Author: Paul Goeringer

We are excited to bring you the 1,000th Southern Ag Today article! 

A recent federal district court decision constituted a big win for livestock and poultry operations around the country.  For years, there has been uncertainty related to livestock and poultry operations’ obligation to report air emissions under two federal laws, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).  Congress amended CERCLA in 2018 to exempt livestock operations from air emissions reporting; however, it did not include a similar exemption in EPCRA.  Shortly after the change, the EPA exempted livestock operations from EPCRA’s reporting requirements.  Environmental groups sued over this exemption arguing that the exemption violated EPCRA.

In August 2025, the federal district court for the District of Columbia upheld the exemption in a Memorandum Opinionissued in Rural Empowerment Ass’n for Cmty. Help v. EPA, No. 18-2260 (TJK) (D. D.C. Aug. 7, 2025).  

Background

Congress enacted CERCLA and EPCRA to ensure federal, state, and local authorities could respond to hazardous substances released into the air. For years, the Congress and the EPA wrestled with whether livestock and poultry operations should be required to report air emissions from manure and decomposing manure. In 2018, Congress resolved part of the issue by passing the Fair Agricultural Reporting Method Act (FARM), which exempted such emissions from CERCLA reporting. Following FARM, the EPA enacted a rule extending the exemption to EPCRA Section 304, reasoning that because livestock and poultry emissions no longer triggered CERCLA’s reporting requirement, EPCRA’s parallel duty to notify local officials was likewise inapplicable. 

Environmental groups sued the EPA, arguing that in enacting the exemption the EPA had misinterpreted EPCRA and failed to consider environmental consequences, thereby violating EPCRA, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and NEPA.  Several agricultural groups intervened in the lawsuit including the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, and National Pork Producers Council.

Court’s Reasoning

The court sided with the EPA and agricultural groups upholding the reporting exemption.  Specifically, the court relied upon the decades-old interpretation of the interplay between CERCLA reporting requirements and EPCRA reporting requirements.  Congress expressly tied the EPCRA reporting requirements to CERCLA, and the EPA has long required only those releases that require notification under CERCLA to report under EPCRA.   The EPA’s decision to exempt manure emissions from EPCRA based on Congress’s exemption under CERCLA was neither inconsistent nor unreasonable, according to the court.  Additionally, the court held that NEPA did not apply.  Congress made clear in the FARM Act that farm animal waste was exempted from CERCLA and that reporting under EPCRA is dependent on CERCLA.  Because of this, the EPA was not required to undertake a NEPA analysis to enact its exemption. 

Why is This Important?

For livestock operations, required reporting under CERCLA and EPCRA was burdensome, complex, and difficult to quantify.  Additionally, some believed that requiring such reports caused unnecessary alarm for citizens.  At least for now, this decision answers the long-standing legal battle over air emissions reporting from livestock and poultry operations.  It’s important to note, the environmental groups may appeal this decision to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

---

Goeringer, Paul, and Tiffany Dowell Lashemt. “Clearing the Air on Manure: What the New Ruling Means for Agriculture.” Southern Ag Today 5(36.5). September 5, 2025. Permalink

Over the past five years, the number of data centers has doubled in the U.S.  The U.S. currently accounts for roughly 54 percent of total global data center capacity.  The number of data centers will only grow in the U.S. over time as we see more computing turning to artificial intelligence-based systems.  These data centers can bring economic benefits to the local economy but can also create additional problems in the areas where they are built.  If states make a push for data centers to develop in an area, this can increase power needs within that area, which will lead to increased infrastructure needs (such as transmission lines) to support the power needs of these data centers. New transmission lines may target your property.  With that in mind, let’s talk about what eminent domain is, why power companies have the right to utilize it, and what landowners should consider when presented with a notice.

The power of eminent domain comes from the U.S. and state constitutions, which allow governments or companies that have been granted eminent domain power by the government to take private property for public use, with just compensation. The law requires owners to be paid fair market value.  State legislatures often provide the power of eminent domain for easements to certain entities that provide a public service.  These private entities are frequently electric, gas, and cable companies.  When the use of eminent domain results in an easement being taken for a transmission line, the analysis of just compensation will depend on the impact on the property from the taking.  This is often not an easy analysis and will require experts to determine the impacts on the dominant estate.   

This entire process is driven by state law; it’s hard to do a basic overview for that reason.  What should landowners do when presented with notices that their land might be in a proposed transmission line path?  First, do not delay responding to the request, and look for competent legal representation with experience in eminent domain actions.  You can also talk to neighbors or other trusted advisors to get ideas on reasonable attorneys in your area.  An eminent domain attorney will understand how to assist you in intervening in any state processes to determine the route, understand the experts needed to help determine fair market value when looking at the value of the easement, and assist in drafting terms to protect the land in the easement document.

No one wants to get the notice in the mail that their property might be taken for a transmission line easement.  As we continue to see states make pushes for the development of data centers, we may see a rise in the need for increased transmission lines.  Not sitting on the notice and talking to attorneys early can help you better protect your rights.  At the same time, it will reduce your stress and, hopefully, let you keep doing what you enjoy doing on your property.  

---

Goeringer, Paul. “High Voltage, Higher Stakes: When Data Demands Your Dirt.” Southern Ag Today 5(33.5). August 15, 2025. Permalink

If you have been following the national agricultural news lately, beyond discussions on policy, there has been a focus on states’ legislatures considering “Crop Protection” legislation. This liability protection would extend to companies producing federally approved pesticides. 

We have all seen the news of large settlements from users of federally approved pesticides claiming linkages between their use and cancer. The biggest of these lawsuits is the Roundup litigation. To date, Bayer has paid roughly $10 billion to settle claims that Roundup has caused cancer.  At the same time, class actions have been filed against Syngenta, the manufacturer of Paraquat, for claims that the product causes Parkinson’s Disease.  Finally, AMVAC Chemical Corporation has been sued due to claims that Dacthal (DCPA) has caused birth defects.  

The debate on Crop Protection legislation concerns this type of litigation. Under the legislation being proposed in several states, as long as the federally approved pesticide includes a label with the most recent human health assessment required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) or a label containing consistent with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) carcinogenicity classification for the pesticide required under FIFRA this would be a sufficient warning label.  Under the legislation, this label would be enough to meet the duty to warn under state law.  This would severely limit the ability for users to sue later for alleged health issues (such as cancer or Parkinson’s Disease).  

This legislation has been signed into law in North Dakota, and as of the writing of this article, it has passed the Georgia legislature and has not been signed by the Governor.  Similar legislation is currently before the legislatures in Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. 

---

Georinger, Paul. “What is Crop Protection Legislation.” Southern Ag Today 5(20.5). May 16, 2025. Permalink

As we continue to see rural landowners offered renewable energy leases, it’s important to remember the phases these agreements often include and what may happen during each phase.  If you are presented with a lease agreement for a renewable energy project and are considering it, talk with an attorney with experience in the area before signing.  In many cases, you can go to your state bar association’s website and look for members in your area and talk with them to better understand their experience with these agreements.  At the same time, you can reach out to groups like the American Agricultural Law Association to see if any of their members may have experience in your area.  Working with an attorney early on can help ensure you get a fair deal that protects your interests.

Wind and solar energy agreements usually have three stages: an easement period, an option period, and a lease period. In the first stage, the easement period, the landowner allows the developer to study the land to see if it’s good for a wind or solar project. The developer may survey the land, place sensors to measure wind and sunlight and study the impact on the environment and wildlife. They will also check if the land is suitable for construction. This stage can last anywhere from one to three years. During this time, the landowner can still use the land if they don’t interfere with the developer’s equipment on the property during the surveying.  At the same time, the landowner will continue to receive rental payments.

During the second phase, called the option to lease, the developer works on getting permits and funding for the project. For example, in Maryland, they need approval from the Public Service Commission and other permits to start construction. Other states may need different permits from local governments and approval to connect to the power grid. This phase usually lasts two to five years. The developer is not required to proceed with the project during this time. The landowner can still use the land as usual and will also receive rental payments for the land during this phase.

The third and final phase is the lease. In this phase, solar panels or wind turbines are installed, and the landowner starts receiving lease payments. This phase includes building, operating, possible renewal, and eventually removing the equipment. All told this phase of the agreement may run for 30 or more years with renewals included.  The landowner will have limits on how they can use the land to avoid interfering with the project.

This agreement could end early in the first phase if the surveys show the property is unsuitable for renewable energy development.  It could also end in the second phase if the permitting is not approved.  As mentioned earlier, it’s important to always talk with an attorney and have the agreement reviewed before signing it.

---

Goeringer, Paul. “Understanding Renewable Energy Agreements: Easement, Option, and Lease Phases Explained.” Southern Ag Today 5(13.5). March 28, 2025. Permalink

            On November 2024, the IRS announced the revised federal estate tax and gift tax limits for 2025.  The federal estate tax limit will rise from $13.61 million in 2024 to $13.99 million in 2025.  The federal gift tax limit will jump from $18,000 in 2024 to $19,000 in 2025. North Carolina and Texas have repealed their state estate taxes, and the remaining states in the South have tied their state estate taxes to the federal estate tax limits.  

Federal Estate Taxes

            For 2025, the federal estate tax limit increases to $13.99 million for an individual and $27.98 million for a couple.  A deceased person owes federal estate taxes on a taxable estate if the value is over the exemption amount.  The taxable estate is the gross estate minus allowable expenses and deductions.  For example, a couple with a taxable estate of $28 million passes away in 2025.  The couple’s heirs may exempt up to $27.98 million from federal estate taxes and only owe federal estate taxes on $20,000.  If an estate is getting close to federal estate tax limits, then please check with your accountant to better understand what potential taxes you would owe. 

            One last note on federal estate taxes: a surviving spouse has an unlimited marital deduction. The surviving spouse can include the predeceasing spouse’s unused federal estate tax limit in their federal estate tax limit. This concept is known as portability, and it provides strategies for estates that may be reaching the estate tax limits.

            It is important to note that the current exemptions sunset on Jan. 1, 2026.  Congress would need to extend the current exemptions, or we would have to revert to the prior exemptions.  The prior exemption is estimated to be around $7 million in 2026.

Federal Gift Tax Limit

            The federal gift tax limit goes up to $19,000 in 2025.  Federal tax law allows each taxpayer to gift up to $19,000 per year to one individual without incurring federal gift taxes. This exemption is tied to inflation but can only increase to the nearest $1,000 amount.  For a couple, this would be $38,000 in gifting to an individual.  Gifting strategies can be adopted by those individuals nearing the estate tax limits to reduce the value of their estates.  Individuals should talk to their accountant and attorney to consider developing strategies that will minimize the impacts of estate taxes.

How Does This Impact You?

            Benjamin Franklin once wrote, “In this world, nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” With that in mind, farm families concerned about hitting the top federal or state estate tax exemption need to begin working on farm succession and estate plans to limit potential estate taxes down the road. Research from USDA’s Economic Research Service highlights that in 2023, 99 percent of U.S. farms would owe no estate taxes with those farms being impacted by federal estate taxes being less than 1 percent.  

            Working with a tax advisor early on can help limit your taxes and devise a tax plan to keep the farm in operation for future generations. Failure to properly plan can force surviving family members to sell family assets to pay taxes on the inheritance. Along with a tax advisor, consider working with additional team members, such as an attorney and financial planner, to begin developing the family’s farm succession plan.

            For those who need to develop estate tax plans, you should discuss with your farm succession team members if the increases in the estate tax limits impact your plan. Although this change may not affect your succession plan, it allows you to discuss other changes in the farming operation over the past year.

---

Goeringer, Paul. “Federal Estate Tax and Gift Tax Limits Announced For 2025.” Southern Ag Today 4(49.5). December 6, 2024. Permalink