Foreign persons and entities hold reported interests in tens of millions of acres of U.S. agricultural land, and particular transactions can raise legitimate security questions. But the national acreage totals do not, by themselves, show that foreign buyers control U.S. food production or pose a uniform threat to food security. To assess the risk, it matters what kind of interest is held, who holds it, where the property is, and what the transaction enables.
How much U.S. agricultural land do foreign investors hold?
The latest federal figures are not identical, so they should be attributed rather than blended. USDA’s 2024 AFIDA report, released January 22, 2026, lists 46 million acres of foreign-held agricultural land interests as of December 31, 2024. The Congressional Research Service (CRS), summarizing 2024 USDA data in a June 24, 2026 report, gives a figure of 47.2 million acres, or 3.6% of all privately held agricultural land. CRS cautions that AFIDA data may underreport holdings.
Those figures describe reported interests, not necessarily land bought outright or owned in fee. AFIDA includes leaseholders, among other interests. The figures also do not establish what share is productive cropland, how much food the land produces, or whether an investor controls any part of the food supply. GAO cited an earlier USDA estimate of approximately 40 million acres in 2021; it is a historical baseline, not a competing current total.
Can foreign companies buy farmland in the United States?
In general, federal law does not impose a blanket ban on foreign investment in or ownership of U.S. agricultural land. The Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 (AFIDA) primarily establishes a reporting system: covered foreign persons must generally report an acquisition or transfer of an interest in agricultural land, other than a security interest, to USDA within 90 days. State and local rules vary, so the federal baseline does not settle what is permitted in every location.
#1 Best Overall
- Used Book in Good Condition
How AFIDA reporting works
USDA launched an online AFIDA reporting portal on January 22, 2026. USDA says the portal collects the same information as paper form FSA-153, and filers may continue to use the paper form. USDA advises filers not to submit the same filing through both options.
Does foreign-held farmland create a national-security threat?
It can raise a security concern in a particular case, but acreage alone is not a security assessment. The relevant questions include who holds the interest, what the property contains or could enable, how much control the interest provides, and whether the land is near a sensitive facility. A national total does not answer those questions or establish hostile intent.
Rank #2
- Used Book in Good Condition
USDA’s National Farm Security Action Plan describes foreign ownership, particularly from countries of concern, as a potential national-security concern. That is the agency’s policy position; it is not proof that a particular investor or transaction is hostile. The available figures also do not establish that foreign investment has caused changes in food prices, harmed family farms or rural communities, or given investors control over U.S. food production.
What CFIUS can review
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) can review certain foreign acquisitions and some real-estate purchases or leases near specified ports or listed military installations, when statutory and regulatory conditions are met. It does not automatically review every foreign farmland transaction. The proximity of a property to a base may matter, but being near a sensitive site does not by itself establish that CFIUS has jurisdiction or that a transaction presents a threat.
What the Fufeng case illustrates
The proposed Fufeng corn-milling project near Grand Forks Air Force Base brought that jurisdiction question into focus. CRS says Treasury determined in 2022 that CFIUS lacked jurisdiction to review the PRC firm’s land purchase tied to the facility. Grand Forks and other military sites were later added to the relevant regulatory list. The case illustrates a boundary in review authority at that time; it does not show that all foreign-held farmland poses the same risk.
How reliable are the foreign-ownership figures?
AFIDA totals are based on filings, not a complete, independently verified census. GAO found problems with USDA’s collection and reporting processes, including unclear procedures, insufficient verification of filing accuracy and completeness, and delays in sharing detailed data with CFIUS agencies. GAO identified errors and warned that USDA could not reliably report where and how much land foreign persons held without process improvements.
Rank #4
USDA also warns that detailed AFIDA spreadsheets may contain inaccuracies, including transcription errors from manually entered paper filings, and that historical spreadsheets are not all retroactively corrected. Country-by-country or location-specific conclusions drawn from those raw records therefore warrant particular caution.
The reporting system is changing, but a launch announcement is not the same as verified performance. USDA announced its online portal in January 2026. GAO’s page, updated through July 2026, said USDA had not yet provided evidence for GAO to verify that the portal was live or that AFIDA information had been shared with DOD. GAO also reported that USDA and Treasury signed a memorandum of understanding in May 2025 to share forms involving countries of concern and transactions USDA believes may pose a national-security risk.
Best Value
How to interpret claims about foreign farmland ownership
When evaluating a headline or claim, separate the size of reported holdings from the risk of a specific transaction. The distinction matters because the available acreage totals measure reported interests across a large country, while security reviews depend on the investor, the property, the rights involved, and the location.
Quick Recap
- Check what is counted: AFIDA covers interests, including leases; a reported interest is not necessarily a purchase or outright ownership.
- Check the denominator and date: USDA’s 46-million-acre figure and CRS’s 47.2-million-acre, 3.6% figure are both attributed to 2024 data but are reported differently. CRS’s percentage is of privately held agricultural land.
- Separate nationality from evidence of risk: Ownership linked to a country of concern may prompt scrutiny, but nationality alone does not prove hostile intent or establish a threat.
- Look for transaction-specific facts: The investor’s rights, the property’s capabilities, and its relationship to sensitive sites are more informative than a national acreage total.
- Treat granular data cautiously: USDA and GAO have identified limitations in the completeness and accuracy of AFIDA records, especially for detailed or historical comparisons.
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.
