Business and Financial
Guest author: Dr. Carl Zulauf, Professor Emeritus, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University.
Note: The U.S. House of Representatives passed its budget reconciliation bill on May 22, 2025. Prior to the bill’s passage, the budget reconciliation process required the House Agriculture Committee to reduce spending by $230 billion over the 10-year budget period. The committee’s final proposed provisions for doing so, which represents the Farm Bill attention we’ve long awaited, were included in the budget reconciliation bill passed by the House. Thank you to our guest author and Farm Bill expert, Dr. Carl Zulauf, for the following summary of the House's proposed Farm Bill changes that now move over to the Senate for consideration.
1. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
- Secretary of Agriculture shall not increase cost of the thrifty food plan based on a reevaluation or update of its composition.
- Cost of thrifty food plan indexed for CPI inflation.
- Work requirements are increased.
- Required state matching share goes from 0% currently to 5% in Fiscal Year (FY) 2028. This cuts Federal spending without cutting program benefits.
- Matching share increases as state’s SNAP error rate increases. Matching share can be as high as 25%.
2. Farm Safety Net
Support Prices
- Separate program for temperate japonica rice appears to have been terminated.
- Starting with 2031 crop year, prior year reference price increased by multiplying it by 1.005.
- In no year can a reference price exceed 115% of its 2026-2030 statutory value, so adjustment does not apply if reference price escalator is at its maximum.
- For long grain and medium grain rice, marketing loans repaid at prevailing world market price.
- For upland cotton, marketing loans repaid at lowest prevailing world market price.
- For upland cotton, a refund shall be provided to producer equal to difference between the lowest prevailing world market price and the repayment amount.
- For 2026-2031 crop years, upland cotton and extra-long staple cotton shall receive storage payments equal to the lessor of the submitted tariff rate for the marketing year or $4.90 for California and Arizona or $3.00 for other states.
- Textile mill assistance equals 3 cents / pound until July 31, 2025; 5 cents / pound thereafter.
Additional Base Acres
- Up to 30 million new base acres can be added by eligible farms.
- Only farms that planted or prevent planted a crop over 2019-2023 can add new base acres.
- An eligible farm is a farm for which 2019-2023 crop year average program commodity acres planted or prevent planted plus lesser of (a) 15% of farm’s total acres or (b) 2019-2023 crop year average acres planted or prevent planted to commodities other than program commodities, trees, bushes, vines, grass, or pasture (including cropland that was idle or fallow) exceeds the farm’s base acres as of September 30, 2024 excluding unassigned cotton base acres. 5-year average includes years with no acres planted or prevent planted. Positive difference is farm’s potential new base acres; includes unassigned cotton base.
- New base acre are allocated among covered commodities using the ratio of 2019-2023 average acres planted or prevent planted to covered crops on the farm to the 5-year average of covered crops planted or prevent planted plus new base acres.
- If multiple covered crops were grown on a given acre in any year from 2019-2023 (other than a covered crop produced under an established practice of double cropping), the owner elects which of the covered crop is included in potential new base.
- A farm’s total base acres after adding new base acres cannot exceed the farm’s total acres.
- Pro-rating occurs if total eligible new base acres exceed 30,000,000. Each eligible farm’s new base acres is reduced by an across-the board share so new base acres total 30 milion.
- Assessment: Farm Service Agency (FSA) reported roughly 270 million base acres for 2019 crop year after excluding unassigned cotton base acres of roughly 3 million. Sum of average National Agriculture Statistics Service planted acres plus average FSA prevent plant acres to current program crops over 2019-2023 equal roughly 264 million, implying approximately 24 million acres (264 + 30 – 270) of current non-covered crops, including unassigned cotton base acres, could be added to US base acres. This is a major expansion of commodity program payments to current noncovered crops.
Price Loss Coverage (PLC) Payment Yield
- Beginning with crop year 2026, PLC payment yields for new base acres on a farm are current PLC payment yields for the farm. If the farm has no current payment yield for a crop, PLC payment yield for the farm is set equal to average payment yield for the county in which the farm is situated or is determined using existing methods if no PLC yield exists.
Producer Election
- Annual producer election is extended through 2031 crop year.
- If no election is made, default choice is the same coverage for each covered commodity as existed for 2024 crop year.
Agriculture Risk Coverage
- Coverage level is increased from 86% to 90% beginning with the 2025 crop year.
- Payment cap per base acre is increased from 10% to 12.5% of the benchmark revenue beginning with the 2025 crop year.
Special Rule for Seed Cotton and Corn
- In determining the maximum payment rate for ARC-CO and PLC, the current year price can be no lower than $0.30 / pound for seed cotton and ‘$3.30 / bushel for corn.
- No marketing loan rate can be established for seed cotton.’’
Payment Limits
- Increases number of potential payment entities on a farm by expanding entities designated as qualified pass-through entities
- Increases per person payment entity from ‘$125,000 ’to ‘$155,000.
- Payment limit is indexed to CPI inflation.
- Payment limit waived if 75% or more of the average gross income of the person or legal entity is derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities.
Sugar Program
- Sets loan rate for raw cane sugar for 2025-2031 crop years at 24.00 cents / pound and for beet sugar at 136.55% of the raw cane sugar loan rate.
- Adjusts rate for storing sugar forfeited to the government.
- Changes beet sugar allotments.
Dairy Margin Coverage
- Updates production history to highest annual milk marketing during any one of the 2021, 2022, or 2023 calendar years.
- Raises maximum coverage from 5 million to 6 million pounds.
Livestock and Tree Loss Assistance
- Payment rate for losses due to predation is 100% of market value of affected livestock.
- Payment rate for losses due to adverse weather or disease is 75% of market value of affected livestock.
- Adds payment for unborn livestock.
- For livestock forage disaster program, changes eligibility from 8 consecutive weeks to 4 consecutive weeks or 7 of 8 consecutive weeks. Payments can be received for 2 months of losses instead of current 1 month of losses.
- Adds assistance for losses of farm-raised fish due to piscivorous birds.
- Changes determination of normal mortality rate for tree losses and honeybee colony losses.
3. Crop Insurance
Premium Subsidy
- Sets highest coverage level at 85% for individual yield or revenue insurance, 90% for individual yield or revenue insurance aggregated across multiple commodities, and 95% for area yield or revenue insurance.
- Increases coverage level for Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) from 86% to 90%.
- Increases premium subsidy for SCO from 65% to 80%.
Administrative and Operating (A&O) Expenses:
- Beginning with the 2026 reinsurance year, an additional A&O subsidy is to be paid to insurance providers for eligible contracts. Amount is 6% of net book premium. Eligible contract is a crop insurance contract in an eligible State. Excluded are catastrophic risk contracts, area-based or similar contracts; and a contract that the provider does not incur loss adjustment expenses as determined by the Corporation. Eligible state is a state in Group 2 or Group 3 as defined in the Standard Reinsurance Agreement for reinsurance year 2026) and eligible contract’s loss ratio exceeds 120% of total net book premium written by all approved insurance providers.
- Beginning with 2026 reinsurance year, A&O reimbursement to approved insurance providers and agents for Specialty Crops shall be at least 17% of premium used to define loss ratio A&O reimbursements for contracts covering agricultural commodities subject to an increase during 2011-2015 reinsurance years are to be adjusted for inflation in a manner consistent with the 2011-2015 increases. For 2026 reinsurance year, inflation adjustment shall not exceed the percentage change for the preceding reinsurance year included in Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
- Increases funds for monitoring program compliance and integrity from current $0.004 billion per FY to $0.006 billion per FY plus $0.01 billion for a related statute for FY2026 and after.
- Authorizes creation of a Poultry Insurance Pilot Program. Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi must be included.
Beginning and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers
- Extends eligibility to 10 years from 5 years.
- Increases subsidy assistance from 10 percentage points to 15 percentage points for 1st and 2nd reinsurance years, 13 percentage points for 3rd reinsurance year, 11 percentage points for 4th reinsurance year, and 10 percentage points for 5th - 10th reinsurance years.
4. Conservation
- Authorizes funding for Environmental Quality Incentives Program ($2.7 billion for FY2026 to $3.3 billion for FY2028 – 2031); Conservation Stewardship Program ($1.3 billion for FY2026 to $1.4 billion for FY2029 – 31); Agricultural Conservation Easement Program ($0.625 billion for FY2026 to $0.700 billion in FY2029 – 2031); and Regional Conservation Partnership Program ( $0.425 billion for FY2026 to $0.450 billion for FY2027 – 2031).
- Authorizes funds for Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention ($150 million / year). Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program ($10 million / year), Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program ($15 million / year), and Grassroots Source Water Protection Program ($1 million through FY2031).
5. Trade
- Authorizes funds through FY 2031 for trade promotion programs: Market Access Program, $0.40 billion / year; Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program, $0.07 billion / year; E (Kika) De La Garza Emerging Markets Program, $0.008 billion / year; Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops, $0.009 billion / year; and Priority Trade Fund, $0.0035 billion / year.
- Gives Secretary of Agriculture discretion to provide a greater allocation to a program(s) for which amount requested exceeds available funding but should try to support exports of types of commodities that funds were originally allocated.
6. Research
- Authorizes funds for Urban, Indoor, and Other Emerging Agricultural Production Research, Education, and Extension Initiative, Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research, Scholarships for Students at 1890 Institutions, Assistive Technology Program for Farmers with Disabilities, Specialty Crop Research Initiative, and Research Facilities Act.
- Extends certain provisions of Secure Rural Schools & Community Self-Determination Act of 2000.
- Rescinds unobligated balances of Competitive Grants for Non-Federal Forest Landowners program and State and Private Forestry Conservation Programs.
7. Energy
- Extends Biobased Markets Program and Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels through 2031.
8. Other
- Authorizes funding for Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention, Specialty Crop Block Grants, Organic Production and Market Data Initiative, Modernization and Improvement of International Trade Technology Systems and Data Collection, National Organic Certification Cost Share Program, and Multiple Crop and Pesticide Use Survey.
- Authorized funding for Animal Disease Prevention and Management Program and Sheep Production and Marketing Grant Program.
- Extends Pima Agriculture Cotton Trust Fund, Agriculture Wool Apparel Manufacturers Trust Fund, Wool Research and Promotion, and Emergency Citrus Disease Research and Development Trust Fund through 2031.
Tags: budget reconciliation, farm bill, policy
Comments: 0
The classification of workers as either independent contractors or employees has once again become a focal point of federal labor policy, reflecting the broader ideological shifts that accompany changes in presidential administrations. With the transition to new leadership in the White House, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) has issued new guidance that redefines the criteria used to determine worker status. This latest interpretation marks a departure from the 2024 Democratic rule (the “2024 Rule”), instead embracing a model more consistent with prior Republican approaches. The change has significant ripple effects for employers and workers as it influences everything from wage protections to benefits eligibility and legal liability.
On May 1, 2025, the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) issued Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2025-1(the “2025 Bulletin”), offering updated guidance on how to assess whether a worker qualifies as an employee or independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
The 2025 Bulletin explicitly states that the WHD will no longer apply the analytical framework established by the 2024 Rule when evaluating worker classification under the FLSA. Instead, the WHD will rely on the standards set forth in Fact Sheet #13 (July 2008) and Opinion Letter FLSA2019-6 (referred to as the “2008 Guidance” and “2019 Guidance,” respectively). However, the 2025 Bulletin clarifies that the 2024 Rule remains applicable in the context of private litigation.
The History of the Independent Contractor Revolving Door
The 2025 Guidance marks the latest development in a long-running pattern of revolving labor policy, reflecting the political priorities of successive presidential administrations. The 2024 Rule had previously replaced the Trump Administration’s 2021 Rule (the “2021 Rule”), which aimed to simplify the employee-versus-independent contractor analysis under the FLSA. The 2021 Rule emphasized two “core factors” of the traditional multifactor economic realities test: (1) the nature and degree of control over the work, and (2) the worker’s opportunity for profit or loss. By prioritizing these elements, the Trump-era rule created a more employer-friendly framework that often favored independent contractor classification.
The 2024 Rule reinstated the “totality of the circumstances” approach to the economic realities test, treating all factors with equal weight rather than prioritizing any single one. By doing so, the WHD assessed worker classification by holistically evaluating all six factors of the test. This broader, more balanced analysis often leaned toward classifying workers as employees, particularly in cases where multiple factors pointed to economic dependence on the employer.
While the Trump Administration previously issued a rule emphasizing a two “core factors” approach to worker classification, neither the 2025 Bulletin nor the 2008 and 2019 Guidance documents it references adopt that framework explicitly. Instead, the 2025 Bulletin affirms the DOL’s departure from the Biden-era 2024 Rule and suggests that additional rulemaking may be forthcoming, signaling continued evolution in the DOL’s enforcement strategy.
DOL Enforcement v. Private Litigation
It’s essential to understand the scope of the 2025 Bulletin’s applicability. As previously discussed, the 2025 Bulletin eliminates the use of the 2024 Rule in WHD investigations and classifications, even though that rule remains effective in private litigation. The distinction between these two contexts – WHD investigations and private lawsuits – centers on who initiates the action, the underlying purpose, and the legal procedures involved.
WHD Investigation
- Initiated by: The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division
- Purpose: To enforce federal labor laws, such as the FLSA, by ensuring employers comply with minimum wage, overtime, and classification rules.
- Process: WHD investigators may conduct audits, review payroll records, and interview employees. These investigations can be random, complaint-driven, or targeted based on industry trends.
- Outcome: If violations are found, the WHD may seek back wages, penalties, or require changes in employment practices. Employers can settle disputes administratively without going to court.
Private Litigation
- Initiated by: An individual worker or group of workers
- Purpose: To seek compensation for alleged violations of labor laws, such as unpaid wages or misclassification.
- Process: The case is filed in court, and both parties engage in litigation, which may include discovery, motions, and potentially a trial.
- Outcome: A judge or jury determines liability and damages. The court may award back pay, liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, and other relief.
Practical Implications
For private employment matters, employers should continue to follow the 2024 Rule, as it remains the governing standard in litigation. The 2025 Bulletin applies only in the context of WHD investigations. While future rulemaking could align the DOL’s position more closely with the 2021 Rule – potentially establishing a new nationwide standard – it is essential for employers to stay informed about ongoing developments relating to worker classification. Misclassifying a worker, even unintentionally, can lead to significant financial penalties under both federal and state laws and may jeopardize the long-term stability of your business.
(Side note: Adding to the complexity of this situation is the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the Chevron doctrine and could have far-reaching implications for how the DOL approaches worker classification. However, the full impact of that ruling warrants a deeper discussion – one best served for a future blog post.)
For more information on the 2024 Rule and worker classification, check out our previous blog post here.
Tags: FLSA, Independent Contractor, Worker Classification, Employee, labor, employment, Ag Labor
Comments: 0
Authored by: Carl Zulauf, Seungki Lee, and David Marrison, Ohio State University, May 2025
Click here for PDF version of this paper
This paper provides estimates of expected payments by the ARC-CO (Agriculture Risk Coverage – County version) and PLC (Price Loss Coverage) commodity programs for the 2024 crop year.
Official payment rates are expected in October 2025. They can deviate notably from estimates as final prices and yields are yet known. Prices and yields, particularly for ARC-CO, are in a range where small changes can cause large changes in payment rates. Use the estimates with caution.
The estimates use 2024 crop year program parameters from USDA, FSA (US Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency), and latest available data for 2024 market year price estimates from USDA, FSA and county yield estimates from USDA, NASS (National Agricultural Statistics Service).
May 2025 Estimates of 2024 Crop Year Payments:
- ARC-CO: Ohio corn and soybean payments are expected for at least some counties. As a revenue program, ARC-CO payment calculations include yield. 2024 Ohio weather was highly variable. Yields and thus county payment rates will be variable. Some counties have irrigated and non-irrigated base acres. Payment estimates are calculated only for non-irrigated base since dryland production is far more common in Ohio. Payment estimates per base acre vary from $0 (21 counties) to $90 (Greene) for corn base and from $0 (13 counties) to $58 (Fairfield) for soybean base (see appended maps). These estimates include the 85% payment factor (i.e. 15% payment reduction factor). No estimate is available for corn and soybeans in 24 and 15 counties. A common reason is that too few farmers in the county responded to the NASS survey to estimate yield with statistical confidence. County NASS yields are not available for wheat. Also appended are maps of county gross revenue (estimated price times estimated yield) plus estimated ARC-CO pay rate per acre. They illustrate that ARC-CO payments are countercyclical to low market revenue (correlation between total revenue and ARC-CO pay rate is roughly -0.30). Higher revenue/yields are almost always preferred to an ARC-CO payment.
- PLC: At present, no PLC payments are expected for corn, soybeans, and wheat as the current estimate of US market year price is not below the effective reference price: corn ($4.35 vs. $4.01), soybeans ($9.95 vs. $9.26), and wheat ($5.50 vs. $5.50).
Commodity Program Policy Objective:
- ARC-CO provides assistance if a crop’s county market revenue is below 86% of a crop’s county benchmark market revenue for 5 recent crop years.
- PLC provides assistance if a crop’s US market year price is below 100% of the crop’s US effective reference price set by Congress.
- ARC-IC provides assistance if an ARC-IC farm’s average per acre revenue from all program crops is below 86% of the ARC-IC farm’s per acre benchmark revenue.
Payment Formulas:
ARC-CO payment rate per base acre = MAX [$0, or 86% times (county benchmark revenue minus observed revenue) times a farm’s PLC base yield times 85% payment reduction factor]. County benchmark revenue = (5-crop year Olympic average (high and low values removed) of recent US market year prices times 5-crop year Olympic average of recent trend-adjusted county yields). Observed revenue = observed US crop year price times observed county yield. ARC-CO payment rate is capped at 10% of county benchmark revenue.
PLC payment rate per base acre = MAX [$0, or (US effective reference price – US market year price) times a farm’s PLC base yield times 85% payment reduction factor].
The federal estate tax exemption is set to drop dramatically in 2026—from $13.99 million in 2025 to an estimated $7–$7.5 million per person. For some farm families, this shift could result in significant estate tax exposure. While most estates won’t exceed the new limit, some farmers, especially those with high-value farmland or appreciating assets, will find themselves suddenly at risk of federal estate taxes.
Gifting is one strategy to reduce the size of your taxable estate, but it’s not always simple or risk-free. Let’s explore when gifting can help, when it might not, and what to watch out for.
Two Types of Gifts
There are two main gifting categories under federal law:
- Annual Exclusion Gifts – In 2025, you can gift up to $19,000 per recipient ($38,000 for couples) annually without using any of your lifetime exemption.
- Lifetime Credit Gifts – Larger gifts are allowed, but they reduce your lifetime estate tax exemption. The lifetime estate tax exemption is the amount of wealth that the IRS exempts from estate taxes. The exemption can be used at death, gifted away during life, or a combination of the two.
Example: If a parent gifts a $1,019,000 farm to a child, the first $19,000 is exempt from taxes and does not reduce the parent’s estate tax exemption. The remaining $1,000,000 reduces the parent’s lifetime estate tax exemption from $13.99 million to $12.99 million.
Gifting Strategies That Work
1. Annual Exclusion Gifts
If you're just slightly over the expected 2026 exemption, annual gifts can move you back under the limit.
Example: A grandparent with 10 grandchildren can gift $190,000 per year. Over 2 years, that’s $380,000—enough to reduce a modest estate and eliminate taxes.
But for high-net-worth individuals, $19,000 per person may be too little to make a significant impact.
2. Lifetime Gifts of Appreciating Assets
Large gifts don’t directly reduce estate tax liability (since they reduce your exemption), but they remove future appreciation from your estate.
Example: If you gift farmland worth $1M that later appreciates to $3M, only $1M is deducted from your estate tax exemption — the $2M in appreciation escapes estate taxation entirely.
Potential Downsides of Gifting
- No Stepped-Up Basis. Gifting assets during life means recipients take your original tax basis, not the stepped-up value at death—potentially increasing future capital gains taxes.
- Loss of Control & Income. You must fully give up ownership and control. Gifting income-producing property could impact your financial security.
- Risk of Financial Mismanagement. If a gifted asset is lost to debt, lawsuits, or divorce, it's gone. One solution? Use an irrevocable trust to hold the gift—this protects assets while still benefiting your heirs.
Another Strategy: Pay Directly for Education & Medical Expenses
The IRS allows unlimited direct payments of tuition or medical bills without using your exemption. But payments must go straight to the provider, not to the individual.
Example: Grandpa has a $9 million estate and wants to reduce its size before the federal estate tax exemption drops in 2026. He has four grandchildren in college and a daughter who recently underwent surgery.
Grandpa pays the following directly:
- $20,000 in tuition for each grandchild (4 x $20,000 = $80,000) directly to their universities
- $25,000 in hospital bills paid directly to the hospital for his daughter
Total Reduction in Taxable Estate: $105,000
Impact on Exemption: None—these payments do not count against Joe’s $13.99 million estate tax exemption or annual gift limit, because they qualify under the IRS educational and medical exclusions. Grandpa could still give each of those recipients an additional $19,000 under the annual gift exclusion without any tax consequences.
Conclusion: Gift With Caution and Professional Help
Gifting can be an effective estate tax strategy—but only when used thoughtfully and with professional guidance. Consider the loss of stepped-up basis, the asset’s appreciation potential, your own financial needs, and the stability of the recipient. For some, the risks of gifting may outweigh the benefits.
With estate tax rules changing in 2026, now is the time to review your estate plan. Consult your attorney and tax advisor to determine if gifting fits your strategy—and how to do it safely.
For more information on gifting and estate taxes, see the Gifting to Reduce Federal Estate Taxes bulletin available at farmoffice.osu.edu.
Tags: estate taxes, Gifting
Comments: 0
On April 9, 2025, Ohio enacted House Bill 106, known as the Pay Stub Protection Act. This bipartisan legislation marks a meaningful step forward in promoting wage transparency and safeguarding worker rights across the state. Prior to this law, Ohio stood out as one of the few states without a mandate for employers to issue pay stubs. With its passage, the Act now ensures employees are provided with comprehensive earnings statements, bringing Ohio in line with the practices of most other states.
What the Law Requires
Under the Pay Stub Protection Act (codified in Ohio Revised Code Section 4113.14), employers are now mandated to provide each employee with a written or electronic pay statement on every regular payday. These statements must include:
- Employee’s name and address;
- Employer’s name;
- Total gross wages earned by the employee during the pay period;
- Total net wages paid to employee for the pay period;
- An itemized list of additions to or deductions from wages paid to the employee, with explanations; and
- The date the employee was paid and the pay period covered by that payment.
For hourly employees, the following three additional items are also required:
- Total hours worked during the pay period;
- Hourly wage rate; and
- Total number of hours worked beyond 40 hours in a workweek.
Enforcement
While the Pay Stub Protection Act brings Ohio in line with the majority of states regarding wage transparency, it differs from some by not granting employees the right to sue or seek monetary compensation for an employer’s noncompliance. If an employee does not receive a pay stub that meets the Act’s requirements, they must first submit a written request to their employer for a compliant pay stub. The employer then has 10 days to provide the required statement.
If the employer fails to respond within that timeframe, the employee may report the violation to the Ohio Department of Commerce. Should the Department find a violation, it will issue a written notice to the employer. The employer is then required to post the notice in a conspicuous location on the premises for a period of 10 days.
Implications for Employers
Although many employers already issue pay stubs as a matter of best practice, Ohio law now makes it a legal requirement. This change presents an opportunity for employers to review their payroll systems and make any necessary updates to ensure compliance. Employers should confirm that their pay statements contain all required information and that any third-party payroll providers are also adhering to the new standards.
A Step Toward Greater Transparency
The Pay Stub Protection Act marks a meaningful step forward for worker rights in Ohio. By requiring detailed pay statements, the law equips employees with the information necessary to confirm their earnings and promotes greater transparency and fairness in the workplace.
For additional details about the Pay Stub Protection Act and its requirements, refer to the official legislative text of House Bill 106 or visit the Ohio Department of Commerce’s website.
Tags: Ohio Law, Pay Stub Protection Act, Agricultural Labor, Ag Labor, Farm Labor
Comments: 0
I recently received this question from a farm family. It’s one of the most common — and important — questions farm families ask when thinking about the future. Long-term care (LTC) is expensive, unpredictable, and often not covered by programs like Medicare. For farmers who’ve spent a lifetime building an operation and want to pass it on, the rising costs of LTC present a real financial risk to the land, the farm business, and the legacy. The following is a brief discussion on LTC costs and strategies.
The Growing Risk of Long-Term Care
Once upon a time, estate taxes were the biggest financial threat to the family farm. Today, that’s no longer the case. With higher federal estate tax exemptions, few farms owe estate taxes anymore. The real financial threat now? LTC costs.
LTC includes a wide range of services — from home-based personal care to skilled nursing facility stays — and most of it isn’t covered by Medicare. These services help people with chronic illness, disability, or aging-related conditions. For example, assistance with dressing, bathing, eating, or even just getting around. Care might start at home and eventually move to a facility. Costs vary by setting and service, but they add up quickly.
Here are a few important facts to help understand the implications of LTC on farming operations:
- 69% of people over 65 will need some form of LTC.
- Average LTC lasts 3 about years, with women needing slightly more (3.7 years) than men (2.2 years).
- 20% of people will need care for more than 5 years — these are the “outliers” most likely to face LTC costs that can jeopardize the farm.
- In Ohio, a year in a nursing home will cost around $100,000 or more.
For a farm couple, those numbers can double — and the risk of outliving income and savings increases.
Can the Farm Handle It?
If you’re wondering whether your operation could survive those costs, it depends on a few things:
- Do you have income (from Social Security, retirement accounts, rent, etc.) that could help cover LTC?
- Do you have non-farm assets, like savings or investments, to use before touching the farm?
- Would you be considered an “outlier”, needing care for many years — and would your current planning handle that?
In most cases, a farm family can survive average LTC costs, around $180,000, without needing to sell land and other critical assets. But it’s the outliers — the 5-to-10-year nursing home stays — that pose the greatest risk. That’s where planning becomes essential.
Planning Ahead: Options for Managing LTC Risk
There’s no one-size-fits-all solution. But there are strategies that can help reduce LTC risks and protect the farm. Here's a breakdown of the most common options:
- Do Nothing
For some, doing nothing is a valid strategy — if you have enough income and assets to cover even the worst-case LTC costs without risking the farm. But that’s rare. Most families should at least consider other options.
- Gifting Assets
Giving land or assets to heirs (usually children) more than five years before applying for Medicaid can protect those assets from LTC costs. But gifting comes with trade-offs:
- You lose control over the assets.
- The heir receives your original tax basis, which could trigger big capital gains taxes later.
- If you need LTC during the five-year look-back period, the gift can cause Medicaid penalties.
Gifting can be effective — but it needs to be done carefully, and early.
- Irrevocable Trusts
An irrevocable trust can protect assets while allowing some flexibility. You give up ownership and control, but the trust (managed by a trustee) holds the asset for your beneficiaries. If structured correctly and established early enough, the trust assets are shielded from LTC costs — and sometimes still qualify for a stepped-up tax basis at death.
But be warned: these trusts are complex, expensive to set up, and must be carefully maintained.
- Wait-and-See Approach
This strategy avoids doing anything upfront but relies on having enough income and savings to cover five years of LTC if needed. If care becomes necessary, assets are transferred and the clock starts. The gamble? If you can’t make it through the five-year penalty period, your assets might still be at risk.
- Self-Insurance
Some families choose to earmark a piece of the operation (a less productive farm, a savings account, etc.) to pay for care if needed. It gives flexibility and control, but it also requires discipline — and can lead to one spouse living more frugally out of fear the money won’t last.
- Long-Term Care Insurance
LTC insurance can cover all or part of the costs — and newer “hybrid” policies can include a life insurance component so the money isn’t lost if care isn’t needed. But these policies can be expensive and hard to qualify for, especially if you already have health issues. Still, they’re worth exploring with a good advisor.
So, What’s the Best Strategy?
The truth is, there’s no “best” option — just the best fit for your family’s goals, resources, health, and timing. Some families will mix and match strategies. Others will lean heavily on one. The important part is that you understand your risk and make intentional decisions, not default to inaction.
Talk to an Attorney and Plan Ahead
LTC is complicated. Medicaid rules, tax law, trusts, and gifting penalties are full of pitfalls. One wrong move — even with good intentions — can backfire. That’s why it’s so important to work with an attorney who understands long-term care planning and farm operations. Also, start the conversation now. Don’t wait until a crisis hits. Planning ahead can make all the difference — for your peace of mind today, and for your farm’s future tomorrow.
For more information on LTC and the risks to farms, see Long-Term Care and the Farm, a bulletin available at farmoffice.osu.edu.
Tags: Long-term care planning
Comments: 0
Farm transition planning is an essential process for agricultural operations. However, identifying and tracking assets and resources and preparing for transition planning can present significant challenges for farm families. To assist with these tasks, Ohio State University Extension has developed the Farm Asset and Resource Management Spreadsheet (FARMS), designed to provide a structured approach to organizing farm transition information.
What is FARMS?
FARMS is an Excel-based resource designed to support farm families and agricultural professionals in collecting and systematically organizing all necessary information related to farm transition planning. Whether at the preliminary stage or already engaged in detailed succession planning, FARMS enables users to input and manage varying levels of data effectively. See example screenshots below for further explanation.
What Information Does FARMS Collect?
Farms collects all the following information:
- Family and beneficiary names and contact information
- Bank accounts
- Financial Accounts
- Life Insurance
- Business Entities
- Real Estate
- Personal Property
- Farm Property
- Debt information
- Designations for executor, trustee, power of attorney, guardian
What Does Farms Do with the Collected Information?
FARMS uses the information provided by the user to do the following:
- Help ensure assets are titled to avoid probate
- Determine net worth and value of estate
- Calculate estate tax liability
- Allocate assets and net worth between spouses
- Allocate assets among beneficiaries to determine how much each beneficiary will receive from the transition plan
- Provide information that will be needed to complete wills, trusts and power of attorney documents.
How to Use FARMS?
Given its foundation in Excel, users should possess at least a basic familiarity with spreadsheet navigation. Training videos are available on YouTube to assist new users with becoming familiar with FARMS, explaining how to enter data and use the summary and analysis functions. A link to the training videos is provided below. Additionally, OSU Extension occasionally provides training sessions for potential users. It is recommended to review the training videos or attend a training session before using FARMS.
Who Should Use FARMS?
FARMS is suited for anyone involved in the farm transition planning process, from family members beginning their farm transition plan to professional advisors engaged in developing detailed transition strategies for clients.
Accessing FARMS
To begin using FARMS, interested users can download the file at the link provided below. We request users complete an initial, short survey prior to downloading FARMS, as user feedback is important to the ongoing improvement of the spreadsheet. FARMS is available at no cost due to the financial support of key partners including North Central Extension Risk Management Education and the National Agricultural Law Center.
Conclusion
FARMS offers a structured, organized approach to farm transition planning, allowing farm families and professionals to collect comprehensive, accurate information. For additional information and to begin utilizing FARMS, visit Ohiofarmoffice.osu.edu and discover how FARMS can positively impact your farm’s transition planning efforts.
Links for FARMS
Training Videos are available here: https://www.youtube.com/@osufarmoffice
FARMS can be downloaded here: https://farmoffice.osu.edu/farmsspreadsheet
Upcoming FARMS Online Training Courses
Click on registration link to register for the course.
April 7 @ 10:00 am: https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/oJmnwm-VQx6XjqvBh7J0aA
April 16 @ 10:00 am: https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/iY9cLoJeQwS0rUHkHr3DpA
April 23 @ 1:00 pm: https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/vT_-X56FQQqBT63fKUQW4g
May 2 @ 3:00 pm: https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/KmbdTjq2SryLkYNOaevp3Q
Example screenshots of FARMS
This worksheet collects family and contact information. This information is used throughout the spreadsheet for beneficiary designations, executor identification and beneficiary allocations.
This worksheet collects all real estate information including parcel identification, value, ownership and probate status. This information is used to avoid probate, and the values are included in the estate tax and beneficiary distribution analysis. Note the use of client and beneficiary names retrieved from contact information worksheet.
This worksheet collects information on up to 10 business entities. The type of entity, tax structure, assets held in the entity, ownership information and probate status is all included.
This is the summary and analysis page. All the information provided in the financial worksheets are pulled into this page and summarized. The user can assess net worth and analyze potential estate tax liability. Additionally, assets can be divided between spouses for additional estate tax analysis. Perhaps most importantly, the assets can be allocated among the beneficiaries to visualize the distribution plan. A running total for each beneficiary is provided.
Tags: FARMS, transition planning
Comments: 0
It's time for another episode of Farm Office Live, our monthly webinar covering agricultural law and farm management updates for Ohio agriculture. Join us this Friday, March 28 at 10 a.m. to hear from our Farm Office team of experts along with guests Eli Earich, attorney with the law firm of Barrett, Easterday, Cunningham & Eselgroth in Dublin, Ohio and Tyler Zimpfer, Law Fellow with the National Agricultural Law Center. The agenda this month covers these topics:
- Grain Contract Law and Legal Considerations - featuring Eli Earich, Barrett, Easterday, Cunningham & Eselgroth
- Legislative Update - Peggy Hall, OSU and featuring Tyler Zimpfer, National Agricultural Law Center Law Fellow
- Enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act - Peggy Hall, OSU
- Crop Margin Outlook, Ohio Farm Sales Data, and Tax Update - Barry Ward, OSU
- Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP) - David Marrison, OSU
- Payment Limitation Rules - Robert Moore, OSU
- Farm Asset and Resource Management Spreadsheet (FARMS) - Robert Moore, OSU
- Beginner’s Guide to Farmland Ownership - Robert Moore, OSU
- Upcoming Events and Deadline - David Marrison, OSU
Don't have time to join us this Friday? We record all of the Farm Office Live webinars and post them at https://farmoffice.osu.edu/farmofficelive. If you're not already a Farm Office Live viewer, register for the free webinar at https://farmoffice.osu.edu/farmofficelive.
Today is the day! March 21, 2025, serves as the deadline for most businesses to report their beneficial ownership information (“BOI”) under the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”). But not so fast! While the prior statement is technically accurate, the situation has been complicated by statements and assurances from the U.S. Department of Treasury and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”). Here’s why.
March 21 Deadline
Over the past few months, we have closely followed and analyzed the ongoing developments surrounding the CTA in our blog posts. This ever-evolving saga has included nationwide injunctions and stays—both imposed and lifted—as well as multiple extensions of the BOI reporting deadline. You can review our previous posts here:
- Corporate Transparency Act reporting deadline remains January 1, 2025
- Federal court puts Corporate Transparency Act ownership reporting on hold
- Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Corporate Transparency Act Reporting Requirements
- Corporate Transparency Act Reporting Requirements Suspended Once Again . . . For Now
- SCOTUS to Decide Fate of Nationwide Injunction Against Corporate Transparency Act
- SCOTUS Allows Corporate Transparency Act Reporting Requirements to Resume
- Corporate Transparency Act Whiplash: Reporting Requirements Still on Hold
- BOI is Back!
In short, after navigating multiple legal challenges, the original BOI reporting deadline for most businesses of January 1, 2025, was extended to March 21, 2025. However, despite this official deadline, statements and assurances from FinCEN and the U.S. Department of Treasury have added further complexity to the situation.
Promises made, promises kept?
On February 27, FinCEN announced that it would not impose fines, penalties, or any other enforcement actions against companies that fail to file or update their BOI reports by the March 21 deadline. FinCEN clarified that this “non-enforcement action” will remain in effect until a forthcoming final rule takes effect. As of this publication, FinCEN has yet to release the proposed final rule that is expected to provide further guidance and clarity on the CTA’s reporting requirements.
But the assurances didn’t stop there. On March 2, the U.S. Department of Treasury announced that the “non-enforcement action” would continue for all domestic reporting companies and beneficial owners even after FinCEN’s forthcoming rule is issued and takes effect. In essence, the Treasury has committed to not enforcing the CTA against domestic companies and owners required to file BOI reports under the Act. However, this relief will not extend to foreign reporting companies, which will be required to comply with the CTA’s reporting requirements. Additionally, the Treasury has pledged to propose a rule that would formally limit the CTA’s scope to foreign reporting companies only.
It’s important to recognize that, until these proposed rules are officially enacted, the promises made remain just that—promises. As of now, no formal rule or regulation prevents the enforcement of the CTA against domestic companies and owners. Until these assurances are solidified into law, businesses should consult with their legal counsel to determine the best course of action regarding CTA compliance.
Additionally, there has been considerable discussion suggesting that these promises and proposed rules effectively eliminate the CTA for domestic companies and owners. However, that is not entirely accurate. If implemented, these proposed rules would be administrative in nature and remain in effect only as long as the current administration permits. As with any administration change, a future administration could introduce new rules that reinstate all aspects of the CTA, including reporting requirements for domestic companies and owners.
For some "light" reading, feel free to check out our blog post on the Principles of Government, where we discuss federal agencies and the powers granted to them.
On the horizon.
Legal Challenges of CTA. The CTA continues to face several legal challenges nationwide questioning its constitutionality. Two of the most notable cases, which introduced the nationwide injunction and stay, are the Texas Top Cop Shop case and the Smith case, both currently before the federal district court in Texas. These cases challenge the constitutionality of the CTA, and the court's ruling could have significant implications for the future of the law. The situation is further complicated by a division among courts across the country regarding the CTA’s constitutionality. While some courts have upheld the CTA as constitutional, others have found it likely unconstitutional and issued more limited injunctions against its enforcement. In summary, the outcome remains uncertain. It appears that this issue is ultimately headed to the Supreme Court of the United States for final determination.
Legislation. There are several legislative proposals that could impact the CTA. One such proposal, the Protect Small Businesses from Excessive Paperwork Act of 2025, aims to extend the BOI filing deadline for most businesses to January 1, 2026. The bill has already passed the House of Representatives and is now in the Senate, where it has been referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Additionally, there are bills in both the House and Senate seeking to repeal the CTA entirely. H.R. 425 and S.100, both titled the Repealing Big Brother Overreach Act, aim to fully overturn the CTA, though they have not seen significant progress since their introduction.
Legal Challenges of Promises Made. To further complicate matters, the Treasury Department’s current stance on suspending enforcement of the CTA against domestic reporting companies and owners may face its own set of legal challenges. Given the significance of the CTA, it is likely that the "non-enforcement action" will undergo intense scrutiny, litigation, and could potentially lead to legislative action. Should this occur, it raises the possibility that the CTA could remain fully enforceable, with reporting requirements for domestic companies and owners intact. This ongoing uncertainty underscores the need for businesses to stay informed and proactive about potential changes and developments.
What Should Businesses Do Now?
With enforcement actions in limbo, businesses should:
- Stay informed. Due to the ongoing legal challenges, proposed legislation, and potential future legal disputes, businesses should stay up-to-date on the status of the CTA and its enforcement. The situation appears to be evolving almost daily.
- Counsel. Businesses should consult with their legal counsel to determine the best course of action regarding the CTA. Taking a risk-averse approach may provide peace of mind, while a wait-and-see strategy could lead to unforeseen consequences.
Conclusion
At this moment, it appears that no fines or penalties will be imposed on businesses that fail to meet the March 21 deadline for BOI reporting. However, given the unpredictable nature of BOI and the CTA, things can change quickly. The CTA has been a dramatic journey, filled with unexpected twists, cliffhangers, and surprising developments. However, the story is far from over. We will continue to keep you updated on the latest changes and progress of the CTA until we reach a final resolution.
Tags: corporate transparency act, BOI, BOI Reporting, CTA, Business, FinCEN, U.S. Department of Treasury
Comments: 0
Nearly 39% of the 880 million acres of farmland in the United States is leased, and in Ohio, this figure approaches 50%. Many individuals who inherit or purchase farmland have limited experience in agricultural management, creating uncertainty regarding effective land stewardship. To assist these novice farmland owners, Ohio State University's Agricultural and Resource Law Program is pleased to announce the release of our latest publication, "The Beginner’s Guide to Farmland Ownership", authored by Robert Moore, Attorney and Research Specialist at OSU. This practical, user-friendly resource is now available for download at farmoffice.osu.edu.
Owning farmland is not only a rewarding opportunity but also a significant responsibility, particularly for new landowners with limited farming experience. Whether you've inherited farmland or recently purchased it, navigating complex decisions such as leasing, selling, or managing alternative land uses can be challenging. This 48-page, comprehensive guide was developed to help new landowners understand and manage their farmland effectively.
"The Beginner’s Guide to Farmland Ownership" addresses key areas that every new landowner needs to understand. Topics include understanding farmland valuation, exploring leasing arrangements (cash rent, share rent, and flex leases), considerations when selling farmland, managing tax implications, and assessing alternative land uses such as renewable energy or conservation easements. Additionally, the guide explores strategies for protecting farmland through legal instruments and minimizing risk through insurance and business entities.
Visit farmoffice.osu.edu to access this publication.
Pages
