Windows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallOutdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchYes, foreign companies and other qualifying foreign persons can hold interests in U.S. farmland, but federal disclosure rules and a growing patchwork of state restrictions apply. USDA reported about 46 million acres of U.S. agricultural land held by foreign persons as of December 31, 2024. That figure covers reportable foreign interests—not just land owned outright by foreign governments—and does not by itself show that those holdings threaten food security.
What “foreign-owned” farmland means
“Foreign ownership” is shorthand for a range of interests. Under the federal Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 (AFIDA), qualifying foreign persons who hold interests in U.S. agricultural land must report them to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Reportable interests can be direct or indirect and may involve individuals, business entities, or foreign governments.
That makes the federal acreage total broader than a count of farms or acres owned outright by foreign governments. The approximately 46 million acres USDA reported for holdings as of December 31, 2024, is an AFIDA-based measure of agricultural land held by foreign persons. USDA announced the figure in a January 22, 2026 release about its reporting system.
How much U.S. farmland is held by foreign persons?
USDA’s reported total is about 46 million acres as of December 31, 2024. It is a national snapshot, not a measure of how much farmland is available for domestic food production, who controls each parcel, or what is grown on it. It also does not establish that foreign-held land has caused a food-security problem.
#1 Best Overall
- Used Book in Good Condition
An older figure cited in a December 2023 Stateline report put foreign-held interests at about 3.1% of privately held U.S. agricultural land, based on data through 2021. That historical percentage should not be treated as a current estimate or substituted for USDA’s later acreage total.
What federal law requires—and what it does not
AFIDA is a disclosure system
AFIDA requires qualifying foreign persons to disclose their interests in U.S. agricultural land to USDA. It is a federal monitoring and reporting law; the acreage figure alone is not a federal ban on foreign participation in farmland.
Rank #2
- Used Book in Good Condition
How to report an interest
On January 22, 2026, USDA’s Farm Service Agency launched an online portal for AFIDA reporting. USDA said the portal gathers the information requested on Form FSA-153. Its announcement also said paper Form FSA-153 remained an option. Secretary Brooke Rollins described the portal as a way to obtain verifiable information about foreign interests and protect farmers’ security; that statement explains the agency’s purpose, not independently measured results.
Federal rule revisions were proposed in 2026
On August 6, 2026, the National Agricultural Law Center described USDA revisions published as a proposal on June 25, 2026. The proposal sought to broaden reporting coverage, gather more information, move reporting online, create an appeals process, and revise civil penalties. In that August analysis, the revisions were proposed—not final. That status should not be read as a description of any later action.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Which states restrict foreign interests in farmland?
The National Agricultural Law Center’s resource, accessed October 8, 2026, counts approximately 29 states with laws that specifically forbid or limit some foreign interests in private agricultural land. No state has a total prohibition, and “29 states restrict foreign ownership” does not mean that 29 states bar all foreign buyers. The laws differ in whom they cover, what property or interests they reach, and how they are enforced.
The Center also describes more than half of states as having laws restricting certain foreign acquisitions of private and public real property, including agricultural land. That broader count has a wider scope than the approximately 29-state count for laws specifically addressing some foreign interests in private agricultural land.
Rank #4
| How a state law may work | What varies |
|---|---|
| Restrict who may acquire land | Covered investors may include nonresident aliens, foreign businesses, foreign governments, or people and entities associated with designated foreign-adversary or country categories. |
| Limit the property or interest covered | Definitions of agricultural land, treatment of direct and indirect interests, acreage thresholds, and whether public or nonagricultural real property is included differ by law. |
| Require separate state disclosure | Some states impose reporting requirements in addition to federal AFIDA reporting; the state’s covered persons and filing rules determine what must be disclosed. |
| Set consequences or enforcement mechanisms | Possible approaches described by the National Agricultural Law Center include agency or attorney-general action, forfeiture or escheat, judicial sale, civil penalties, and private enforcement. |
This variation matters in practice: a rule may target a particular category of investor or land interest rather than foreign buyers generally. A state count is therefore a guide to the spread of restrictions, not a substitute for checking the law that applies to a particular transaction.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Arkansas’s 2023 Syngenta case
A December 2023 Stateline report described Arkansas as an example of how these laws can operate. It said the state ordered Syngenta to sell 160 acres used for research under a 2023 law, and that the company paid a $280,000 civil penalty for failing to register under a separate Arkansas law enacted in 2021. The report traced Syngenta’s ownership connection to ChemChina, which acquired Syngenta in 2017, and said the acreage was the only property then known to fall under the new law.
Best Value
Those details describe the reported 2023 case, not a confirmed current disposition. The sources cited here do not establish whether the land was later sold or resolve any subsequent litigation or enforcement.
Do restrictions improve food or national security?
Supporters frame restrictions as a way to protect national security and food security. Mississippi agriculture commissioner Andy Gipson, quoted by Kevin Hardy in Stateline on December 4, 2023, argued that land sold outside the country reduces acreage available for domestic self-interest and food security. That is an argument for the policy, not evidence that foreign-held acreage has caused a food shortage.
The sources cited here do not provide a causal evaluation showing that foreign ownership has reduced U.S. food security, or an outcome study establishing that state restrictions have improved it. Acreage totals identify the scale of reported interests; they do not establish the consequences of those interests or the effectiveness of a restriction.
Stateline also reported concerns that restrictions could make it harder for farmers to sell land, affect economic development, or discriminate against Asian Americans. Those are policy concerns raised in the debate, not quantified outcomes established by the sources cited here. Assessing a particular law means weighing its security rationale against its scope, enforcement, and possible effects on landowners and communities.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
