Bipartisan legislation is gaining momentum as U.S. senators push for stricter oversight of foreign ownership of American farmland, with a focus on preventing Chinese investments that could threaten national food security. The proposed Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure (AFIDA) Improvements Act seeks to modernize the existing AFIDA program, which has long been used to monitor foreign purchases of agricultural land. The bipartisan effort, led by senators like Pete Ricketts (R-NE) and John Fetterman (D-PA), reflects growing alarm over the potential for foreign adversaries, especially China, to gain control over significant portions of the U.S. agricultural sector.
The AFIDA Improvements Act follows a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which criticized the current AFIDA system for being ill-equipped to combat foreign ownership of U.S. farmland. The GAO findings have prompted lawmakers to advocate for stronger regulatory measures, including enhanced information-sharing between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The legislation also aims to improve the AFIDA handbook and establish a deadline for the USDA to implement an online AFIDA system, which could streamline the reporting process and increase transparency in foreign land acquisitions.
China’s expanding influence in the U.S. agricultural sector has become a focal point of the debate. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Chinese ownership of American farmland has surged from 13,720 acres in 2010 to over 383,935 acres by 2021. This growth has raised concerns among lawmakers about the potential for foreign entities to undermine U.S. food independence. In response, Republican senators like Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and John Cornyn (R-TX) have emphasized that allowing foreign countries to control significant portions of American farmland could pose a serious threat to national security. Senator Tuberville, in particular, has highlighted the role of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in seeking to infiltrate the U.S. agricultural supply chain, framing the issue as a direct conflict between American interests and foreign adversarial strategies.
Other lawmakers have introduced complementary measures to address these concerns. The Passage Act (PASS Act), championed by Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD), aims to prevent entities from covered countries—including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran—from purchasing agricultural land near military bases or sensitive sites. The bill has garnered support from Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), indicating a broader Republican consensus on the issue. Additionally, Sens. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), and Katie Britt (R-AL) have proposed the Not One More Inch or Acre Act, which would ban China from purchasing U.S. land entirely. These efforts suggest that the debate over foreign ownership of American land is intensifying, with multiple legislative strategies being developed to address the perceived threat.
The issue has also gained traction in the presidential campaign trail, with former President Donald Trump expressing support for a ban on Chinese farmland acquisitions. The Trump administration’s historical stance on such matters has aligned with the current legislative push, as Trump has repeatedly called for a strong response to Chinese economic influence. The bipartisan nature of the AFIDA Improvements Act underscores the shared concern over the potential impact of foreign ownership on U.S. food security, even as differing approaches to how to address the issue have emerged among lawmakers.
Despite the urgency of the issue, the path to passing the legislation remains complex. While the U.S. Department of Agriculture has reported that foreign investors own over 40 million acres of agricultural land in the United States, implementing stricter oversight requires navigating both political and logistical challenges. The AFIDA Improvements Act represents a significant step toward addressing these concerns, but its success will depend on how effectively it can balance national security interests with the need to maintain a competitive agricultural sector. As lawmakers continue to debate the best approach to safeguarding American farmland, the issue is likely to remain a focal point of the ongoing discussion on foreign investment in U.S. economic and agricultural policies.