomacy, and military posturing is enough to sustain upward pressure on oil prices.
—Thursday: Oil extends gains as Iran tensions drive volatility
Geopolitical risks in Strait of Hormuz keep markets on edge despite partial supply flows
Oil prices climbed Thursday, with both benchmarks posting gains of roughly 3% as escalating geopolitical tensions tied to Iran injected fresh volatility into global energy markets.
Brent crude settled at $105.07 per barrel, up 3.1%.
U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) rose 3.11% to $95.85. Prices spiked by nearly $5 earlier in the session before trimming gains, reflecting the market’s sensitivity to rapidly evolving headlines.
The rally was driven by signs of intensifying instability within Iran, including reports of air defense activity over Tehran and indications of internal political strain. The reported resignation of a senior Iranian negotiator signaled a potential shift toward a more hardline posture, dampening expectations for near-term diplomatic progress and increasing the perceived risk of prolonged conflict.
Meanwhile, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz remains the central pressure point for global oil markets. The critical transit route — which previously handled about 20% of global oil flows — continues to operate at significantly reduced capacity as both U.S. and Iranian forces maintain restrictions on maritime traffic. Ongoing incidents, including vessel seizures and military threats, highlight the fragile and unpredictable nature of shipping conditions in the region.
Despite these constraints, some cargoes are still moving through the corridor, suggesting that enforcement is not absolute and that limited volumes continue to reach global markets. Even so, uncertainty surrounding the durability of these flows — alongside mixed political signals — is sustaining a heightened risk premium in oil prices.
Market sentiment remains split. While current disruptions underpin prices, a portion of traders continues to anticipate an eventual de-escalation and restoration of normal shipping activity. However, with timelines for any resolution highly uncertain and expectations varying widely, volatility is likely to persist in the near term.
—Oil production from Persian Gulf countries is running about 14.5 million barrels per day below prewar levels this month, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.. The bank said a recovery in output would likely take several months, assuming a full and secure reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and no renewed military strikes.
—Diesel shock ripples through global economy as war disrupts supply chains
Tighter diesel markets outpace gasoline increases, raising costs for transportation, agriculture, and industry
According to reporting from the New York Times (link), diesel prices have surged far more sharply than gasoline since the onset of the U.S./Israel war with Iran, underscoring a critical vulnerability in global energy markets and the broader economy. The conflict has constrained oil flows from the Persian Gulf — a key source of diesel-rich crude — triggering supply shortages that are proving far more disruptive than those affecting gasoline.
Diesel prices have climbed roughly 45% since late February, compared with a 35% rise in gasoline, reflecting both structural supply constraints and the fuel’s central role in heavy industry. Unlike gasoline, which is primarily used in passenger vehicles, diesel powers trucks, farm equipment, rail systems, and industrial machinery — sectors that have limited ability to reduce consumption even as prices spike.
The disparity stems in part from pre-existing tightness in diesel markets before the war began. Persian Gulf producers, which supply a significant share of global diesel and jet fuel, have reduced exports amid the conflict, and other regions lack the refining capacity to quickly compensate. Meanwhile, China has restricted fuel exports to protect domestic supply, further tightening global availability.
Refining constraints compound the issue. While both gasoline and diesel are derived from crude oil, refineries are not easily able to shift production toward diesel without significant investment and reconfiguration. Additionally, much of the crude produced in the U.S. is better suited for gasoline production, limiting the country’s ability to offset global diesel shortages despite being a net exporter of refined products.
The economic implications are significant. Diesel is deeply embedded in supply chains, meaning higher prices ripple through freight costs, food production, and construction. Farmers, in particular, face elevated input costs during peak planting season, while trucking firms and logistics operators have little flexibility to cut back usage.
Timeline. Even if geopolitical tensions ease and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz resumes, analysts caution that diesel markets may take months to rebalance. The fuel’s global nature — combined with transportation bottlenecks and regional supply constraints — suggests that elevated prices could persist longer than those for gasoline.
As one analyst noted, diesel is not just another fuel — it is the backbone of modern economic activity, making its disruption far more consequential for inflation and growth than headline gasoline prices alone.
—Data centers and farmland collide in rural America
Farm Bureau analysis warns of rising competition for land, water, and energy as digital infrastructure expands
A new analysis (link) by American Farm Bureau Federation authors Autumn Lankford Higgins and Bernt Nelson highlights a growing tension between the rapid expansion of data centers and the long-term viability of U.S. agriculture, underscoring how the multi-billion-dollar buildout of digital infrastructure is increasingly reshaping rural land use and resource allocation.
Demand for data centers — driven by artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and high-performance data processing — is accelerating across the United States, with nearly 5,000 facilities either active or under construction. These projects, often requiring hundreds of megawatts of electricity and billions in capital, are frequently located in rural areas where land is more available and development costs are lower. Meanwhile, this siting trend is placing agriculture in direct competition with the very infrastructure it increasingly depends on for productivity and innovation.
The Farm Bureau analysis frames this dynamic as a “dual reality” for agriculture. On one hand, modern farming relies heavily on digital tools such as precision agriculture, cloud-based systems, and real-time analytics — all powered by data centers. Meanwhile, those same facilities are competing with farmers for essential inputs, including land, water, and energy.
Land use is emerging as a central concern. Once farmland is converted to industrial use, the shift is effectively permanent, raising alarms about the long-term erosion of productive acreage. Developers are often drawn to agricultural land because it is already cleared and contiguous, making it cheaper and faster to develop. In high-demand regions, this has driven land prices sharply higher, sometimes into the millions of dollars per acre, and introduced speculative pressures that can ripple through local land markets.
The report also highlights how federal tax provisions, such as like-kind exchanges under Section 1031, can amplify these effects by enabling landowners to reinvest proceeds from farmland sales into other properties, potentially inflating farmland values elsewhere. Over time, these dynamics can shift entire regional markets away from agricultural production toward development-driven pricing.
Beyond land, data centers are intensifying pressure on critical resources. Electricity demand is a major flashpoint, with data centers accounting for roughly 4.4% of U.S. electricity use in 2023 and projected to climb significantly by 2028. At the same time, farm electricity costs are already rising sharply, with USDA forecasting a nearly 50% increase between 2019 and 2026. Expanding grid infrastructure to meet demand could lead to higher costs for agricultural producers unless carefully managed.
Water use presents another area of concern. Data center cooling systems can require substantial volumes of water, creating potential conflicts in regions where agricultural irrigation already strains local supplies. While more efficient cooling technologies are emerging, the report emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in water usage to protect shared resources.
Despite these pressures, the Farm Bureau notes that data centers can deliver meaningful economic benefits to rural communities, including job creation, tax revenue, and infrastructure investment. However, those gains are uneven and not guaranteed, particularly if development outpaces local planning capacity or leads to rising living costs.
The organization ultimately calls for a balanced policy approach that recognizes farmland as a strategic asset while allowing for responsible development. Key recommendations include prioritizing previously developed sites over prime farmland, ensuring transparent zoning and permitting processes, and requiring early engagement with local stakeholders.
The analysis concludes that rural America can support both agriculture and data center growth — but only with deliberate planning, smart site selection, and policies that safeguard long-term agricultural productivity. Without that balance, the expansion of the digital economy risks undermining the very rural systems that sustain it.
| TRADE POLICY |
—U.S. sugar prices under pressure from over-quota imports
ARPC analysis finds Tier 2 imports eroding price supports, inflating stocks, and driving significant revenue losses
A new white paper (link) by Shawn Arita, Ming Wang, and Sandro Steinbach of the Agricultural Risk Policy Center at North Dakota State University — prepared at the request of Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) — finds that over-quota (Tier 2) sugar imports have materially depressed U.S. domestic sugar prices and undermined the structure of the federal sugar program. The study uses a partial equilibrium model and a stocks-to-use regression based on USDA data to estimate that these imports reduced U.S. raw sugar prices by roughly 5 to 8 cents per pound during FY 2025–FY 2026, while generating annual industry-wide revenue losses of approximately $0.9 billion to $1.5 billion, with potential losses rising to as much as $1.8 billion when refined-market effects are included.
The analysis identifies a structural shift in the composition of U.S. sugar imports as the primary driver of price pressure. Historically, the U.S. market relied on managed imports from Mexico under the “Needs Formula,” which is designed to maintain a target stocks-to-use ratio of 13.5%. However, as over-quota imports surged — rising from negligible levels prior to 2018 to more than 1.2 million short tons raw value by FY2024 — these arbitrage-driven supplies displaced Mexican imports and disrupted the managed supply system.
A key factor behind this shift is the erosion of tariff protection. The Tier 2 tariff, fixed at 15.36 cents per pound since 2000, has lost roughly half of its real value due to inflation. As a result, the gap between U.S. and global sugar prices has narrowed, making over-quota imports commercially viable and encouraging a surge in inflows. This has effectively imposed a ceiling on domestic prices, as imported sugar enters whenever U.S. prices exceed global levels plus tariff and transport costs.
Meanwhile, the Needs Formula has become less effective. Because it subtracts projected Tier 2 imports from Mexico’s allocation, rising over-quota volumes have compressed Mexican shipments to near zero in some periods. Unlike Mexican supply — which enters at negotiated reference prices — Tier 2 imports respond to market arbitrage, amplifying price volatility and contributing to excess inventories. By FY2026, stocks-to-use ratios exceeded target levels, reinforcing downward pressure on prices.
The study finds that much of the current price weakness stems from accumulated inventories rather than just current-year flows. A dynamic extension of the model shows that stock overhang from earlier import surges — particularly between FY2021 and FY2024 — now accounts for the majority of price suppression.
The impact is particularly acute for U.S. sugar beet producers, who compete directly with refined imports. Because Tier 2 imports include a higher share of refined sugar than Mexican shipments, the competitive pressure is concentrated in the refined market. The report estimates that beet producers alone may be absorbing $0.7 billion to $1.0 billion in annual losses, representing the majority of total industry harm.
Policy developments are expected to further influence market conditions. The Supreme Court’s February 2026 ruling limiting tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act removed additional barriers that had temporarily restrained imports. A short-term 10% tariff under Section 122 is set to expire in July 2026, after which the system will revert to the eroded Tier 2 tariff unless Congress intervenes.
Looking ahead, the report concludes that without a meaningful adjustment to tariff policy or a shift in global market dynamics, over-quota imports are likely to continue exerting downward pressure on U.S. sugar prices. The resulting financial strain could persist across the domestic sugar sector, affecting growers, processors, and long-term production capacity.
| CHINA |
—Shifting leverage in a global economic war
Iran conflict and trade tensions expose limits of U.S. power while China’s long-term strategy pays dividends
A new analysis (link) by Jenni Marsh in Bloomberg argues that President Donald Trump has stumbled into a widening global economic conflict, while Xi Jinping appears increasingly prepared — leveraging years of strategic planning to weather shocks from both trade disputes and the Iran war.
The piece frames the current moment as a dual-front challenge for Washington. Trump’s earlier tariff escalation against China triggered retaliation through export controls on rare earths, forcing a partial truce and exposing vulnerabilities in U.S. supply chains. Now, the Iran conflict has compounded those pressures, with Tehran’s near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz disrupting roughly one-fifth of global oil flows and triggering one of the most severe energy shocks in modern history.
Meanwhile, China’s positioning reflects years of preparation for precisely this type of geopolitical fragmentation. Xi’s push for economic self-reliance — including massive investments in renewable energy, domestic coal production, and electric vehicles — has helped insulate the Chinese economy from volatile global energy markets. China now derives roughly 80% of its energy needs domestically and has diversified oil imports across suppliers such as Russia and Saudi Arabia, reducing exposure to chokepoints like Hormuz.
The Bloomberg analysis highlights how the Iran conflict is reshaping global economic alignments. Rising oil prices have forced the U.S. to ease some sanctions on Russian and Iranian exports to stabilize supply, weakening a key pillar of U.S. leverage. At the same time, countries are accelerating investments in renewables — a sector China dominates — potentially expanding Beijing’s influence in global energy markets and supply chains.
Trade tensions further underscore the shifting balance. China’s export controls on rare earth magnets — a small but critical segment of global trade — demonstrated Beijing’s ability to weaponize supply chains with precision. The country has built out legal and regulatory frameworks over several years to mirror U.S.-style sanctions tools, allowing it to respond quickly and effectively in a renewed trade conflict.
Meanwhile, the U.S. faces mounting domestic pressure. Elevated gasoline prices tied to the Iran war are complicating the administration’s economic outlook ahead of midterm elections, even as officials pursue broader geopolitical strategies aimed at limiting China’s global reach.
The analysis concludes that the convergence of trade disputes and the Iran conflict is accelerating a broader shift in global power dynamics. Economic chokepoints — from rare earths to strategic waterways — are increasingly being used as tools of statecraft. As Trump prepares for a potential summit with Xi, the meeting may reflect not American dominance, but a more contested and multipolar economic order shaped by long-term strategic positioning rather than short-term pressure tactics.
| CONGRESS |
—Grown in America Act gains traction as farm and food groups push domestic sourcing incentives
Bipartisan bill backed by USA Rice and industry coalition highlights economic gains and supply chain resilience
The Ag Investment for America coalition (link), alongside USA Rice, is ramping up support on Capitol Hill for the Grown in America Act (HR 1707), a bipartisan proposal aimed at boosting domestic demand for U.S.-grown agricultural commodities through targeted tax incentives. At a congressional briefing this week, lawmakers and industry leaders underscored the bill’s potential to strengthen farm incomes, support rural jobs, and reduce reliance on imported inputs amid volatile global trade conditions.
Led by Rep. David Kustoff (R-Tenn.) and Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), the legislation currently has 32 bipartisan cosponsors and is gaining attention as policymakers look for ways to reinforce domestic supply chains in agriculture.
The bill would provide a 25% tax credit to U.S. companies and cooperatives based on the value of commodities they source domestically for food and beverage production, creating a direct financial incentive to shift away from imports.
New analysis (link) presented by Dr. Bart Fischer of the Texas A&M Agricultural and Food Policy Center estimates the measure would generate $2.36 billion in additional economic activity annually and support at least 7,000 new jobs nationwide. The benefits, according to the study, would extend across nearly every state and most congressional districts, reflecting the broad footprint of U.S. agriculture and food manufacturing.
The structure of the tax credit is designed to reward sustained increases in domestic sourcing. Companies must meet a minimum threshold of 50 percent U.S.-sourced commodities to qualify, with a requirement to increase that share by at least 5% annually until reaching 85%. This escalating benchmark is intended to drive long-term changes in procurement behavior rather than short-term adjustments.
USA Rice President and CEO Peter Bachmann emphasized that the policy could be particularly impactful for commodities like rice, where processing is essential before consumption. He noted that the incentive would benefit the entire value chain — from growers to mills to end users — while helping offset uncertainty in export markets.
Meanwhile, coalition partners including the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, and FMI – The Food Industry Association echoed support for the measure, framing it as a tool to enhance domestic investment and stabilize supply chains amid geopolitical disruptions and shifting trade dynamics.
The push for the Grown in America Act comes as producers face heightened uncertainty tied to global market access, including softer export demand in key destinations and ongoing trade tensions. By incentivizing domestic utilization of U.S. crops, supporters argue the bill could provide a more stable demand base and improve long-term resilience for American agriculture.
Coalition leaders indicated the measure could become part of broader tax or farm policy negotiations in the months ahead.
| POLITICS & ELECTIONS |
—Trump disapproval hits second-term high as economic anxiety mounts
Rising gas prices and worsening economic sentiment weigh on approval, while immigration remains a relative strength
Disapproval of Donald Trump has reached its highest level of his second term, according to a New York Times polling average reported April 23, which shows 58% of Americans disapprove of his job performance compared to 39% who approve — a net approval rating of negative 19 points. The decline comes amid mounting economic concerns and rising gas prices tied to the ongoing Iran conflict, echoing broader voter unease about inflation and financial conditions.
The latest figures mark Trump’s weakest standing since the aftermath of his first-term election loss and the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Polling deterioration has accelerated in recent weeks, coinciding with heightened geopolitical tensions and domestic economic strain.
Political pressure is also intensifying ahead of the midterm elections, with Democrats aiming to frame the vote as a referendum on Trump’s leadership. Meanwhile, some conservative voices — including Tucker Carlson — have recently broken with the president, highlighting fractures within parts of his broader coalition.
A survey conducted by Marquette University Law School shows Trump’s approval among independents has dropped sharply to 28%, down from 39% at the start of his term. While Republican support remains relatively strong at 80%, there are signs of erosion even within the base.
Economic concerns are a central driver of the decline. A recent poll from Fox News found that 70% of voters believe the economy is worsening for them and their families, up from 55% a year ago. Notably, nearly half of Republicans now share that view — roughly double the level from last April.
Trump’s approval ratings on key economic issues reflect this shift. Just 34% of voters approve of his handling of the economy, while only 28% approve of his approach to inflation. Meanwhile, immigration remains a relative bright spot, with 46% of voters expressing approval of his policies on the border.
Taken together, the data underscores a challenging political environment for the administration, with economic anxiety increasingly shaping public opinion as geopolitical tensions continue to ripple through domestic conditions. While most election watchers have signaled Democrats will likely regain control of the House following midterm elections, they are more cautious about the Senate outcome. One election watcher recently said if Trump’s approval rating drops below 40%, the odds rise that the Democrats could also take control of the Senate.
—Rating changes expand Senate battleground as Democrats eye broader map
Inside Elections analysis highlights shifts in Ohio, Nebraska, and South Carolina as political environment pressures GOP defenses
According to Nathan L. Gonzales and Jacob Rubashkin of Inside Elections, the 2026 Senate map is expanding in Democrats’ favor, with newly competitive terrain emerging in states previously considered safely Republican, including Ohio, Nebraska, and South Carolina. Their latest April 23 analysis underscores how a weakening political environment for Republicans — driven in part by President Donald Trump’s standing and shifting voter sentiment — is forcing rating changes across key races and widening the battlefield.
In Ohio, the race between Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) and former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) has tightened, prompting a rating shift from Lean Republican to Tilt Republican. Brown holds a significant fundraising edge, reporting $16.5 million cash-on-hand compared to Husted’s $8.2 million, and early polling reflects a highly competitive contest. Republicans, however, are preparing for a costly defense, with the Senate Leadership Fund reserving $79 million in fall advertising — its largest investment nationwide. The contest is also being shaped by Democratic efforts to tie Husted to the FirstEnergy bribery scandal, while Republicans aim to nationalize the race. Overall, the move to Tilt Republican reflects both Democratic momentum and the expectation of a closely fought, high-spending battle.
In Nebraska, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) sees his race downgraded from Solid Republican to Likely Republican as independent candidate Dan Osborn reemerges as a credible challenger. While Ricketts maintains structural advantages — including personal wealth, strong GOP networks, and higher name recognition from his tenure as governor — the broader political climate is less favorable for Republicans than in prior cycles. Osborn’s potential strength hinges on consolidating a two-person race, though complications from Democratic and third-party filings could fragment opposition. Still, polling suggests a narrow contest, and analysts note that if Osborn succeeds in simplifying the field, Republicans may be forced to invest heavily in a state that would typically not require significant resources.
In South Carolina, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also faces a downgrade, moving from Solid Republican to Likely Republican. While Graham retains a formidable financial advantage, with $11.6 million cash-on-hand, and benefits from the state’s GOP lean, analysts point to potential vulnerabilities tied to his long tenure and shifting political dynamics. Democrats may field a competitive candidate in physician Annie Andrews, who has demonstrated fundraising strength and could attract national support if the environment continues trending toward Democrats. Importantly, recent electoral data suggests 2026 may resemble a less favorable GOP environment akin to 2020 rather than the stronger Republican performance in 2024, raising the possibility that even traditionally safe seats could become more competitive.
Taken together, these rating changes reflect a broader recalibration of the Senate landscape. As Gonzales and Rubashkin note, Republicans are now defending more competitive seats than Democrats, while the overall political climate appears to be deteriorating for the GOP. Although Democrats still face challenges converting opportunities into guaranteed pickups, the expansion of the battleground into states like Nebraska and South Carolina signals a more fluid and uncertain path to Senate control heading into November.
Outlook: Inside Elections concludes: “While the broader, macro environment is working in favor of Democrats, Republicans are hoping to hold the majority at the individual race level. Potentially flawed Democratic nominees in Maine, Michigan and Iowa could be fatal to Democratic chances. Although, the electorate might be frustrated enough with the status quo and lack of GOP attention to affordability concerns that voters prefer flawed alternatives to the party in power. Unlike 2018, Democrats are likely to gain seats in both chambers, but it’s still not clear whether it will be enough for them to secure the Senate. Democrats are likely to gain 2-4 seats, with the top end of that range being enough for a majority.”
—MAHA coalition shows cracks as voter frustration builds
Disillusionment with Trump policies — particularly on pesticides and health priorities — raises turnout risks and opens a lane for Democrats
Discontent is emerging within the “Make America Healthy Again” coalition that helped elect Donald Trump, with some voters now questioning their support and signaling they may sit out future elections, according to reporting by the New York Times. The backlash is tied in part to administration policies — including a recent executive order promoting glyphosate — that critics say conflict with the movement’s core focus on health, food transparency, and reducing chemical exposure.
The MAHA movement — loosely aligned around Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — brought together vaccine skeptics, organic food advocates, and anti-pesticide activists under a populist umbrella skeptical of both government and industry. While still influential, leaders say enthusiasm has waned as policy decisions diverge from campaign rhetoric. Concerns range from the White House’s handling of vaccine issues to frustration over the stalled Senate confirmation of wellness advocate Casey Means as surgeon general.
The most acute tension stems from Trump’s push to expand glyphosate production, a move the administration has justified on national security and food supply grounds. However, many MAHA supporters — particularly those focused on pesticide reduction — view the decision as a betrayal. Activists argue the policy undercuts efforts to promote “real food” by allowing continued reliance on chemicals they believe pose health risks.
Political implications are beginning to surface. Movement leaders warn that disengaged MAHA voters — many of them independent or formerly Democratic — could become “political orphans,” unwilling to back either party. Meanwhile, Democrats are actively attempting to capitalize on the opening. Cory Booker has aligned with anti-pesticide advocates in legal filings, while Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) has pushed for stronger food safety and chemical regulations, seeking to appeal to health-focused voters.
Despite these overtures, the coalition remains fractured. Vaccine-focused MAHA voters are unlikely to shift toward Democrats, while those centered on food and agriculture policy may be more persuadable. Still, analysts suggest turnout — rather than partisan realignment — may be the more immediate risk, particularly in close elections where marginal voter participation is decisive.
The White House has taken notice, recently engaging MAHA influencers directly to shore up support. But with policy disagreements persisting and grassroots enthusiasm fading, the durability of the MAHA coalition — and its role in shaping upcoming elections — remains uncertain.
—MAGA allies float plan to reabsorb Arlington into Washington, D.C.
Proposal aims to reshape political maps and revive a long-dormant territorial debate
A political idea once confined to niche urbanist circles is gaining traction among some conservative allies of President Donald Trump, according to reporting by Axios. The proposal would reverse the 1847 retrocession of Arlington and Alexandria from District of Columbia back to Virginia, effectively expanding the nation’s capital and redrawing the political landscape in Northern Virginia.
The push is being advanced by Chad Mizelle, a former Justice Department official aligned with Trump adviser Stephen Miller. Mizelle argues that the original retrocession may be unconstitutional and has suggested that Trump could force a legal test by issuing an executive order, sending the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court. The move would potentially reclaim Arlington and Alexandria — including economically vibrant areas like Clarendon — as part of Washington.
The idea also has legislative backing. Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) has introduced a bill dubbed “Make D.C. Square Again,” reflecting the original 100-square-mile footprint envisioned for the capital. Supporters see the effort as a strategic counter to Virginia Democrats, who recently redrew congressional maps to their advantage. By shifting heavily Democratic Northern Virginia territory into D.C., Republicans believe they could disrupt that balance.
Democrats have dismissed the proposal outright. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) called it a “stupid waste of time,” underscoring skepticism about both its legality and political viability.
Beyond politics, the concept raises broader questions about governance and identity. Reabsorbing Arlington would significantly expand D.C.’s population and tax base while giving the district new infrastructure, including access to an airport and greater control over the Potomac River. But it could also revive longstanding tensions over representation, as D.C. residents continue to lack full voting rights in Congress — a condition some Virginians may resist inheriting.
While still far from reality, the proposal highlights how historical boundaries are being revisited through a modern political lens — blending constitutional questions, partisan strategy, and regional identity into a single, provocative idea.
| WEATHER |
— NWS outlook: Thunderstorms forecast for the Upper Midwest and central/southern Plains with severe weather and isolated flash flooding possible… …Gusty winds and warm, very dry conditions will lead to a Critical Risk of fire weather across much of the central/southern High Plains through Friday.
—Corn Belt weather swings stall planting, but drier window ahead
Heavy rains disrupt fieldwork across the Midwest while contrasting temperature patterns and targeted moisture bring mixed impacts across key U.S. growing regions
Planting progress across the Corn Belt has been abruptly slowed by recent rainfall, particularly in key states like Iowa and Missouri, with additional precipitation spreading into eastern areas today. A more significant, widespread rain event is expected to sweep across the entire region from Sunday night through Monday night, further delaying fieldwork in the short term. However, the pattern is forecast to shift notably drier from Tuesday through May 4, offering a critical window for farmers to resume planting and easing immediate concerns about prolonged delays.
Meanwhile, temperatures across the Corn Belt are sharply divided through April 29. A cold pattern dominates the northern Plains and northwestern Corn Belt, while central and southeastern areas remain unseasonably warm, creating a stark regional contrast. This split will give way to a broader, cooler air mass settling across the entire region between April 30 and May 2.
In the Hard Red Winter wheat belt, much-needed rainfall is set to arrive this weekend, with the heaviest totals favoring Nebraska and northeastern Kansas — areas in need of drought relief. A second round of precipitation is expected around Thursday, April 30. However, the Texas and Oklahoma panhandles are likely to miss both systems, leaving drought concerns intact in those regions.
Further south, the Mid-South is entering a markedly wetter pattern beginning today and extending through early May. This stretch is expected to deliver the most substantial rainfall the region has seen in months, significantly improving soil moisture conditions and helping to reverse earlier deficits.
—Weak monsoon threatens India with dual economic shock
Risks to farm output, inflation, and broader demand
A weak monsoon forecast is poised to deliver a “double economic blow” to India, hitting both agricultural output and wider economic activity, according to reporting from the Financial Times. The country’s heavy reliance on seasonal rains means below-normal precipitation can simultaneously depress rural incomes and ripple into urban demand and inflation dynamics.
The core risk centers on India’s deep dependence on the monsoon, which underpins farm production and rural livelihoods. Agriculture still relies heavily on rainfall, meaning weaker precipitation can reduce crop yields and farm earnings. That in turn weakens rural consumption — a key driver of broader economic growth — amplifying the slowdown beyond the farm sector.
Meanwhile, the second blow comes through inflation and macroeconomic spillovers. Lower crop output typically pushes up food prices, a major component of India’s inflation basket. This creates a policy dilemma for the central bank, which may face pressure to tighten monetary policy even as growth slows — a classic stagflationary risk. Broader data and forecasts reinforce this concern, with below-average rainfall expected to lift food prices and strain GDP growth expectations.
The timing compounds the challenge. India is already navigating external pressures — including elevated commodity prices tied to global geopolitical tensions — meaning a weak monsoon could intensify cost pressures while simultaneously eroding domestic demand.
In effect, the monsoon shortfall threatens to hit both sides of the economy at once: supply (through weaker agricultural output) and demand (through reduced rural spending and higher inflation). That dual shock underscores why weather patterns remain a critical macroeconomic variable for India, even as the country continues to modernize and diversify its economy.
