‘When farmers win fair choices at fair prices, rural communities win, consumers win and America’s food security wins.’
Prepared Opening Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
“Pressure Cooker: Competition Issues in the Seed & Fertilizer Industries”
Tuesday, October 28, 2025
Today, the Judiciary Committee turns its attention to a problem Iowa farmers talk to me about at the kitchen table and at the co-op. This time of year, farmers are going in to buy the basics they need to plant and harvest a crop – but they don’t always feel like they have a real choice, let alone a fair price.
America’s farmers are the most productive in the world. They take the risk, put in the work and feed the United States and much of the world. But they also operate on thin profit margins. If input costs go up or switching suppliers is too hard, that pinch is felt by every farmer, family and consumer in the world.
Farmers across the country are shouldering significantly higher input costs, particularly for seed and fertilizer. According to USDA’s Agricultural Prices reports, the price indexes farmers pay for these categories were notably higher in January 2025 than at the start of 2021. This was obviously due, in part, to the record high inflation rates under the Biden administration.
Rising input prices squeeze already thin margins, especially when combined with volatile commodity markets, higher borrowing costs and weather risks.
Today’s hearing will examine the drivers behind these trends — energy markets that influence nitrogen production, global supply disruptions, logistics bottlenecks and market concentration — and evaluate practical steps that increase transparency and competition so producers can remain viable and resilient.
One such step would be to pass my legislation, the Fertilizer Research Act. This bill would require the Department of Agriculture to do a comprehensive study on the fertilizer industry to shed light on the reasons farmers are paying so much for fertilizer.
The department would be required to give recommendations on further regular public reporting.
This hearing is focused on competition issues. However, there is something that the Trump administration can do right now to help ease the burden for farmers: lowering the countervailing duties on phosphate from Morocco. In 2024, the Biden administration increased duties on Moroccan phosphate to 18 percent.
The Biden phosphate duties have only hurt farmers by boxing out access to this important market on an essential input with no substitute.
I’m calling on the Trump administration to help American farmers and get rid of the Biden phosphate duties.
Over the last 20 years, a few big companies have bought up many of the smaller seed and chemical businesses. Those same companies now sell not just the seeds, but also the pesticides and digital farming tools that tell farmers what to plant and when.
Because all those products and data systems are tied together, it’s hard for farmers to switch to a different brand — their data and recommendations are “locked in” to one company’s system.
On the fertilizer side, global energy and trade shocks hit prices fast. In regional markets, those prices can be slow to fall. On top of that are the contracts and dealer practices — loyalty rebates, “most-favored” clauses and early-order calendars — that can lock in a farm or a local retailer even when there’s a better option on paper.
Now, nobody here wants to punish innovation. We want better yields, healthier soils and quality products. But we also want competition that’s fair, transparent and local competition that a farmer can actually expect when he or she sits down to make a purchase.
Competition law is about making sure the rules don’t give a few players the power to decide what everyone else pays and which choices are even available.
This hearing focuses on problems and workable solutions.
First, transparency: farmers deserve to know the effective price they’re paying, including how rebates and claw backs really work, and whether wholesale fertilizer declines are being passed through in a timely way.
Second, portability: farmers ought to control their own data and move it — quickly, completely and affordably — so they can seek independent agronomic advice without fear of losing their history.
Third, fair dealing: contracts and dealer programs shouldn’t operate as de facto exclusive arrangements in rural counties where there might only be one or two full-service outlets.
And fourth, accountability: when mergers don’t deliver what was promised on paper, agencies should look back and fix it.
I represent Iowa, so I’m thinking about anhydrous ammonia logistics, early-season timing and the reality that a lost multi-line dealer can mean a long drive and fewer options.
But these issues cross state lines, and the principles are the same whether you farm in Iowa, Illinois or anywhere else: more sunlight, more choice, less fine print and a level playing field.
I appreciate Senator Durbin’s partnership in setting a constructive, bipartisan tone today. We’ll hear from farmers, producers and industry experts.
My goal is simple: identify practical steps — legislative and regulatory — that respect innovation and property rights but restore real, on-the-ground competition.
When farmers win fair choices at fair prices, rural communities win, consumers win and America’s food security wins.
I look forward to the discussion, and I’ll turn to Senator Durbin now for any opening remarks.
-30-?