Author: Ryan Loy

  • Midsouth Rice Production and Trade Update for 2024/25 

    Midsouth Rice Production and Trade Update for 2024/25 

    Midsouth Production Expenses and Profitability

    The global rice market is poised for significant shifts in the 2024/25 marketing year, driven mostly by relative profitability, policy changes, and evolving global trade dynamics. Domestic rice production expectations, specifically in Arkansas, look to increase slightly, marking three consecutive years of increased rice acres and production. Shifting off the traditional crop rotation may signal rice’s operating margins are a more attractive investment to farmers (and their lenders) again in 2025. Based on enterprise budgets published by the University of Arkansas, operating expenses for rice look to improve year-over-year (Table 1). Nitrogen inputs show the only increase in per-acre expenditures, with a 4% increase from 2024, while seed and diesel expenses have significantly declined. It’s worth noting that a possible 2025 seed shortage could hinder the expansion of rice acres; if this comes to fruition, seed expenses will likely increase relative to 2024, severely impacting profitability (Haigwood, 2025).  

    Table 1. 2023 – 25 Selected Rice Operating Expenses

    202320242025% Change         
    (2024 – 2025)
    Seed ($/ac)$43.92$71.28$45.36-36.36%***
    Nitrogen (N) ($/lb)$0.40$0.25$0.264.00%
    Phosphate (P) ($/lb)$0.45$0.35$0.350.00%
    Potash (K) ($/lb)$0.41$0.25$0.250.00%
    Herbicide ($/ac)$138.78$135.89$131.62-3.14%
    Insecticide ($/ac)$3.01$9.04$9.040.00%
    Fungicide ($/ac)$24.10$11.32$11.320.00%
    Diesel ($/gal)$4.50$3.65$2.80-23.29%

    Per-acre operating costs in Arkansas amount to roughly ~$992/acre, based on 2025 operating expense forecasts. Table 1 highlights the profitability of mid-south rice production using Arkansas County, Arkansas. Using the 2023 Arkansas state average yield and price of 186 bu/acre and $6.13/bu, a mid-south rice farmer under an 80/20 crop share agreement can expect to breakeven at 203 bu/acre (assuming $6.13/bu) or at $6.67/bu (assuming 186 bu/acre). Table 1 below highlights per-acre profit above operating expenses (~$992/acre) under a range of prices and yields.  

    Figure 1. Rice Net Operating Returns, Arkansas County, Arkansas, 2025, 80-20 Crop Share

    Quick Trade Update

    The Mexico rice market will be worth watching as we move into the 2024/25 marketing year. The USDA-FAS forecasts Mexico to import nearly 860,000 metric tons of paddy/rough rice (a 1% increase YoY). The U.S. is poised to remain the primary source of these imports due to its proximity and relationship with Mexico. However, Brazil (and other countries such as Argentina and Thailand) are expected to increase their market share of Mexican paddy rice imports from lower prices and tariff exemptions through the extended Presidential Anti-inflation decree, which exempts tariffs on countries without a free trade agreement (FTA) for rough rice through 2025 (USDA-FAS, 2025). However, long-grain milled rice is not included in the tariff exemption, and as such, the import tariff returns to 20% for countries besides the United States, which is exempt due to the USMCA trade agreement. This helps the U.S. maintain competitiveness and retain market share for milled rice exports to Mexico (USDA-ERS, 2025).  Still, domestic U.S. rice supply has outpaced total use (including exports), with a 10.7% increase in ending stocks, according to the January 2025 WASDE Report. Current ending stocks, coupled with the expectation for increased rice acres and global trade uncertainty, could continue to put downward pressure on rice prices and hinder U.S. export competitiveness into this marketing year.  

    References

    University of Arkansas, Division of Agriculture. (2025). Crop Enterprise Budgets for Arkansas. Retrieved January 2025, from, https://www.uaex.uada.edu/farm-ranch/economics-marketing/farm-planning/budgets/crop-budgets.aspx

    United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. (2025). Rice Outlook: January 2025. Retrieved January 2025, from, https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/dn39x152w/3f464060c/t722k493j/RCS-25A.pdf

    United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. (2025). Grain and Feed Update: Mexico, January 2025. Retrieved February 2025, from, https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Grain%20and%20Feed%20Update_Mexico%20City_Mexico_MX2025-0003.pdf

    United States Department of Agriculture. (2025). World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, January 10, 2025. Retrieved January 2025, from, https://www.usda.gov/oce/commodity/wasde/wasde0125.pdf

    Haigwood, W.S. (2025). Rice Seed Availability Tightens Even More for 2025. Retrieved February 3, 2025, from, https://www.farmprogress.com/rice/rice-seed-availability-tightens-for-2025


    Loy, Ryan. “Midsouth Rice Production and Trade Update for 2024/25.Southern Ag Today 5(7.3). February 12, 2025. Permalink

  • Benefits of Debt Consolidation to Improve Short-Term Liquidity

    Benefits of Debt Consolidation to Improve Short-Term Liquidity

    Historically, low commodity prices, high input costs, and expensive financing have been some of the most significant issues farmers have faced in the last few years. Luckily, some financial relief may come in the form of lower interest rates from the Fed reducing COVID-era rate increases (Wright, 2024). The Fed aggressively moved in September to cut 50 basis points, bringing the target Federal Funds rate to 4.75 – 5%, with indications for at least another 50 basis points before the end of 2024 (Fannie Mae, 2024). This article explores a hypothetical situation of a producer leveraging lower interest rates to consolidate debt to improve short-term liquidity. 

    Consider a farmer’s debt obligation for 2024 (Table 1). In this scenario, the farmer holds a land loan with an original principal balance of $450,000 at a fixed interest rate over 20 years. As of 2024, the remaining principal stands at $330,000, with 12 years left in the repayment period. Additionally, the farmer has a machinery loan with an original principal balance of $180,000, structured over a 7-year term. The outstanding balance on this loan is currently $110,000, with 4 years left until maturity. 

    The farmer also faces a $50,000 operating loan, due at the end of this year. Unfortunately, this year has not been profitable, and he cannot cashflow all his debt obligations. 

    Table 1. Current Debt Obligations – Before Consolidation

    The farmer’s total current debt obligation amounts to $123,000 for the year (Table 2). To address this financial strain, the producer meets with their lender to explore options for restructuring their debt. They discuss the possibility of consolidating existing debt into a longer-term, more favorable interest rate structure. The lender agrees to consolidate the remaining principal balances on all three loans ($330,000 + $110,000 + $50,000) into a new 10-year note totaling $490,000 (Table 3). The lender agrees to secure this loan using the equity in the farmer’s financed land as collateral. 

    Table 2. Debt Financing Structure Before Consolidation

    Table 3. Consolidated Debt Structure

    Under this new debt structure, the farmer not only relieves the burden of the current year payments, but also reduces the ongoing obligation from $73,000/year to $63,000/year.  While debt consolidation offers advantages, it’s also important to consider potential drawbacks. For example, under the original debt structure, the annual debt service obligation would have dropped to $40,000/year, after the machinery loan was paid off in 4 years.  Under the consolidated note, the producer is committed to $63,000/year for a full 10 years.  Longer-term debt obligations also potentially lead to paying higher total interest expenses, even with an interest rate lower than their original loan(s) due to the extended accrual period. Additionally, creating a new loan comes with closing costs and fees that could offset the immediate financial benefits. Every situation is unique, and the pros/cons are not always clear.  Those looking to consolidate existing debt should meet with their lenders and determine the best strategy for their farm’s short-term viability and long-term sustainability. 

    References

    Wright, Andrew. “Lower Interest Rates Create Opportunities for Managing Debt on the Farm.” Southern Ag Today 4(37.3). September 11, 2024.

    Fannie Mae. (2024). Fed Cuts Interest Rates Amid Sluggish Existing Sales but a Rebound in Starts Activity. Retrieved November 5, 2024, from https://www.fanniemae.com/research-and-insights/forecast/fed-cuts-interest-rates-amid-sluggish-existing-sales-rebound-starts-activity#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Open%20Market%20Committee,rate%20of%202.75%2D3%20percent.

  • Sifting through the Rice Market: Rising Supplies and Growing Competition

    Sifting through the Rice Market: Rising Supplies and Growing Competition

    With several key moves during the 2024 rice market, and harvest behind us, we can let the dust settle and make some observations and conclusions as we look toward 2025. A major shift in domestic production patterns emerged in 2022; volatile input costs, triggered by the Russian-Ukraine War and supply chain disruptions, led to a decline in rice acreage as southern U.S. farmers opted to grow less input-intensive crops like soybeans and corn. These challenges were exacerbated by a severe drought in California that substantially reduced short/medium grain rice production. Rice production rebounded in 2023 and maintained that level in 2024, when more stable fertilizer prices shifted producers back to rice to counter the risk of lower prices, as was the case in other commodities (Figure 1). Recent conversations with agronomists indicate that U.S. rice farmers may maintain or expand rice acreage and production in 2025.

    Figure 1. U.S. All Rice Class Production and Acres Harvested (2014 – 2024)

    The November 2024 World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report indicates the current outlook for U.S. rice is for larger ending stocks, weaker exports and unchanged supplies and domestic use from October 2024 (USDA-AMS, 2024). All rice exports combined are lowered 1 million cwt to a total of 100 million. All rice ending stocks are increased 1 million cwt to 46.7 million, a 19% increase from the 2023/24 marketing year. The seasonal average farm price for long grain and southern short/medium grain is unchanged at $14.50/cwt, suggesting a cautious domestic response to the stock increases (Figure 2).

    Figure 2. Rice Marketing Year Average Farm Prices (2020/21 – 2024/24F)

    Internationally, it’s important to note the spread between India’s rice, Thailand/Vietnam rice, and U.S. milled rice. U.S. long grain is and has remained for several months at $800/metric ton, while Vietnam and Thailand are currently selling at $550 and $500/metric ton, respectively. The price gap widened following the September 2024 lift of India’s export ban on non-basmati milled rice. Currently, India has set the price floor at $490/metric ton. India’s return to the international market has forced Thailand and Vietnam to lower their prices by 10-13%, impacting demand for U.S. long grain rice in countries like Iraq. Iraq’s preference for cheaper rice from Asia, influenced by the price differential, has reduced demand for U.S. rice exports and poses a challenge for U.S. farmers (Childs and Jarrell, 2024). 

    Looking ahead, global rice exports for 2025 are expected to increase by 4% YoY, bringing total exports to 56.3 million metric tons. India is projected to reclaim much of their share, reaching a volume of 21 million tons. However, countries like Pakistan, Thailand, Vietnam, and the United States are expected to see a decline in export volumes (Figure 3). 

    Figure 3. Milled Rice Exports (2020/21 – 2024/25Nov)

    Source: USDA-FAS, 2024

    References

    United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service. (2024). World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE-654). Retrieved November 9, 2024, from, https://www.usda.gov/oce/commodity/wasde/wasde1124.pdf

    United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service – PSD Reports. (2024). World Rice Trade. Retrieved November 9, 2024, from, https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/app/index.html#/app/downloads

    United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2024). Rice Production and Acres Harvested. Retrieved October 2024, from, https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/

    Loy, R., and Hunter, B. (2024). The Disparity Between Crop Prices Received and Input Prices Paid.” Southern Ag Today 4(28.3). July 10, 2024. Available at, https://southernagtoday.org/2024/07/10/the-disparity-between-crop-prices-received-and-input-prices-paid/

    Childs, N., & Jarrell, P. (2024). Rice outlook: October 2024 (Report No. RCS-24I). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Retrieved November 2024, from, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/outlooks/110219/rcs-24i.pdf?v=5219.8


    Loy, Ryan. “Sifting through the Rice Market: Rising Supplies and Growing Competition.Southern Ag Today 4(48.3). November 27, 2024. Permalink

  • The Disparity Between Crop Prices Received and Input Prices Paid

    The Disparity Between Crop Prices Received and Input Prices Paid

    The United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS) releases monthly indexes for input prices paid and output prices received. These indexes include collecting survey responses for output and input prices for agricultural production, crops, livestock, and food commodities. The spread between these two indices often helps understand where farmers are getting price squeezed and how their profit margins are impacted. Current farm income instability from inflationary pressures, high interest rates, and several supply chain disruptions (e.g., the Russian-Ukraine war and Panama/Suez Canal) are forcing farmers to pay higher input costs while receiving lower commodity prices, emphasizing the need to consider these indexes into the future. 

    These price indices measure the change in prices paid (and received) relative to a point in time—2011 in this case (Figure 1). The base year is often chosen during a time without prevailing inflation or major supply chain disruptions (Schulz, 2022). 2011 was a good year for agricultural production and profitability. As such, using 2011 as a base year is a way to highlight how better or worse-off agricultural producers are compared to a good year. 

    Figure 1. Crop Output Prices Received vs. Input Prices Paid

    Figure 1 compares the annual index value from 2000-2024 for the two indices with 2011 as the base year. The price received index in 2012 was 102.8%, meaning that the crop price received, on average, in 2012 was 2.8% higher than in 2011 (base year = 100%). The red circle in Figure 1 shows the beginning of a divergence between input and output prices. In 2013, when writing the 2014 farm bill, the index for input prices paid was almost exactly the index for output prices received. This is where most of our current farmer safety net support stems from, and since then, we’ve seen a major divergence in the two indices, with the widest gaps between 2014 – 2020 (USDA-NASS). From 2021 – 2022, we saw both indices increase, but the gap remained, and the divergence has grown wider in 2023 and 2024 due to declining commodity prices. 

    Another way to view the indices is to calculate how they change year to year. Figure 2 plots the same indices as Figure 1 but shows the yearly change between the index values. Using this percentage change helps producers understand 1) the volatility of crop output prices and 2) the magnitude of change as compared to the previous year. A key takeaway is that input prices are less volatile (in terms of yearly % change) than output prices. Secondly, the percentage change in crop output prices between 2023 and 2024 (-13.8%) is much larger than the percentage decrease in input prices (-1.38%) during that period.

    Without any relief in the form of improved crop prices received, figure 1 suggests farmers will continue to suffer from cost/price squeezes and eroding profit margins. Further, figure 2 shows the magnitude of that spread between the indices in Figure 1; if input and output prices continue this trajectory, an improved farm safety net will be warranted. This will be at the forefront of every producer’s mind, with ongoing Farm Bill debates in 2024.  

    Figure 2. Year-over-Year % Change in Input and Output Crop Prices


    References

    Schulz, L. (2022). Disentangling Input and Output Price Relationships. Retrieved from: https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/articles/schulz/SchSep22b.html

    The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC). (2024). Fertilizers in Russia. Retrieved from: https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/fertilizers/reporter/rus

    USDA-Economic Research Service (2024). Farm Sector Income & Finances: Highlights from the Farm Income Forecast. Retrieved from: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-sector-income-finances/highlights-from-the-farm-income-forecast/

    USDA- Economic, Statistics, and Market Information System. (2024). Agricultural Prices. Retrieved from: https://usda.library.cornell.edu/concern/publications/c821gj76b?locale=en


    Loy, Ryan, and Hunter Biram. “The Disparity Between Crop Prices Received and Input Prices Paid.Southern Ag Today 4(28.3). July 10, 2024. Permalink

  • Tax Reporting for Crop Insurance

    Tax Reporting for Crop Insurance

    With tax season in full swing, knowing how to properly report crop insurance premiums and indemnities is important to ensure accurate tax reporting. Many producers have CPAs or accounting firms that manage their finances and taxes. However, understanding how to report crop insurance proceeds is a great on-farm skill when maintaining accurate financial records.

    The Schedule F, “Profit and Loss from Farming,” is an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) form that allows producers to report net profit (or losses) from their agricultural production (IRS, 2022). The Schedule F shows income and expenses pertaining to principal farming activities, such as grain and livestock sold, any income from cooperatives, program payments, and federal crop insurance distributions. Crop insurance proceeds (or indemnities) must be included on a Schedule F as farm income regardless of how much proceeds a producer receives to cover the producer premium. Importantly, crop insurance proceeds can be reported in several ways depending on when you sell your grain. 

    1. Reporting crop insurance indemnities – not deferred

    Assume a producer received $50,000 in crop insurance indemnities this year and would receive a 1099-MISC form from the crop insurance company confirming that indemnity amount. The producer’s normal business practice is to sell their crop in the same year as production (i.e., crops produced in 2023 are sold in 2023). Therefore, the producer must report the indemnity on the tax return for the year the crop was sold and produced. The $50,000 indemnity would be reported on lines 6a and 6b.  

    Figure 1. Reporting a $50,000 Crop Insurance Indemnity

    1. Reporting crop insurance indemnities – deferred

    Again, assume a producer received $50,000 in crop insurance indemnities this year. However, the producer normally reports income from crops in a following tax year under their normal business practices. Therefore, the producer can defer the crop insurance indemnities to next year. The $50,000 would again be reported on line 6a. But now, the producer checks the box on line 6c to defer the indemnity until next year (Figure 2). To defer, a producer must submit a statement containing 1) producer’s name and address, 2) declaration that the producer is making the deferral, 3) identifying crop and damage information, 4) declaration that crop income is normally included in the following year, and 5) name of the insurance carrier. For more information on how to compile this statement, please consult a tax professional.

    Now, let’s assume the producer deferred a $30,000 indemnity in 2022 and must report it on their 2023 taxes (Figure 3). The producer would follow Figure 2 and then report the $30,000 on line 6d. 

    Figure 2. Deferring a $50,000 Crop Insurance Indemnity

    Figure 3. Reporting a Deferred Crop Insurance Indemnity from 2022

    1. Reporting crop insurance premiums

    Lastly, the premium paid is reported as expense on the Schedule F. The full amount of premium paid must be reported regardless of how much indemnities cover the premium cost. In this case, premiums reduce Schedule F profit and lessens the tax burden on their farming enterprise. Assume a producer paid a total of $40,000 in premiums for 2023, they would report this amount on Schedule F, Part II, line 20, effectively reducing taxable Schedule F profit by $40,000. 

    Figure 4. Reporting a $40,000 Crop Insurance Premium

    It’s worth noting that we are not tax accountants, and every farm’s situation is unique. Therefore, you should always consult with a tax professional when preparing your farm’s taxes. 

    References

    Internal Revenue Service. (2023, July 13). About Schedule F (Form 1040), Profit or Loss From Farming. Retrieved September 25, 2023, from https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-schedule-f-form-1040.

    Loy, R. and Biram, H.D. (2023). Cultivating Financial Security: A Guide on Farm Finances, Taxes, and Crop Insurance. University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service Fact Sheet No. FSA80.

    Tidgen, K.A. (2019). Special Rule for Taxing Crop Insurance and Disaster Payments. Iowa State University Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation. Retrieved September 25, 2023, from https://www.calt.iastate.edu/blogpost/special-rule-taxing-crop-insurance-and-disaster-payments.


    Loy, Ryan, and Hunter Biram. “Tax Reporting for Crop Insurance.Southern Ag Today 4(11.3). March 13, 2024. Permalink