PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 22, 20260 citationsOpen Access

What Ending Prevented Planting Buy-Ups Means for Farmers’ Insurance Costs

View Full Paper
FTFrancis TsiboeHZHongxi ZhaoRCRwit Chakravorty

Key Points

  • The research aims to understand how the elimination of the prevented planting buy-up option will affect farmers' insurance costs.
  • Analyzed Risk Management Agency data
  • Conducted counterfactual simulations
  • Evaluated changes in producer-paid premiums
  • Assessed impact on major crops
  • Replacing a 5 percent PP buy-up requires a 14 to 29 percent increase in premiums nationally
  • Enhanced subsidies under OBBB only partially offset these premium increases
  • Relief from subsidies varies across states
  • Producers with high coverage levels may face higher costs despite federal support

Abstract

The scheduled elimination of the Prevented Planting (PP) buy-up option in 2027 represents a significant shift in U.S. crop insurance policy, altering how producers manage planting-season risk. This brief examines how farmers are likely to adjust their insurance choices following the loss of this targeted risk management tool, particularly in the context of expanded premium subsidies under the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). Using counterfactual simulations based on Risk Management Agency data, the analysis evaluates changes in producer-paid premiums when farmers substitute higher coverage levels for the eliminated PP buy-up, holding insured acres, insurance plans, and unit structures constant. Results indicate that replacing a 5 percent PP buy-up through higher coverage levels would require substantial increases in producer-paid premiums across major crops, ranging from 14 to 29 percent nationally. Although enhanced subsidies under OBBB partially offset these increases, the relief is uneven across states and producers, depending on prevailing unit structures and historical coverage choices. Producers concentrated at high coverage levels are likely to experience higher out-of-pocket costs despite greater federal support. Overall, the findings suggest that while OBBB broadens subsidy access, it does not fully compensate for the loss of a targeted planting-season risk tool and may weaken incentives for maintaining strong insurance protection for some producers.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tsiboe et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6971bdec642b1836717e2987https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.388965
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Ending Prevented Planting Buy-Ups Changes Insurance Choices and Expands Program Risk2026
  2. 2Prevented Planting Buy-Up Elimination and What the Evidence Indicates about Adoption, Actuarial Performance, and Pre-Planting Risk Management Options for Farmers2026
  3. 3The Actuarial Performance of Prevented Planting Buy-Up Coverage2026
  4. 4USDA Moves to Restore the Prevented Planting Buy-Up Option: What It Means for Producers2026
  5. 5Actuarial implications of prevented planting coverage2024 · 3 citations