The USDA plan to tighten eligibility rules for crop subsidies is unduly restrictive, said two lawmakers from the South. The proposed rule would apply to general partnerships and joint ventures that are not owned by a farm family, about 3 percent of the 2.1 million farms in the country. Congress exempted family farmers when it instructed the USDA, in the 2014 farm law, to devise a stricter definition of who is a farm manager.
The department’s proposal would limit farms to a maximum of three managers that qualify for farm payments, and would require them to document their work. Managers must provide 500 hours of substantial management per year, or a quarter of the critical management time needed on the farm.
“In my opinion, the rule should allow as many managers as are justified by the operation’s needs,” said Arkansas Rep. Rick Crawford, chairman of a House Agriculture subcommittee, during a hearing on the farm program. He said “limiting the number of managers on a farm to one, two or a maximum of three managers is truly arbitrary and capricious and ignores the remarkable diversity and complexity in agriculture today.” Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama said the limit on managers could crowd out new farmers who were sharing operations with a parent.
“We think it’s a good, strong rule,” said Val Dolcini, head of the Farm Service Agency. It would be the first revision since 1987 in the definition of a manager. The USDA proposal is open for public comment until May 26. Reformers say the lack of a clear definition allowed some operations to maximize their farm payments by naming additional people who provided management.