Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S1706)
This bill amends the Food Security Act of 1985 to create an exception to certain statutory payment limits for persons or legal entities whose average adjusted gross income is at least 75% derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture. The exception applies to payments or benefits under subtitle E of title I of the Agricultural Act of 2014 and section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996.
Whether the exception benefits small farms or large operators
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly sets out a targeted substantive change by creating an exception to payment limitations for persons or entities deriving a large share of income from agriculture and specifies the payments covered.
This bill amends the Food Security Act of 1985 to create an exception to certain statutory payment limits for persons or legal entities whose average adjusted gross income is at least 75% derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture.
The exception applies to payments or benefits under subtitle E of title I of the Agricultural Act of 2014 and section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996.
The bill explicitly includes agritourism, direct-to-consumer marketing, sale of agricultural equipment, and other agriculture-related activities as qualifying income sources, as determined by the Secretary.
Technocratic, targeted change with modest fiscal effects; more likely if packaged into a larger agriculture/farm-bill vehicle than as a standalone bill.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly sets out a targeted substantive change by creating an exception to payment limitations for persons or entities deriving a large share of income from agriculture and specifies the payments covered. The bill leaves substantial implementation detail to the Secretary and does not address fiscal impacts, verification standards, or accountability measures.
Whether the exception benefits small farms or large operators
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Whether the exception benefits small farms or large operators
Likely supportive of aiding people who truly depend on agriculture, especially small-scale and family farmers.
However, concerned the 75% income threshold and broad "other agriculture-related activities" language could be exploited by larger operators without stronger safeguards.
Views the bill as a pragmatic, narrowly focused fix to ensure disaster programs reach producers who depend on farming income.
Wants clearer definitions, implementation guidance, and fiscal estimates to avoid unintended consequences.
Generally favorable because it restores access for producers who primarily rely on agriculture and reduces an arbitrary federal cap.
Still cautious about expanding federal payouts and wants strong proof to prevent fraud or benefits to large non-farm entities.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic, targeted change with modest fiscal effects; more likely if packaged into a larger agriculture/farm-bill vehicle than as a standalone bill.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Whether the exception benefits small farms or large operators
Technocratic, targeted change with modest fiscal effects; more likely if packaged into a larger agriculture/farm-bill vehicle than as a sta…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly sets out a targeted substantive change by creating an exception to payment limitations for persons or entities deriving a large share of income from agricultu…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.