Base Acre Policy Raises Equity, Market Distortion Questions

Decoupled base acres may amplify income inequality and distort planting decisions as farm program payments increase.

URBANA, Ill. (RFD NEWS) — Federal farm payment policy may be increasingly misaligned with today’s production realities, raising equity concerns and potential market distortions as new base acres are allocated in 2026.

Jonathan Coppess, with the University of Illinois Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics and former Administrator of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency, says the USDA’s continued reliance on decoupled base acres rewards historical planting decisions rather than current risk exposure.

In a January 15 farmdoc daily analysis, Coppess explains that ARC and PLC payments are tied to base acres, not planted acres, allowing farmers to receive payments for crops they do not grow. With USDA signaling it will prioritize assigning new base acres to formerly unassigned cotton acres, those design flaws are returning to the forefront as program signups are delayed.

Using national average data, Coppess shows that crops with high base-acre payment rates — particularly rice, peanuts, and seed cotton — generate significantly higher total returns when corn or soybeans are planted on those base acres. Two producers growing the same crop can receive vastly different income outcomes solely because of their base-acre history.

Those disparities may influence planting decisions, especially as higher ARC and PLC payments take effect under the Reconciliation Farm Bill. Coppess cautions that this could contribute to oversupply risks in corn and soybeans.

Farm-Level Takeaway: Decoupled base acres may amplify income inequality and distort planting decisions as farm program payments increase.
Tony St. James, RFD NEWS Markets Specialist
Related Stories
While the 2018 Farm Bill received an extension under the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” Act, the National Pork Producers Council wants lawmakers to do more to support the sector.
WTO gauges point to agricultural raw materials trade growing more slowly than overall goods, reinforcing the need to manage export risk and monitor policy shifts closely.
Dr. Jeffrey Gold, President of the University of Nebraska, joined us to break down what telehealth entails and which conditions can be managed through remote appointments.
Improved export prospects and higher crop prices strengthened future expectations despite continued caution about spending.
While the agriculture industry hoped details on proposed “bridge” payments for farmers would be released this week, Ag Secretary Brook Rollins said the USDA is still working with the White House on the finer points.
Federal lawyers submitted a brief this week backing Bayer’s argument that federal laws governing herbicides like Roundup should prevent lawsuits over the popular chemical.

Tony St. James joined the RFD-TV talent team in August 2024, bringing a wealth of experience and a fresh perspective to RFD-TV and Rural Radio Channel 147 Sirius XM. In addition to his role as Market Specialist (collaborating with Scott “The Cow Guy” Shellady to provide radio and TV audiences with the latest updates on ag commodity markets), he hosts “Rural America Live” and serves as talent for trade shows.

LATEST STORIES BY THIS AUTHOR:

Bioethanol continues to gain ground as the bridge fuel connecting agriculture, aviation, and maritime industries in the global shift toward lower-carbon energy.
Expanding bioethanol use strengthens rural economies, supports farm markets, and positions U.S. agriculture at the center of global low-carbon trade.
NCBA CEO Colin Woodall says more conversations need to occur with stakeholders present surrounding President Trump’s proposal to lower consumer beef prices with Argentinian imports.
Corn and wheat inspections outpaced last year, but soybean movement remains seasonally active yet behind, keeping basis and freight dynamics in focus by corridor.
Lawmakers are pressing for answers on how Washington’s “managed trade” approach — keeping leverage through long-term tariffs — will affect farmers, global markets, and future export opportunities.
Beef industry groups seem to agree — market-based pricing, not federal intervention, best supports rancher livelihoods and long-term beef supply stability.