Author
Listed:
- Coppess, Jonathan
- Schnitkey, Gary
- Paulson, Nick
- Sherrick, Bruce
- Zulauf, Carl
Abstract
The Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee recently released additional details of a farm bill proposal in advance of a markup scheduled for May 23, 2024. (House Agriculture Committee, Press Release, May 10, 2024). At the top is a 10% to 20% increase to statutory reference prices to “account for persistent inflation and rising costs of production” (House Agriculture Committee, Title-by-Title Summary, May 10, 2024). Important details are yet to be released (which crops receive what level of increase; how much it will cost), but the emphasis is clear and recent history provides guidance on what to expect. The recent proposal by the Chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee is also instructive, proposing increases to statutory reference prices only for seed cotton, rice, and peanuts (Senate ANF Committee, Section-by-Section, May 1, 2024). Without a change in trajectory, any 2024 Farm Bill is likely to produce different reference price increases for different program crops. Doing so will add to the existing disparities among farmers. Increasing reference prices has important implications on the topline spending projections by CBO (see e.g., farmdoc daily, May 14, 2024). Buried beneath these projections are implications for farmers. Critical to this is an oddity unique to the farm payment programs (Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC)): base acres. The payments from these programs are decoupled from what a farmer plants and, thus, from the risks of producing the crop, as well as its costs. This article discusses some of the implications of the imbalance in reference prices and base acres.
Suggested Citation
Coppess, Jonathan & Schnitkey, Gary & Paulson, Nick & Sherrick, Bruce & Zulauf, Carl, 2025.
"Reference Price Disparities & Why It Matters to Farmers,"
farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 14(93).
Handle:
RePEc:ags:illufd:358513
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.358513
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:illufd:358513. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dauiuus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.