Ricketts and Fetterman Join Forces to Combat China's Efforts to Buy U.S. Farmland
Bipartisan bill aims to curb foreign ownership of U.S. farmland, highlighting food security as a national security priority amid rising Chinese investments.
A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers is making a renewed push to tighten restrictions on foreign ownership of American farmland, introducing legislation designed to strengthen federal oversight and safeguard the nation’s agricultural resources from overseas interests. The initiative, spearheaded by Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska and Democrat Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, is gaining momentum with support from both sides of the aisle amid rising concerns about national security and food independence.
The proposed Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure (AFIDA) Improvements Act aims to address longstanding gaps in federal law that critics say have left the United States vulnerable to increasing foreign investment in agricultural land. The bill comes in response to recent findings by the Government Accountability Office, which determined that existing AFIDA measures are inadequate for monitoring and controlling such transactions. Notably, the legislation would require more rigorous reporting of foreign entities holding even a modest stake—more than one percent—in domestic farmland, tightening the scope of who must disclose landholdings to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
"American farmland should remain in the hands of American farmers and ranchers, not foreign adversaries," said Sen. Ricketts. "The neighbors who feed us should benefit from land ownership, not Communist China. Food security is national security." Echoing this sentiment, fellow sponsor Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama warned that China’s efforts to purchase American farmland represent an attempt to gain leverage over U.S. agriculture supply chains. "We cannot give the CCP a foothold," Tuberville emphasized.
The AFIDA Improvements Act seeks to implement several key reforms. Among them are increased information-sharing between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and the USDA, mandated updates to the AFIDA handbook, and a deadline for the USDA to launch an online system for reporting and tracking foreign investments in agricultural land. This digital upgrade is expected to streamline transparency and enforcement, providing policymakers with up-to-date data to better assess potential security risks.
Foreign ownership of American farmland has surged in recent years. According to USDA data, foreign investors now own more than 40 million acres of U.S. agricultural land. Between 2010 and 2021, the amount held by Chinese entities grew dramatically—from just under 14,000 acres to nearly 384,000 acres. These numbers have ignited debate in Congress and across rural America about the implications for national sovereignty and rural economies.
The legislative effort is part of a broader movement in Congress to scrutinize and potentially restrict foreign acquisitions of U.S. farmland—especially by entities linked to countries deemed hostile to American interests, such as China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Other proposals, such as the PASS Act, seek to ban these nations from purchasing land near military bases or critical infrastructure. Additional bills introduced this year would go even further, proposing outright bans on land purchases by citizens or companies from certain countries.
Calls for federal action have also spilled into the 2024 presidential campaign, with candidates voicing strong opposition to foreign ownership of U.S. farmland and promising stricter controls if elected. In 2023, the Senate passed a bipartisan amendment aimed at barring Chinese, Russian, North Korean, and Iranian entities from acquiring American agricultural assets, though the measure ultimately did not become law.
Supporters of the AFIDA Improvements Act argue that the legislation is an essential step toward protecting America's food supply chain and empowering federal agencies to proactively identify and block transactions that could jeopardize national security. As Congressional debate continues, the issue is likely to remain at the forefront of U.S. agricultural and security policy discussions.
