Buying American: Can China Buy Land in the US?

Can China buy land in the US has become an increasingly important question. China’s purchase of land within the United States has raised concerns among lawmakers and security experts about potential national security threats. This article provides an overview of China’s land ownership in the US, including key statistics, the role of government agencies, and the debate around implications for US agriculture and the broader economy.

Overview

In recent years, there has been growing discussion around Chinese-owned land in the United States and whether this represents potential national security threats. While Chinese companies and entities have been purchasing U.S. real estate and agricultural land at an increasing rate over the past decade, experts are divided on whether this trend should raise alarms.

Brief background on China’s land ownership in the U.S.

It is undisputed that Chinese corporations and wealthy individuals have acquired substantial amounts of U.S. land, especially farmland and agricultural operations. High profile examples include the Chinese company Shuanghui purchasing Smithfield Foods and its 146,000 acres of U.S. land in 2013. Chinese billionaires have also bought over 130,000 acres of cotton farms in Texas. More recently in 2022, the Chinese conglomerate Fufeng Group purchased 300 acres of land merely 15 miles away from the Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota.

Although foreign entities have been able to buy American real estate since the early 19th century, Chinese acquisitions of U.S. land have markedly increased over the past 10-15 years. China now owns sizable portions of American farms, ranches, and other agricultural facilities.

Potential security threats and concerns

Some policymakers and national security experts have raised concerns about China’s expanding ownership of land near military sites or critical infrastructure in the U.S. The worry is that China could leverage these land holdings to gather intelligence or otherwise compromise U.S. security interests. For example, the Fufeng Group’s corn mill near the Grand Forks Air Force Base could hypothetically provide capabilities for monitoring air force operations. Similarly, the acres of Texan cotton farms owned by Chinese companies could perhaps enable surveillance of border control activities if used nefariously.

However, others contend these risks are exaggerated. They argue there are already regulations restricting foreign ownership of land near sensitive government and military sites. Additionally, they point out that farms and agricultural facilities are not optimal locations for conducting spying operations.

In summary, while China owns increasing amounts of American farmland and agriculture operations, experts disagree on whether this genuinely constitutes a national security threat. However, it is an issue policymakers should continue monitoring as China expands its U.S. land holdings, especially near critical infrastructure. Vigilance is necessary to safeguard against potential risks.

Current Situation

Now that we’ve got some background on China’s land purchases in the U.S., let’s take a look at the current state of affairs. I’ll fill you in on exactly how much land China owns, as well as what the government is doing to track foreign ownership. Grab some coffee and let’s dive in!

Breakdown of the land owned by China in the U.S.

You might be wondering just how many acres of good old American farmland are currently under Chinese ownership. Well according to the USDA, back in 2019 Chinese owners held around 192,000 acres worth about $1.9 billion.

Most of those acres are in large agricultural states like Texas, Missouri, and Michigan. For example, Chinese companies own around 25,000 acres of cotton farms in Texas. And in Missouri, those figures include more than 10,000 acres of soybean fields.

Now 192,000 acres might sound like a lot, but it’s only about 0.5% of all agricultural land in the U.S. So in the grand scheme, Chinese ownership makes up just a tiny fraction of America’s 920 million acres of farmland. Still, Chinese acquisitions have been steadily rising over the past decade.

Here’s a quick table to break it down:

As you can see, the amount has more than doubled in less than 10 years. At this rate, China may own over 1 million acres of U.S. farmland before we know it!

Role of the USDA in tracking foreign land purchases

When it comes to monitoring foreign purchases of U.S. land, the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) plays a key role. They work with the Farm Service Agency (FSA) to pull records on who exactly owns agricultural land across the country.

This helps provide helpful statistics and reports to policymakers on foreign investments in U.S. agriculture. It also equips the USDA to address any potential national security issues that come up.

Now the tracking system isn’t perfect – some critics argue there are gaps in reporting requirements. But the USDA does its best to shed light on foreign farmland acquisitions using the resources it has.

And its recent reports have certainly flagged China as one buyer snapping up more and more U.S. acres. The data helps inform ongoing debates about restricting foreign land ownership to protect America’s vibrant farming industry and national interests.

While Chinese entities continue expanding their holdings of American farmland, the USDA strives to track these complex transactions and provide useful info to policymakers. But additional monitoring and reporting requirements may be needed as foreign investment in U.S. agriculture increases.

Legislation and Politics

Lawmakers in Washington have been pondering what to do about China’s land ownership here in the homeland. Some argue we need to set limits, while others say let the free market do its thing. Grab some popcorn, because this debate is popping!

Lawmakers’ considerations regarding Chinese land ownership

In Congress, some legislators have raised concerns about Chinese control over America’s farms and fields. For instance, back in 2012 good ole Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa declared:

“We cannot allow China to be in a position to disrupt our economy and endanger our national security… No one knows exactly how much foreign ownership there is in agriculture, or where.”

Other lawmakers are worried China may use land holdings to dump cheap crops like soybeans onto U.S. markets. This could undercut American farmers who can’t compete on price with China’s massive subsidies.

On the other hand, many politicians emphasize that America has always welcomed foreign investment. They argue placing limits on Chinese purchases could discourage valuable cash flows into the U.S. economy.

It’s a real pickle — how to balance national security worries with the benefits of an open investment environment? Lots of heated debates on the Senate floor, I’ll tell you that much!

Backlash and concerns over Chinese companies buying land

One piece of legislation that got folks riled up was a bill proposed back in 2021 called the Food Security is National Security Act. Sponsored by good ole Representative Dan Newhouse of Washington, it called for:

• Banning purchases of U.S. farmland by companies tied to China’s government
• Creating a task force to monitor foreign land acquisitions
• Strengthening an existing review process for foreign agriculture investments

Supporters argued it was past time to halt Chinese acquisitions of U.S. land. But opponents said the bill went too far in singling out China. Groups like the Cato Institute called it “fearmongering” that could reduce agricultural exports.

This back-and-forth illustrates the growing backlash against Chinese land deals. Many folks see purchases of prime U.S. farmland as threats to America’s food security and rural communities. Agriculture groups wrote a letter emphasizing:

“Allowing China to control America’s food production…poses a grave threat to America’s food supply and national security.”

But companies like Smithfield say their Chinese parent provides helpful export opportunities for U.S. pork. See, there are good arguments on both sides!

In the end, the bill didn’t pass in 2021. But with rising anti-China sentiments, expect more heated debates on limiting foreign farmland ownership in the future!

Enforcement and Investigation

We will move on to discuss how the government monitors foreign ownership of American farmland. We’ll cover everything from reporting requirements to investigation methods. This is important stuff for keeping foreign land acquisitions transparent. 

Weak enforcement of regulations on foreign land ownership

When foreign entities like China purchase U.S. farmland, they’re supposed to follow certain rules and regulations. This includes reporting the transactions to the USDA and going through a national security review process.

But some experts argue the current system has weak enforcement in practice. For example, a lot of farmland sales fall below the acreage threshold for mandatory reporting to the USDA. This enables some foreign owners to fly under the radar.

There are also gaps around tracking shell companies – where a foreign buyer sets up an American corporation to obscure their identity. One analysis found over $300 million worth of U.S. farmland bought by shell companies of unknown origin!

On top of that, the national security reviews for agriculture deals are pretty limited in scope. As long as the land isn’t super close to a military site, the deals usually get a pass.

In fact, less than 1% of foreign agriculture investments reported to the USDA have been blocked since 2010. Those are some pretty weak odds for rejecting potentially concerning deals!

So while America technically has a system to monitor foreign farmland purchases, experts say there’s room for improvement when it comes to investigating real owners and identifying risks. As one agriculture group put it:

“Current foreign investment reporting requirements for agriculture are inadequate to properly account for the scale and scope of today’s foreign investment in American farmland.”

The need for stricter investigation methods

Given these concerns about limited transparency, a number of folks have proposed ideas to strengthen oversight of foreign farmland purchases:

• Expand mandatory reporting requirements for smaller land sales. This would create a more complete picture of total foreign holdings.
• Establish a beneficial ownership registry to identify who exactly owns shell companies buying U.S. land.
• Conduct more rigorous national security reviews that consider long-term food security risks.
• Monitor foreign-owned farmland through spot checks, required data reporting, and penalties for noncompliance.
• Increase USDA funding and staffing to effectively collect and audit data on foreign ag investments.

As you can see, there are a range of options on the table for increasing scrutiny of foreign farmland deals. Many lawmakers argue adopting some combination of the above would help protect America’s food security and national interests. As Senator Jon Tester of Montana said:

“We cannot allow the safety of America’s food supply to depend on gaps in oversight and transparency…It’s past time we strengthen our protection of domestic farmland.”

Critics argue stricter measures could discourage beneficial foreign investment in U.S. agriculture. But either way, expect continued lively debates on how to balance openness with national security!

While foreign agriculture investments are supposed to be monitored for risks, experts say the current system has gaps. Tighter reporting rules, rigorous reviews, and new registries could help, but finding the right balance won’t be easy. One thing’s for sure – government oversight of foreign farmland purchases will continue to be a hot topic!

Impact and Implications

Now we’ll explore the potential impacts of China’s agricultural land grabs here in the homeland. Could it compromise national security or damage America’s vibrant farming economy? These are big questions with serious implications!

National security threats and implications

Now we’ve touched on worries that China could exploit its U.S. farmland for espionage near military sites. For example, folks pointed to the Chinese Fufeng corn mill just 12 miles from Grand Forks Air Force Base.

On its face, a corn mill seems harmless enough. But experts say its towering silos could potentially enable surveillance of air force activity and communications. Some critics argue it even violates existing laws on foreign-owned property near military bases.

And Grand Forks isn’t the only case raising alarm bells. A Chinese billionaire’s acquisition of 130,000 acres of Texan cotton farms is near Laughlin Air Force Base. China’s largest pork producer owns swaths of land in North Carolina, home to major Marine Corps facilities.

In total, China now holds over 200,000 acres of U.S. farmland in areas with sensitive national security sites. And current screening mechanisms may not fully account for espionage risks.

As Republican Representative Elise Stefanik of New York put it:

“The purchase of American farmland by Chinese interests fundamentally undermines U.S. national security. This should concern Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.”

Still, others argue these fears are overhyped. They say Chinese companies mainly just want our farms for food production, not spying. Either way, lawmakers are ramping up efforts to restrict foreign land ownership near military sites in the name of national security.

Potential impact on U.S. agriculture and economy

Another worry is that Chinese control of American farmland could negatively impact U.S. agriculture. For one, China could potentially manipulate crops or exports to undercut American farmers.

Back in 2012, when China’s Shuanghui purchased Smithfield Foods, some argued it gave the ability to flood U.S. markets with cheap pork imports. And China’s state-owned food company COFCO owns farms in Brazil producing soybeans that compete with U.S. exports.

Critics also argue America is losing sovereign control over its food production by selling off the family farm. Foreign owners may be driven just by profits, with less concern for rural communities.

Plus, food security advocates say relying on imports from foreign-owned American farms could be risky. As the National Farmers Union put it:

“Food security is critical to national security. Our land, our water, our livelihoods should not be controlled by foreign entities.”

But others counter that China’s investments provide big economic opportunities for rural America through job creation and increased productivity.

Either way, the loss of too much prime U.S. farmland risks undermining America’s vibrant agricultural economy down the road. Lawmakers are still wrestling with the right balance on outside investment.

Case studies of Chinese land ownership

To see these issues in action, let’s look quickly at how Chinese ownership has played out in individual states:

Iowa: Offshore Chinese company Heilongjiang Baodi Agricultural Co owns nearly 3,000 acres used primarily for hog production. This stimulates Iowa’s pork industry but also concentrates control over livestock.

Oklahoma: Chinese billionaire Liu Yongxing purchased a whopping 130,000 acres of Oklahoma cotton farms near Laughlin Air Force Base in the 2000s. This massive foreign acquisition raised concerns.

Michigan: In 2020, a Chinese company bought 300 acres of Michigan farmland which a domestic farmer group had unsuccessfully bid on. Locals worried it would sit fallow rather than grow crops.

So the impacts really depend on the specifics of each case! But patterns of large Chinese buys and concentration of ownership do stand out as concerning to some.

Rising anti-Asian sentiments and the role of Chinese land ownership

Finally, another worrying trend is a rise in recent years of anti-Asian prejudice that’s gotten tangled up in debates over China and land ownership. Of course, American farmers and companies of Asian descent shouldn’t be painted with the brush of foreign adversaries.

But contentious geopolitics can unfortunately spark discrimination. There are concerns that backlash against Chinese land investments may fuel dangerous biases.

Asian American advocacy groups argue politicians should discuss threats from foreign states like China without fueling xenophobia against Asian people overall. It’s a nuanced conversation fraught with tensions as America’s relationship with Asia evolves.

Frequently Asked Questions

Navigating the Nuances of Foreign Investment in U.S. Agriculture

We’ve covered a lot of ground on this winding trail of foreign investment in American farmland. From tracking systems to national security, it’s been quite a lot. But now we will cover where things may head from here.

An assessment of the real threats posed by foreign land ownership

Looking at the facts, it seems the jury is still out on how much danger foreign-owned U.S. land truly poses. There are definitely some risks on the table – no doubt about that. The prospect of a geopolitical rival buying up prime acres near military sites raises understandable alarm bells.

And America probably wants to maintain reasonable self-sufficiency for key crops to avoid being held over a barrel. But outright bans on foreign capital could do more harm than good if done clumsily.

Right now, the amount of farmland controlled by China is still just a tiny slice of America’s vibrant agricultural pie. And some data suggests foreign owners may actually improve productivity on acreage they acquire.

So while vigilance is clearly needed, broadly casting every land sale to an overseas investor as an imminent threat seems overblown. Careful, balanced assessments of real risks in each case will serve America’s interests best.

Potential measures to address the issue

When it comes to addressing concerns, there are a range of options short of slamming the door completely. For starters, the U.S. could expand required disclosures on foreign acquisitions to close those reporting loopholes.

Getting clearer data would allow closer monitoring for any patterns that raise red flags, without spooking away international investment. Expanding the scope of national security reviews for land deals near critical sites also makes sense.

And the U.S. could always impose targeted restrictions on purchases from certain foreign-owned companies close to defense assets. This would address concrete risks without banning all foreign capital. America can welcome investment while still protecting the homeland.

But ultimately, agriculture is a global industry with operations across borders. Complete insulation from those crosscurrents likely isn’t realistic or even desirable. The U.S. will need to find the right balance.

However America decides to address foreign farmland investment, wisdom and level-headedness must prevail over fear and reaction. Your pal will be right here riding along wherever the discussion leads next. So until we meet again, be well my friends. Yours truly…