logo
China slams ‘discriminatory' US bill curbing espionage via farmland

China slams ‘discriminatory' US bill curbing espionage via farmland

Miami Herald7 days ago
Maryland Sen. Angela Alsobrooks introduced a bill last week that would prevent foreign adversaries from buying up the nation's farm and timber lands in order to spy on the U.S. and interrupt its food supply chain - despite the fact that data shows investors from these nations own less than 1% of U.S. farm, timber and ranching lands, per the Department of Agriculture.
Alsobrooks, a Democrat, who last week co-introduced the bipartisan bill alongside two Republican Senators and one Democrat, called the bill "commonsense legislation that will make us safer and stronger."
In response, the Chinese Embassy called the bill discriminatory and urged the U.S. to rethink its international strategy.
"The U.S. overstretches the concept of national security and deprives the right of institutions and citizens of particular countries to purchase farmland," the spokesperson for the Chinese embassy said in an email.
While multiple experts The Baltimore Sun interviewed said scope of the threat is hard to determine because of difficulties collecting data on foreign investments, one food and national security expert says fears of food supply issues are overblown.
"The perception of the threat doesn't match the reality of the threat," said Caitlin Welsh, the director of the Global Food and Water Security Program of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, on food-supply concerns.
However, Welsh did say that there is an argument that some agricultural land purchases by foreign investors could be a potential national security concern, such as near military facilities.
The bill Alsobrooks introduced would codify the Agriculture Secretary's role in reviewing farmland transactions made by investors from other countries to determine whether they pose threats to American security.
Purchases from China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are subject to "special review," according to an email statement from Alsobrooks.
The House of Representatives unanimously passed the bill in June. The Senate's version is not yet scheduled for a vote.
Adding the Agriculture Secretary to certain conversations on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. was a part of a Trump administration July plan created to monitor investors in other countries purchasing farmland, arguing that certain investments could put national and food security at risk. The secretary was added to the committee on July 8 via a memorandum of understanding; this bill would make that appointment permanent.
The administration has pushed for prioritizing American businesses and limiting outside influence in the United States.
"This is typically discriminatory and violates the principle of market economy and international trade rules, and will eventually hurt the U.S.'s own interests," China's embassy spokesperson said. "We urge the U.S. to immediately stop politicizing trade and investment issues."
Alsobrooks did not respond by publication to a follow-up request for comment on the embassy's remarks.
Military assets and espionage threats
Maryland is home to several "sensitive sites," Alsobrooks said in a statement to The Sun, namely Camp David, federal agencies and Fort Meade.
"It is absolutely critical these sites are safe from foreign adversaries," she said.
Foreign investors are required to self-report agricultural land transactions to the U.S. Department of Agriculture under a 1978 law called the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act.
Danny Munch, an economist at the American Farm Bureau Federation, described Alsobrooks' bill as an effort to "streamline oversight" of foreign purchases of agricultural land between the Department of Agriculture which collects data under the 1978 law, and the committee that reviews foreign investments.
"There is concern within some of the agricultural community that some of the … bad actors that could exist would not be reported," Munch said.
Still, he said, some farmers like being able to sell their land "when and to who they want."
A plan for a Chinese firm to purchase land for a corn milling plant 12 miles away from an U.S. Air Force base in 2023 led to nationwide attention to investors from foreign adversarial nations purchasing land near military sites.
From 2016 to 2021, foreign purchases of U.S. agricultural land has increased by 40%, according to the Department of Agriculture.
Investors from Canada, The Netherlands, Italy and The United Kingdom owned the most U.S. agricultural land of any foreign country. Investors outside of the United States owned about 3.5% of agricultural land in December 2023, according to the Department of Agriculture. Investors from adversarial nations owned less than 1% of this foreign-held land.
"Foreign adversary" nations own a small percentage of agricultural land, with investors from North Korea owning no acres and from Russia owning 11 acres as of December 2023. Investors from China owned 277,336 acres of agricultural land, according to a Department of Agriculture report.
Vincent Smith, professor emeritus at Montana State University and the director of the Agricultural Policy Program at the American Enterprise Institute, noted that the annual rate of return on investments in agricultural land runs at roughly 6%.
"It has to do with worries about spying, intellectual property theft, and so on," Smith said. Whether Chinese institutions should be able to access properties adjacent to military bases and American security assets is a point of "legitimate debate," he said.
Smith said the potential risks from foreign countries acquiring this agricultural land include using the land for espionage as well as stealing intellectual property by monitoring farming techniques.
Iran-based investors owned 3,030 acres of U.S. agricultural land as of December 2023, according to the Department of Agriculture.
Majid Sadeghpour is the political director of the Organization of Iranian American Communities, a nonprofit that advocates for human rights and democracy in Iran and strongly opposes Iran's current government. Sadeghpour's group, which opposes "an appeasement policy towards Iran," according to their website, was in favor of the bill, and its restriction on Iranian companies.
"We welcome U.S. government vigilance and measures which ensure individuals / organizations associated with the regime and its (Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps) do not financially benefit from investments in the United States," he said in an email to The Sun.
Food supply concerns
The bill's co-author also alleges that these countries pose a threat to the U.S. food supply chain.
In a statement to The Sun, Alsobrooks said that an insecure food supply chain represents a significant threat to the nation, adding that the bill would support Maryland's agricultural communities while protecting the country's food security.
The Maryland Grain Producers Association backed the bill for just this reason, its executive director said.
Lindsay Thompson, the association's executive director, said the group is concerned that if unchecked, purchases of farmland by corporations headquartered in these countries could undermine the U.S. food supply by taking land from U.S. farmers, as well as stealing crop production techniques. She added that it could lead to financial hardships, cutting the food supply short.
"The secretary of USDA uniquely understands the entire agricultural system and the vulnerabilities that our farmers and agricultural companies could be subject to in these types of transactions," Thompson said.
Welsh, however, said there is not significant evidence that the small percentage of foreign-held agricultural land could impact the nation's food supply. She said, however, she believes foreign purchases of agricultural land should be monitored on the federal level.
"I think that pulls on a lot of emotions, but … I don't think that there is a strong basis of evidence for the claim that China's ownership of U.S. farmland threatens U.S. food security," Welsh said.
_____
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gap Inc. Appoints Maggie Gauger as Athleta President and Chief Executive Officer
Gap Inc. Appoints Maggie Gauger as Athleta President and Chief Executive Officer

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Gap Inc. Appoints Maggie Gauger as Athleta President and Chief Executive Officer

Gauger Brings Three Decades of Successful Leadership in Women's Active Apparel SAN FRANCISCO, July 29, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Gap Inc. (NYSE: GAP) today announced Maggie Gauger will join the company as Global Brand President and CEO of Athleta effective August 1, as Chris Blakeslee steps down from the role. "As we continue to reinvigorate our house of iconic American brands to not only shape culture but drive profitable, sustainable growth over the long term, we believe in Athleta's incredible potential in the women's active market and within our portfolio," said Gap Inc. CEO Richard Dickson. "Over the past two years, Chris has led the early stages of Athleta's reset, recentering the brand to win with innovative performance product and refining the brand's point of view, helping to position Athleta for the future." Dickson continued, "We are thrilled for Maggie Gauger to join as CEO of Athleta as we look to accelerate the brand's reinvigoration. Maggie blends proven business transformation capabilities, deep consumer centricity, product fluency, and a heartfelt commitment to empowering women and girls. This combination of skills and experiences will equip her to lead Athleta into its next chapter of growth - rooted in purpose, performance, and people." Gauger, a proven leader in women's active sport and style, comes to Athleta with more than 20 years of experience in key leadership roles at Nike, most recently serving as the head of its North America Women's Business, where she was responsible for driving growth, brand love, and customer affinity and acquisition within the large active and athleisure market. Her extensive background across retail, strategy, merchandising, product creation, commerce, digital, and general management - both domestically and globally - are critical assets to the future growth of Athleta. "I'm energized to bring my experience working at the intersection of sport, style and culture to Athleta - a brand with strong purpose and still so much untapped potential," said Maggie Gauger. "Athleta has an unwavering mission focused on the power of women - not just as athletes, but as leaders, creators, and change-makers. And I can't wait to work with the incredible Athleta team to grow, to lead, and to inspire the next generation through the power of product and community." As Gauger transitions into her role, Blakeslee will remain with the company as an advisor to support a smooth transition. For further information, please contact:press@ About Gap Inc., a purpose-driven house of iconic brands, is the largest specialty apparel company in America. Its Old Navy, Gap, Banana Republic, and Athleta brands offer clothing, accessories, and lifestyle products for men, women and children available worldwide through company-operated and franchise stores, and e-commerce sites. Since 1969, Gap Inc. has created products and experiences that shape culture, while doing right by employees, communities and the planet through its commitment to bridge gaps to create a better world. For more information, please visit About AthletaA certified B Corporation, Athleta is a premium performance lifestyle brand with a purpose of inspiring and empowering women and girls to find confidence, strength, and wellbeing through movement. Athleta's versatile performance apparel is designed for women by women, with inclusivity at its core. Founded in 1998, Athleta integrates performance and technical features into their products to support women across their entire lifestyle—from yoga and training to travel and recovery. In 2016, the company launched Athleta Girl mirroring its signature performance in styles for the next generation. Based in San Francisco, CA and a Gap Inc. brand (NYSE: GAP), Athleta apparel is available at over 250 retail stores across the United States and Canada and at View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Gap Inc.

1 in 10 Americans have achieved millionaire status, but the milestone is losing its luster
1 in 10 Americans have achieved millionaire status, but the milestone is losing its luster

Fast Company

time6 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

1 in 10 Americans have achieved millionaire status, but the milestone is losing its luster

As a child, Heidi Barley watched her family pay for groceries with food stamps. As a college student, she dropped out because she couldn't afford tuition. In her twenties, already scraping by, she was forced to take a pay cut that shrunk her salary to just $34,000 a year. But this summer, the 41-year-old hit a milestone that long felt out of reach: She became a millionaire. A surging number of everyday Americans now boast a seven-figure net worth once the domain of celebrities and CEOs. But as the ranks of millionaires grow fatter, the significance of the status is shifting alongside perceptions of what it takes to be truly rich. 'Millionaire used to sound like Rich Uncle Pennybags in a top hat,' says Michael Ashley Schulman, chief investment officer at Running Point Capital Advisors, a wealth management firm in El Segundo, California. 'It's no longer a backstage pass to palatial estates and caviar bumps. It's the new mass-affluent middleweight class, financially secure but two zeros short of private-jet territory.' Inflation, ballooning home values and a decades-long push into stock markets by average investors have lifted millions into millionairehood. A June report from Swiss bank UBS found about one-tenth of American adults are members of the seven-digit club, with 1,000 freshly minted millionaires added daily last year. Thirty years ago, the IRS counted 1.6 million Americans with a net worth of $1 million or more. UBS — using data from the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and central banks of countries around the globe — put the number at 23.8 million in the U.S. last year, a nearly 15-fold increase. The expanding ranks of millionaires come as the gulf between rich and poor widens. The richest 10% of Americans hold two-thirds of household wealth, according to the Federal Reserve, averaging $8.1 million each. The bottom 50% hold 3% of wealth, with an average of just $60,000 to their names. Federal Reserve data also shows there are differences by race. Asian people outpace white people in the U.S. in median wealth, while Black and Hispanic people trail in their net worth. Barley was working as a journalist when her newspaper ended its pension program and she got a lump-sum payout of about $5,000. A colleague convinced her to invest it in a retirement account, and ever since, she's stashed away whatever she could. The investments dipped at first during the Great Recession but eventually started growing. In time, she came to find catharsis in amassing savings, going home and checking her account balances when she had a tough day at work. Last month, after one such day, she realized the moment had come. 'Did you know that we're millionaires?' she asked her husband. 'Good job, honey,' Barley says he replied, unfazed. It brought no immediate change. Like many millionaires, much of her wealth is in long-term investments and her home, not easy-to-access cash. She still lives in her modest Orlando, Florida, house, socks away half her paycheck, fills the napkin holder with takeout napkins and lines trash cans with grocery bags. Still, Barley says it feels powerful to cross a threshold she never imagined reaching as a child. 'But it's not as glamorous as the ideas in your head,' she says. All wealth is relative. To thousandaires, $1 million is the stuff of dreams. To billionaires, it's a rounding error. Either way, it takes twice as much cash today to match the buying power of 30 years ago. A net worth of $1 million in 1995 is equivalent to about $2.1 million today, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. A seven-figure net worth is, to some, as outdated a yardstick as a six-figure salary. Nonetheless, 'millionaire' is peppered in everything from politics to popular music as shorthand for rich. 'It's a nice round number but it's a point in a longer journey,' says Dan Uden, a 41-year-old from Providence, Rhode Island, who works in information technology and who hit the million-dollar mark last month. 'It definitely gives you some room to breathe.' No other country comes close to the U.S. in the sheer number of millionaires, though relative to population, UBS found Switzerland and Luxembourg had higher rates. Kenneth Carow, a finance professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, says commonalities emerge among today's millionaires. The vast majority own stocks and a home. Most live below their means. They value education and teach financial responsibility to their children. 'The dream of becoming a millionaire,' Carow says, 'has become more obtainable.' Jim Wang, 45, a software engineer-turned finance blogger from Fulton, Maryland, says even if hitting $1 million was essentially 'a non-event' for him and his wife, it still held weight for him as the son of immigrants who saved money by turning the heat off on winter nights. The private jets he envisioned as a kid may not have materialized at the million-dollar threshold, but he still sees it as a marker that brings a certain level of security. 'It's possible, even with a regular job,' he says. 'You just have to be diligent and consistent.' The resilience of financial markets and the ease of investing in broad-based, low-fee index funds has fueled the balances of many millionaires who don't earn massive salaries or inherit family fortunes. Among them is a burgeoning community of younger millionaires born out of the movement known as FIRE, for Financial Independence Retire Early. Jason Breck, 48, of Fishers, Indiana, embraced FIRE and reached the million-dollar mark nine years ago. He promptly quit his job in automotive marketing, where he generally earned around $60,000 a year but managed to stow away around 70% of his pay. Now, Breck and his wife spend several months a year traveling. Despite being retired, they continue to grow their balance by sticking to a tight budget and keeping expenses to $1,500 a month when they're in the U.S and a few hundred dollars more when they travel. Hitting their goal hasn't translated to luxury. There is no lawn crew to cut the grass, no Netflix or Amazon Prime, no Uber Eats. They fly economy. They drive a 2005 Toyota. 'It's not a golden ticket like it was in the past,' Breck says. 'For us, a million dollars buys us freedom and peace of mind. We're not yacht rich, but for us, we're time rich.'

Government shutdown talk is starting early ahead of a difficult funding fight in Congress this fall
Government shutdown talk is starting early ahead of a difficult funding fight in Congress this fall

Chicago Tribune

time6 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Government shutdown talk is starting early ahead of a difficult funding fight in Congress this fall

WASHINGTON — It's become tradition. Congressional leaders from both major political parties blame each other for a potential government shutdown as the budget year draws to a close. But this year, the posturing is starting extraordinarily early. The finger-pointing with more than two months to go in the fiscal year indicates the threat of a stoppage is more serious than usual as a Republican-controlled Congress seeks to make good on its policy priorities, often with no support from the other political party. Democratic leadership from both chambers and the two panels responsible for drafting spending bills met behind closed doors recently to discuss the strategy ahead. The leaders emerged demanding that Republicans work with them but were careful to avoid spelling out red lines if Republicans don't. 'We are for a bipartisan, bicameral bill. That's what always has been done,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer. 'The onus is on the Republicans to help us make that happen.' On the Republican side, lawmakers describe the Democrats as itching for a shutdown. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Schumer had threatened a shutdown should Republicans pass a bill to roll back $9 billion in public broadcasting and foreign aid funds. Republicans subsequently passed those cuts. 'It was disturbing to see the Democratic leader implicitly threatening to shut down the government in his July 'Dear Colleague' letter, but I'm hopeful that he does not represent the views of Senate Democrats as a whole,' Thune said. The federal government is operating on a full-year continuing resolution that provided about $1.7 trillion in spending for defense and non-defense programs. The funding expires Sept. 30. President Donald Trump requested a comparable amount for the coming fiscal year, but the Republican proposed dramatically overhauling how that money is distributed to include more for defense and border security and significantly less for health, education, housing and foreign assistance. So far, the House has approved two of the 12 annual spending bills. The Senate has yet to approve any, but those bills that have advanced out of the Senate Appropriations Committee are enjoying bipartisan support while the House bills are generally advancing out of committee on party line votes. This week, the Senate is expected to consider the appropriations bill to fund military construction projects and the Department of Veterans Affairs, generally one of the easier spending bills to pass. One or two others could get added to the package. Congress got off to a late start on the funding process. Republicans prioritized Trump's tax and spending cut bill. Most lawmakers agree Congress will need to pass a stop-gap measure before Sept. 30 to avoid a shutdown and allow lawmakers more time to work on the full-year spending measures. Democrats overwhelmingly opposed this year's funding bill that expires in two months. But in the end, Schumer and nine Democratic colleagues decided a government shutdown would be even worse. They voted to allow the bill to proceed and overcome a filibuster, giving Republicans the ability to pass it on their own on a final vote. Schumer took considerable heat from progressives for his strategy. House Democratic leadership issued a statement at the time saying 'House Democrats will not be complicit.' And members of his own caucus publicly expressed disagreement. 'If we pass this continuing resolution for the next half year, we will own what the president does,' said Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. 'I am not willing to take ownership of that.' Some liberal groups threatened to hold protests at various events Schumer was planning to promote a new book, and some of those events ended up being postponed due to security concerns. The Democratic frustrations have only grown stronger in the ensuing months. First, the Democrats watched the Trump administration slow-walk or block hundreds of billions of dollars from going out in part through the work of its Department of Government Efficiency. Then they watched as Republicans passed Trump's big tax and spending cut bill without any Democratic votes. Finally, they watched as Republicans this month canceled $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funds when much of it had been previously agreed to on a bipartisan basis. Meanwhile, Trump's director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought, declared that the appropriations process 'has to be less bipartisan.' Democrats complain that much of the work taking place in the House has been a waste of time, since those partisan bills have no chance of getting 60 votes in the 100-member Senate. 'At this point in time, why have appropriations if they can just unilaterally through rescissions whack it all away?' said Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill. 'I think what you're seeing is more frustration than I've ever witnessed.' Republicans control all the levers of power in Washington. That could make it harder to blame Democrats for a shutdown. But in the end, any bill will need some Democratic support to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. 'Our concern is that from their standpoint, they want to have a shutdown,' Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said of Democrats. '… The Democrats see it as a way to derail the agenda that we're putting through.' Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2-ranked Republican in the Senate, said Republicans were determined to hold votes on the 12 spending bills. He said that Schumer 'had unilaterally shut down the appropriations process' in previous years by not holding such votes, moving instead to negotiate directly with GOP leadership in the House and then-President Joe Biden's Democratic administration on an all-encompassing spending package. 'If Democrats walk away from this process again, simply to protect wasteful Washington spending,' Barrasso said, 'they will be the ones sabotaging the Senate and shutting down the government.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store