[ad_1]
City People’s Farm Payouts Hit $2.3 Billion
Nearly 80,000 “city dwellers” living in some of the largest metropolitan areas in the U.S. received a collective $2.3 billion in farm subsidies between 2019 and 2023. Many of them took advantage of loopholes that allowed the money to be sent to people who don’t live or work on farms.
And Republicans in the House of Representatives are proposing a farm bill that would widen these loopholes even further, making the problem worse by sending even more tax dollars to recipients in these areas.
The high number of recipients of Department of Agriculture farm subsidies in these metro areas is largely due to loopholes in the last farm bill and to payouts from two Trump-era disaster programs: the Market Facilitation Program and the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program.
Recipients of agricultural subsidies must be “actively involved” in agriculture. However the law contains a loophole that allows city dwellers to receive agricultural subsidies even if they do not live or work on a farm. The Court of Audit in 2018 found it that about a quarter of agricultural subsidy recipients do not perform any personal labor on the farm.
EWG analyzed USDA data and found that the $2.3 billion in farm subsidies went to exactly 79,347 people living in Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami and 197 other major metropolitan areas.
Payments to metro area recipients averaged $29,043 per person between 2019 and 2023, an average of $5,808 per person per year. This is more than double the typical benefits received by recipients of SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, would receive if they could receive a benefit for every month in a year.
But hunger relief programs like SNAP are subject to much stricter income and asset tests than exist for agricultural subsidies that people living on a low income only remain eligible for benefits for a limited period of 12 months on average before they leave the program – unlike the city folks who collect tax money year after year.
Expanding loopholes
Rather than closing the loopholes that allow city dwellers to collect farm subsidies, the 2018 Farm Bill made more of it. That law allowed the nephews, nieces, and nephews of a farmer, and all members of “general partnerships” to receive payments regardless of whether they live or work on a farm.
Republican House of Representatives Proposals in 2024 Agricultural Act could create even more loopholes that would allow more city dwellers to collect payments. abolish the payment limit for corporate farms and increase the payment limit for all farms. The House proposal would significantly increase the amount some farmers are eligible to receive.
The House proposal would allow each member of a farm organized as a joint venture or limited liability company to withdraw $155,000 each year. Grants for corporate farms would be limited only by the number of people in the LLC.
Currently, each member of a farm receives a pro-rata share of $125,000. If a farm LLC has five members, they split $125,000 five ways. But under the House GOP plan, each member would be eligible for a whopping $125,000.
More than 200,000 farms are organized as these types of corporate farms. Under the new proposal, the maximum payment limit would also be increased to $155,000 per year.
Tracking down ‘city people’
EWG’s analysis found that city dwellers in zip codes in the 200s most populated metropolitan areas. Using existing datasets, grant recipients were identified as those living in areas with a population density of more than 3,000 people per square mile. To exclude nonmetropolitan areas, the methodology looked at places where the USDA does not take into account rural areas, proximity to a city centre, and other metrics.
This analysis is an update and builds on previous EWG estimates of urban populations, which included only recipients living within city limits. The updated methodology attempts to capture the greater urbanization that has changed the way certain areas are defined, and to promote a better understanding of how many subsidy recipients live in urban areas.
Below is a list of the 200 largest metropolitan areas, along with the number of urban recipients and how much total farm subsidies those people in that metropolitan area received between 2019 and 2023.
The largest amounts of agricultural subsidies go to ‘city people’ in metropolitan areas
|
metro area |
Receivers |
Total |
|
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington |
6,049 |
$93,569,871 |
|
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin |
3,594 |
$31,655,752 |
|
Kansas City, Mo.-Kan. |
2,990 |
$29,564,544 |
|
Denver-Aurora-Lakewood |
2,865 |
$36,462,091 |
|
Minneapolis-St. Paul Bloomington |
2,473 |
$23,525,917 |
|
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler |
2,413 |
$86,396,310 |
|
Lincoln, Nebraska |
2,301 |
$28,833,959 |
|
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim |
2,297 |
$50,792,170 |
|
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Lands |
2,204 |
$26,708,148 |
|
Omaha-Council Bluffs, Nebraska-Iowa |
2,090 |
$30,459,930 |
[ad_2]
House Republicans Push to Increase Payouts
So, it turns out that U.S. farmers are about to reap quite the harvest—not just in corn and soybeans, mind you, but also in new subsidies. These subsidies could soar up to a whopping $10 billion! But wait, let’s break it down a bit further. The state with the juiciest payout (drumroll, please) is Illinois, raking in a cool $2.6 billion across two years. Impressive, right? And hot on its heels is Iowa, pocketing a tidy $2.3 billion. These payments are determined at the county level, based on a mix of factors. It’s like a financial cornucopia for our hardworking farmers!
Now, I don’t know about you, but I’m picturing a farmer doing a little victory dance in a sunflower field. Maybe even high-fiving a scarecrow. By the way, if you’re curious about other jaw-dropping numbers, did you know that the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter was a whopping $1.195 billion? Yep, it happened in the healthcare sector. Pharmacia & Upjohn—the company behind this hefty fine—also had to forfeit an additional $105 million, bringing the total criminal resolution to a staggering $1.3 billion!
1www1.villanova.edu2
blogs.worldbank.org3
openknowledge.worldbank.org4investopedia.com
1. Subsidies and Their Effects:
- Imagine a bustling marketplace where countries exchange goods, services, and ideas. Now, picture governments slipping secret coins into the pockets of their own industries—these coins are subsidies.
- Distortive Subsidies: Some subsidies are like overzealous cheerleaders, boosting specific sectors (think solar panels, steel, or soybeans). But here’s the twist: When these subsidies become too generous, they distort the natural rhythm of trade.
- Trade and Investment Flow Alterations: Subsidies alter the choreography. They sway trade routes, change investment destinations, and sometimes lead to unexpected pirouettes.
- Tariff Bindings and Market Access: Imagine tariff bindings as elegant promises—countries agree to certain trade rules. But when subsidies kick in, they can unravel these promises. It’s like a tango partner suddenly stepping on your toes during a waltz. Ouch!
- Public Support for Open Trade: The audience (that’s us) loves a good show. But when subsidies steal the spotlight, public support for open trade wanes. It’s like watching a play where the villain gets all the applause.
**2. Global Trade Tensions:
- Geopolitical tensions—those dramatic plot twists—have intensified. Trade wars, supply chain disruptions, and climate events have thrown the script into chaos.
- Self-Reliance and Industrial Policies: Countries now crave self-reliance. They’re eyeing “strategic” sectors and whispering sweet nothings to their own industries. Subsidies are the love letters.
- China’s Export Subsidies: Remember when China’s subsidized exports raised eyebrows? Well, that trend is spreading faster than a catchy tune. Other countries are joining the chorus.
- Developing Countries Caught in the Tango: Picture a developing country, twirling on the trade floor. It relies on exports to grow, diversify, and combat climate change. But when subsidies trip it up, the dance becomes awkward.
**3. Escalating Cycles and Solutions:
- The drama escalates: Subsidies provoke countermeasures. Tariffs are like dramatic slaps across the face and[ad_1]
City People’s Farm Payouts Hit $2.3 Billion
Nearly 80,000 “city dwellers” living in some of the largest metropolitan areas in the U.S. received a collective $2.3 billion in farm subsidies between 2019 and 2023. Many of them took advantage of loopholes that allowed the money to be sent to people who don’t live or work on farms.
And Republicans in the House of Representatives are proposing a farm bill that would widen these loopholes even further, making the problem worse by sending even more tax dollars to recipients in these areas.
The high number of recipients of Department of Agriculture farm subsidies in these metro areas is largely due to loopholes in the last farm bill and to payouts from two Trump-era disaster programs: the Market Facilitation Program and the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program.
Recipients of agricultural subsidies must be “actively involved” in agriculture. However the law contains a loophole that allows city dwellers to receive agricultural subsidies even if they do not live or work on a farm. The Court of Audit in 2018 found it that about a quarter of agricultural subsidy recipients do not perform any personal labor on the farm.
EWG analyzed USDA data and found that the $2.3 billion in farm subsidies went to exactly 79,347 people living in Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami and 197 other major metropolitan areas.
Payments to metro area recipients averaged $29,043 per person between 2019 and 2023, an average of $5,808 per person per year. This is more than double the typical benefits received by recipients of SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, would receive if they could receive a benefit for every month in a year.
But hunger relief programs like SNAP are subject to much stricter income and asset tests than exist for agricultural subsidies that people living on a low income only remain eligible for benefits for a limited period of 12 months on average before they leave the program – unlike the city folks who collect tax money year after year.
Expanding loopholes
Rather than closing the loopholes that allow city dwellers to collect farm subsidies, the 2018 Farm Bill made more of it. That law allowed the nephews, nieces, and nephews of a farmer, and all members of “general partnerships” to receive payments regardless of whether they live or work on a farm.
Republican House of Representatives Proposals in 2024 Agricultural Act could create even more loopholes that would allow more city dwellers to collect payments. abolish the payment limit for corporate farms and increase the payment limit for all farms. The House proposal would significantly increase the amount some farmers are eligible to receive.
The House proposal would allow each member of a farm organized as a joint venture or limited liability company to withdraw $155,000 each year. Grants for corporate farms would be limited only by the number of people in the LLC.
Currently, each member of a farm receives a pro-rata share of $125,000. If a farm LLC has five members, they split $125,000 five ways. But under the House GOP plan, each member would be eligible for a whopping $125,000.
More than 200,000 farms are organized as these types of corporate farms. Under the new proposal, the maximum payment limit would also be increased to $155,000 per year.
Tracking down ‘city people’
EWG’s analysis found that city dwellers in zip codes in the 200s most populated metropolitan areas. Using existing datasets, grant recipients were identified as those living in areas with a population density of more than 3,000 people per square mile. To exclude nonmetropolitan areas, the methodology looked at places where the USDA does not take into account rural areas, proximity to a city centre, and other metrics.
This analysis is an update and builds on previous EWG estimates of urban populations, which included only recipients living within city limits. The updated methodology attempts to capture the greater urbanization that has changed the way certain areas are defined, and to promote a better understanding of how many subsidy recipients live in urban areas.
Below is a list of the 200 largest metropolitan areas, along with the number of urban recipients and how much total farm subsidies those people in that metropolitan area received between 2019 and 2023.
The largest amounts of agricultural subsidies go to ‘city people’ in metropolitan areas
metro area
Receivers
Total
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington
6,049
$93,569,871
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin
3,594
$31,655,752
Kansas City, Mo.-Kan.
2,990
$29,564,544
Denver-Aurora-Lakewood
2,865
$36,462,091
Minneapolis-St. Paul Bloomington
2,473
$23,525,917
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler
2,413
$86,396,310
Lincoln, Nebraska
2,301
$28,833,959
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim
2,297
$50,792,170
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Lands
2,204
$26,708,148
Omaha-Council Bluffs, Nebraska-Iowa
2,090
$30,459,930
[ad_2]
House Republicans Push to Increase Payouts
So, it turns out that U.S. farmers are about to reap quite the harvest—not just in corn and soybeans, mind you, but also in new subsidies. These subsidies could soar up to a whopping $10 billion! But wait, let’s break it down a bit further. The state with the juiciest payout (drumroll, please) is Illinois, raking in a cool $2.6 billion across two years. Impressive, right? And hot on its heels is Iowa, pocketing a tidy $2.3 billion. These payments are determined at the county level, based on a mix of factors. It’s like a financial cornucopia for our hardworking farmers!
Now, I don’t know about you, but I’m picturing a farmer doing a little victory dance in a sunflower field. Maybe even high-fiving a scarecrow. By the way, if you’re curious about other jaw-dropping numbers, did you know that the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter was a whopping $1.195 billion? Yep, it happened in the healthcare sector. Pharmacia & Upjohn—the company behind this hefty fine—also had to forfeit an additional $105 million, bringing the total criminal resolution to a staggering $1.3 billion!
1
www1.villanova.edu2
blogs.worldbank.org3
openknowledge.worldbank.org4investopedia.com
1. Subsidies and Their Effects:
- Imagine a bustling marketplace where countries exchange goods, services, and ideas. Now, picture governments slipping secret coins into the pockets of their own industries—these coins are subsidies.
- Distortive Subsidies: Some subsidies are like overzealous cheerleaders, boosting specific sectors (think solar panels, steel, or soybeans). But here’s the twist: When these subsidies become too generous, they distort the natural rhythm of trade.
- Trade and Investment Flow Alterations: Subsidies alter the choreography. They sway trade routes, change investment destinations, and sometimes lead to unexpected pirouettes.
- Tariff Bindings and Market Access: Imagine tariff bindings as elegant promises—countries agree to certain trade rules. But when subsidies kick in, they can unravel these promises. It’s like a tango partner suddenly stepping on your toes during a waltz. Ouch!
- Public Support for Open Trade: The audience (that’s us) loves a good show. But when subsidies steal the spotlight, public support for open trade wanes. It’s like watching a play where the villain gets all the applause.
**2. Global Trade Tensions:
- Geopolitical tensions—those dramatic plot twists—have intensified. Trade wars, supply chain disruptions, and climate events have thrown the script into chaos.
- Self-Reliance and Industrial Policies: Countries now crave self-reliance. They’re eyeing “strategic” sectors and whispering sweet nothings to their own industries. Subsidies are the love letters.
- China’s Export Subsidies: Remember when China’s subsidized exports raised eyebrows? Well, that trend is spreading faster than a catchy tune. Other countries are joining the chorus.
- Developing Countries Caught in the Tango: Picture a developing country, twirling on the trade floor. It relies on exports to grow, diversify, and combat climate change. But when subsidies trip it up, the dance becomes awkward.
**3. Escalating Cycles and Solutions:
- The drama escalates: Subsidies provoke countermeasures. Tariffs are like dramatic slaps across the face and .
- Multilateral Solution Needed: To break this cycle, we need a grand finale—a multilateral solution. Trade negotiators, grab your capes!
- The World Bank’s Insights: A recent study by the World Bank shines a spotlight on subsidies. They’ve categorized over 2,000 subsidy programs across major trading partners. It’s like creating a dance card for the global economy.
- Knowledge Gap and Foundation for Research: But wait, we need more info! Trade negotiators hunger for data like dancers crave rhythm. Let’s fill that knowledge gap and waltz toward fairer trade.
1
documents.worldbank.org3
oecd.org4
.
- Multilateral Solution Needed: To break this cycle, we need a grand finale—a multilateral solution. Trade negotiators, grab your capes!
- The World Bank’s Insights: A recent study by the World Bank shines a spotlight on subsidies. They’ve categorized over 2,000 subsidy programs across major trading partners. It’s like creating a dance card for the global economy.
- Knowledge Gap and Foundation for Research: But wait, we need more info! Trade negotiators hunger for data like dancers crave rhythm. Let’s fill that knowledge gap and waltz toward fairer trade.
1blogs.worldbank.org2
documents.worldbank.org3
oecd.org4
oecd.org
Discover more from Mission LiFE
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
3 thoughts on “House Republicans Push to Increase Payouts in 2024”