
Farmers and rural businesses shelled out money for improvements. Will their promised rebates arrive?
A freeze on federal loans and grants is creating turmoil for some rural U.S. business owners who fear they won't get reimbursed for new, cleaner irrigation equipment or solar panels they purchased with the promise of a rebate.
In Cherryville, Maine, Hugh Lassen and his wife and two teenagers grow organic, wild blueberries on their Intervale Farm. Last year they purchased solar panels to run their home, a blueberry sorter and 14 freezers. They did it thinking they'd get an $8,000 grant through the Rural Energy for America Program.
'It's never the right time to spend $25,700,' Lassen said. 'It's a huge amount of money for us because we're pretty small … you also have college expenses looming.'
President Donald Trump ordered a freeze on giving out these funds, but federal judges have said departments can disburse them. Yet many departments have not resumed writing checks, so questions remain for some business owners who spent years making plans for improvements they could afford only with grants.
'We'll just have to suck it up if somehow the funding doesn't come through,' Lassen said.
REAP, offered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is one of the many initiatives rocked by the funding freeze. It provides grants to small businesses in rural areas so they can generate clean energy or improve their energy efficiency. Besides solar, it has helped fund wind turbines, electric irrigation pumps to replace diesel ones, and corn ethanol.
Once a business gets approved for REAP, it purchases the technology and operates it for at least 30 days. Then a USDA agent comes out personally for verification and barring any problem, the check gets issued.
Some people have spent months on their applications.
Deanna and Christopher Boettcher run Mar Vista Farm and Cottages in Gualala, California, and began their REAP application in 2023. They put in time going over plans with contractors and filling out paperwork for 48 solar panels to cover about 80% of their electricity needs.
The day they received approval to buy the panels, the funding freeze was announced.
'I am speechless,' Deanna Boettcher said. 'Absolutely this will change my plans. There is no way we can build the solar system without the funds ... So many obstacles and hurdles they put in the way, and to finally get there and then this.'
Their solar system cost $82,600. REAP is supposed to cover half. 'We're not going to even think about starting it unless we know that it's not frozen … so we're back to where I was two years ago.'
Lassen stressed that lower energy costs make farm products cheaper to make, allowing them to be priced lower. Solar and wind are appealing to remote communities because they can be cheaper than traditional energy sources, such as diesel generators and irrigation pumps.
Grants have proven to be a major driver of new clean energy projects in rural areas because they lower the price tag.
But the Trump administration believes the role of government should be far more limited. Rather than solar power or energy efficiency, Trump has spoken often about his support for oil and gas, erasing environmental and climate policies created under the Biden administration. His key advisor, billionaire Elon Musk, has said the government should scrap all federal tax credits and subsidies.
Russell Vought, the newly-confirmed White House budget director, co-authored the conservative agenda for Trump's second term, Project 2025, which criticized renewables like wind and solar and encouraged more oil and gas usage.
USDA leaders 'have been directed to assess whether grants, loans, contracts, and other disbursements align with the new administration's policies,' according to a statement from a department spokesperson who noted that Brooke Rollins, USDA secretary nominee, 'will have the opportunity to review the programs and work with the White House to make determinations as quickly as possible,' once she's confirmed.
The Lassens' solar system has a Tesla inverter, which converts direct current from the panels to the alternating current used on the property. Hugh said this puts him in a 'funny place where we're benefitting from the brainpower,' but could also suffer from Elon Musk's 'slash and burn cost-cutting" efforts.
'Farmers and small business owners throughout Appalachia and rural America are struggling to stay afloat,' said Chelsea Barnes, director of government affairs and strategy at Appalachian Voices, a nonprofit focused on sustainability. For people who have been awarded REAP funding and made purchases but haven't been reimbursed, "that will cause significant financial harm.'
REAP originated with the 2002 Farm Bill and has long enjoyed strong bipartisan support for energy self-reliance, with money flowing in via farm bill legislation and the Inflation Reduction Act. The program has spent $2.4 billion total since it was created and about half of that came from the Biden administration IRA, passed in 2022.
'It's really counterproductive to go after a program that does so much to help farmers bring down their costs. This is something that everybody agrees on. It primarily benefits Republican districts," said Andy Olsen, a senior policy advocate at the Environmental Law and Policy Center.
___
The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
13 hours ago
- Reuters
What's up with the wacky CBOT corn spreads? -Braun
NAPERVILLE, Illinois, June 11 (Reuters) - U.S. corn supply estimates for the waning 2024-25 marketing year have been dwindling in recent months, though a notable rebound is expected for 2025-26. But the futures market might not be reflecting these trends, leading many to wonder if old-crop stockpiles are actually larger than the government has predicted. Normally, that supply trajectory might put Chicago futures in an inverse, where old-crop corn is pricier than new-crop. But so far this month, CBOT July corn has traded at an average of around 3 cents per bushel cheaper than December corn , reflecting a small carry in the market. Analysts think the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday will trim its forecast for 2024-25 U.S. corn ending stocks to 1.392 billion bushels, rendering stocks down 21% on the year. In past Junes, such a decline in corn stocks has been associated with July-December inverses exceeding 50 cents. The closest comparison in terms of stock declines would be 2018, when July-December corn traded at a 21-cent carry during the first two weeks of June. At that time, U.S. 2017-18 ending stocks were pegged to ease 8% on the year, but the actual estimate was more than ample at 2.1 billion bushels. This demonstrates that contracting year-on-year supplies can be associated with market carry in June. Additionally, there are examples (2008, 2018) where this carry existed despite a reduction in stock estimates over the previous several months. Still, the current setup may suggest that either July futures are too cheap versus December, old-crop stocks are being understated, or some combination of both. Given the present market structure, what might this mean for old-crop corn stocks – and trade expectations – moving forward? If old-crop stocks are too low, it may not come to light on Thursday. There is no relationship between the old-new crop futures spread and the trend in USDA's old-crop ending stock estimates from May to June. Fast-forward to June 30, when USDA publishes its June 1 stock survey, and the chance for a bearish bomb increases. Since 2008, whenever July-December corn traded near flat or in a carry during early June, analysts underestimated June 1 corn stocks about 73% of the time. On the flip side, analysts underestimated June 1 corn stocks in just one out of six years when old-new crop corn featured a strong inverse relationship. Since 2008, there is also a 73% hit rate for final corn ending stocks to be the same or higher than was estimated in June whenever July-December corn traded near flat or in a carry during early June. This same early June spread, however, does not suggest that final ending stocks will be bearish as the trade has gone on to both underestimate and overestimate September 1 corn stocks. The outcome is still wide open for the end of September, when USDA will publish final 2024-25 corn ending stocks. But right now, CBOT corn for expiration in mid-September is the cheapest of the bunch. July-September corn is trading at an inverse averaging 12 cents per bushel so far this month, which is unusual given the slight carry in July-December. The historical relationship between these spreads suggests that one or both are a bit out of sync. With multiple anomalies in the futures market setup having been identified, this might simply mean that 2025 is an outlier year. And if that's the case, historical odds may be increasingly less reliable from here. Karen Braun is a market analyst for Reuters. Views expressed above are her own. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab


Reuters
2 days ago
- Reuters
US wheat gets a glow-up: Multiyear highs for crop health, export sales: Braun
NAPERVILLE, Illinois, June 9 (Reuters) - Second-worst ever. That's how health conditions for the 2025 U.S. winter wheat crop were described last autumn. But winter wheat ratings now sit at a six-year high for early June, just as the harvest is kicking off. This is exactly what U.S. exporters need to continue – and potentially expand – their impressive sales into next year. As of Sunday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture rated 54% of the U.S. winter wheat crop in good or excellent (GE) condition, above trade expectations and up from 50% two weeks earlier. That is up significantly from 38% GE in late October, which was the crop's second-worst start in the 39-year dataset. The 16-percentage-point improvement since then is the period's largest. U.S. winter wheat at 54% GE is the date's best rating since 64% in 2019. The crop was 62% GE at this point in 2016, which still holds the record U.S. winter wheat yield. Final yields were about 13% and 7% above the long-term trend in 2016 and 2019, respectively. For comparison, winter wheat was 47% GE one year ago and final yields were close to trend. Analysts expect USDA on Thursday to make a marginal increase to its 2025-26 U.S. winter wheat harvest forecast, but the trade has already been wrong on this crop. A month ago, USDA's crop peg was at the very top of market guesses. USDA a month ago pegged 2025-26 U.S. winter wheat yield at a nine-year high of 53.7 bushels per acre, which would be roughly 3% above trend. Not everything is going perfectly. The U.S. winter wheat harvest was 4% completed as of Sunday, a weekly advancement of just 1 percentage point. The trade was looking for 8%. In the No. 3 winter wheat state of Oklahoma, only 5% of the crop has been harvested compared with 44% a year ago and a five-year average of 23%. Over the past couple of weeks, top hard red winter wheat (HRW) states like Kansas and Oklahoma have observed more than double their normal rainfall totals. Some HRW wheat areas may continue experiencing heavier rains over the next several days, mainly in the southern portion. Top grower Kansas should remain on the drier side in the next week or so, favoring harvest pace there. If excessive rains were to continue, it could be a problem. Not only do they delay harvest, but they could reduce grain quality, clipping both test weights and starch content and ultimately, the value. Foreign buyers are counting on that wheat. As of May 29, U.S. wheat export sales for the 2025-26 marketing year that began on June 1 sat at a 12-year high for the date following a surge in bookings last month. Some 39% of those bookings were for the HRW variety, the date's largest portion in five years and up from 24% a year ago. By volume, U.S. HRW export sales for 2025-26 are at a 17-year high. New-crop U.S. hard red spring wheat also rang in 2025-26 with total sales among the best in decades. U.S. spring wheat health is trending positively, too. Some 53% of that crop was rated GE as of Sunday, up from the initial 45% two weeks earlier. Ironically, as with winter wheat, that was spring wheat's second-worst initial health rating on record. The 53% is still below average for the date, but the big improvement is promising. U.S. spring wheat producers may be able to partly offset their 55-year low in plantings should weather continue its favorable trajectory. Karen Braun is a market analyst for Reuters. Views expressed above are her own. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab


Reuters
6 days ago
- Reuters
USDA redaction of trade analysis causes concern about report integrity
CHICAGO/WASHINGTON, June 6 (Reuters) - Analysts voiced concerns this week about the integrity of U.S. Department of Agriculture reports after the agency delayed a report and excluded findings that point to tariffs as a reason for a forecasted increase in the agricultural trade deficit, according to Reuters interviews with four analysts. The administration of President Donald Trump has pledged to shrink the farm trade deficit and has said tariffs will strengthen the farm economy, but farm groups have been critical of the approach. The agency's delay of a quarterly agricultural trade report and exclusion of its typical explanatory text were concerning because the moves raised questions about the objectivity of the data, two analysts said. "The trade is uneasy about USDA statistics now," said Charlie Sernatinger, head of grains with Marex, a brokerage and financial services company. A USDA spokesperson said the report was delayed by an internal review. "The report was hung up in internal clearance process and was not finalized in time for its typical deadline. Given this report is not statutory as with many other reports USDA does, the department is undergoing a review of all of its non-statutory reports, including this one, to determine next steps," the spokesperson said. The quarterly trade outlook report jointly published by the USDA's Economic Research Service and Foreign Agricultural Service was scheduled to be released on May 29. Shortly before it was set to publish, its authors were told to stop its release, according to a source familiar with the situation. The authors were then questioned by leaders at the ERS, FAS and USDA Office of the Chief Economist about the report's attribution of the growing agriculture trade deficit to tariffs and sentiments like "Buy Canadian" that have reduced demand for U.S. goods, the source said. In the delayed report released on Monday, the USDA raised its forecast of the U.S. agriculture trade deficit for fiscal-year 2025 to $49.5 billion, from the $49 billion it previously forecast in February. The version of the report published on Monday contains correct and unaltered data, the source said, but excludes explanatory text typically contained in the forecasts. The report delay and redaction were first reported by Politico. Such trade reports would typically be reviewed by communications and policy staff, but the removal of the explanatory text was highly unusual, according to a second source familiar with the report publication process. Two other analysts said they were confident in the USDA data for now, but expressed concern about how Trump's disruption of the federal government could affect future reports. "Departures of key personnel limit the ability of agencies to collect and analyze information," said Patrick Westhoff, director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri. The USDA has lost about 27% of ERS employees and 14% of FAS employees to terminations or voluntary incentives to leave the agency as the Trump administration works to reduce the size and cost of the federal government, according to Reuters reporting. The U.S. had an agricultural trade surplus for decades but in recent years, imports of high-value goods like alcohol, fruits and vegetables have driven a growing deficit, according to USDA data.