45Z has rules & regs out and Trump signed the executive order. It’s a big deal for anyone that no-tills, implements cover crops & the end users of their crops.
If you’re already signed up with Gradable or another such data aggregator, congrats you’re ahead of the game.
https://t.co/RzwubwXDpn
Day 3 looking at corn profitability w/ Grok: Land rent is up 104% over the last twenty years. Farmland values soared 170%(!), up to $4170/ac. Checkout this chart from Farm Bureau. What happened in 2005, 2012, and 2021 to cause the chart to spike? 🤔.
Much like the other culprits on this list, land goes up when times are good and doesn't drop when the market dips. Historically the solution for this problem is to buy land... but I'm not sure thats a good idea in this lending environment.
Using Grok, I dove into farm equipment costs over the last twenty years. The tl;dr is that equipment costs have jumped 97% over that time period, which is the lowest of all of my expense categories (see my last post).
Diving deeper, I found that the biggest culprit for this is fuel/oil and repair costs, which both rose 122%. Depreciation costs were much lower than I expected (26%), likely due to changes in machinery sizing and the healthy used equipment market.
What can we do about this? Look for ways to lower fuel costs via locking in fuel pricing when prices dip. Find a local repair man who offers rates lower than the dealer. What else?
Next I'll look into land.
Farm profitability has been a hot topic. I wanted to dig deeper and used Grok to quantify where the money goes as farm profits rise and fall. I started with corn and focused on the last twenty years.
2005 corn profitability was rough. Using USDA data, revenue was $323/ac and costs were $417/ac (ouch). Since that time, revenue has gone up 133% while expenses are up 102%. What I wanted to know was-- where did the money go? Here's what Grok found:
- Equipment costs are up 97%
- Land costs are up 104%
- Fertilizer costs are up 156%
- Chemical costs are up 179%
- Seed costs are up 202%
Over the next few days I'll dive deeper into each of these categories and share what I learn.
@BenRiensche What do you think farmers should be paid for this program? What do you think farmers should be paid for more time consuming programs (1 hour of work) that are making emissions claims?
I’m not a financial advisor or crop insurance expert, but I can share some insights about the Enhanced Coverage Option (ECO) for your 2025 corn and soybean crop insurance plan based on available information and general considerations. ECO is a county-level, area-based crop insurance endorsement that supplements your underlying individual policy (like Revenue Protection or Yield Protection), offering higher coverage levels—up to 90% or 95% of expected county revenue or yield—down to a floor of 86%. Here’s a breakdown of what to think about when considering ECO as a hedging tool for your 2025 crops:
### Potential Benefits of ECO for 2025 Corn and Soybeans
1. **Increased Subsidy Makes It More Affordable**: For 2025, the USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) raised the ECO subsidy from 44% to 65% (for revenue protection policies), significantly lowering your out-of-pocket premium costs. For example, posts on X and articles from farmdoc daily suggest that farmer-paid premiums for ECO at 95% coverage could drop by around 37% compared to 2024 in some regions (e.g., from $29.15 to $18.22 per acre for corn in Livingston County, IL). This makes it a cost-effective way to boost coverage without breaking the bank.
2. **Protection Against Low Prices and County Yield Drops**: With corn and soybean prices trending lower in early 2025 (e.g., December 2025 corn futures averaged $4.70 in February, and soybeans were down $1.01 from 2024’s projected price), ECO could lock in a higher revenue floor. If county yields or prices dip below the 95% or 90% trigger, you’d receive an indemnity, hedging against market volatility or regional production issues. X posts from farmers and analysts highlight ECO’s appeal this year due to prices already nearing or breaching the 95% mark.
3. **Complements Your Base Policy**: ECO fills the gap between your individual policy (typically capped at 85% coverage) and a higher threshold (up to 95%). For 2025, with revenue guarantees lower than in 2022-2023 (corn at $4.70 vs. $5.91, soybeans at $10.54 vs. $13.76), and production costs still high (e.g., ~$1,050/acre for corn in central Illinois), ECO could help cover more of your downside risk.
4. **Flexibility with Farm Programs**: Unlike the Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO), ECO eligibility isn’t tied to your farm bill program choice (ARC or PLC), giving you more flexibility to pair it with ARC-County, which has higher benchmark prices for 2025 ($5.03 for corn, $12.17 for soybeans).
### Potential Drawbacks to Consider
1. **County-Based, Not Farm-Specific**: ECO pays out based on county-level yield or revenue losses, not your individual farm’s performance. If your yields are consistently above the county average, you might not see a payout even if prices drop, as noted in some X posts where farmers debate its “safety” relative to actual farm results. Historical data from farmdoc daily (2015-2023) shows many Midwest counties had negative net payments (premiums exceeded indemnities), especially for soybeans, suggesting it might not always pay off.
2. **Not a Full Hedge**: ECO isn’t a substitute for market-based hedging (e.g., futures or options). It protects a band of revenue (86% to 95%) but won’t cover losses below 86% unless your underlying policy kicks in. Some X users point out that options might offer more tailored price protection, though at a higher cost than ECO’s subsidized rate.
3. **Delayed Payouts**: Indemnities for ECO are calculated after county yields are finalized, often not paid until June of the following year (2026 for your 2025 crop). This could affect cash flow planning compared to harvest-time payouts from individual policies or private “ECO Offset” products.
4. **Cost vs. Benefit Uncertainty**: While premiums are lower in 2025, the value depends on your county’s loss history. Farmdoc daily analysis shows low loss ratios (e.g., 0.29 in Wisconsin, 0.69 in Nebraska for corn) meaning premiums often exceed payouts over time in some areas.
@ChetEdinger@GrainStats Do you have any thoughts on what an app could offer that would make it useful to marketing your grain?
I dont see an app replacing the experience of working with a grain buyer, but I do think there are ways that it could improve the experience.
@MaraPopara2023@friedberg I understand how you'd come to this conclusion, but I challenge you to focus on the teachings of Jesus rather than how institutions have responded while in power.
@MaraPopara2023@friedberg Yes, humans have proven that they can create a tribe out of anything. I think that the events you mentioned ventured pretty far from the teachings of Jesus.
People think that it stinks being a Cornhusker fan, but really it’s great for 45 weeks of the year. Most of the actual season stinks, but the rest of the year you are “going 10-2”.