Bill Overview
Title: Prohibition of Agricultural Land for the People’s Republic of China Act
Description: This bill requires the President to prohibit nonresident aliens, foreign businesses, and agents associated with China's government from (1) purchasing agricultural (including ranching) real estate located in the United States, or (2) participating in Department of Agriculture programs that are unrelated to food and safety regulatory requirements.
Sponsors: Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]
Target Audience
Population: Non-resident Chinese individuals and entities related to agriculture
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill targets nonresident aliens and foreign businesses specifically from China, prohibiting them from purchasing agricultural land in the United States.
- It potentially affects Chinese investors or companies that may be interested in investing in U.S. agriculture.
- The impact also extends to agents associated with the Chinese government who may be involved in agricultural investments in the U.S.
Reasoning
- Given the policy is targeting non-resident aliens and foreign businesses specifically from China, the direct impact on the American population is minimal. However, those involved in agriculture might experience indirect impacts, such as changes in market dynamics or investment landscapes.
- The budget constraints imply that the number of affected entities will be relatively small as the focus is not on providing new services but rather on enforcement and regulatory measures.
- While non-resident Chinese individuals and companies may be deterred from investing in U.S. agricultural land, local landowners who previously sold land to these entities might see a change in demand, potentially affecting sale prices and market competition.
- Opinions on the policy are likely to be mixed within the U.S. Some may view it as protective of national interests, while others might see it as a barrier to foreign investments that could benefit local economies.
- The policy's impact is more likely over medium to long timelines rather than immediate effects, which might be reflected in gradual changes in wellbeing scores.
Simulated Interviews
Corn Farmer (Iowa)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand why some might want to limit foreign ownership of farmland, but these partnerships can help us sell more produce.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Vineyard Owner (California)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried this policy will limit my ability to find new investors, which is crucial for growing my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Real Estate Investor (New York)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could really affect my business, but it might open up domestic opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Rancher (Texas)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a good move to keep our land with Americans, but it could affect the prices around here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Agricultural Analyst (Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a strategic move, though it could lead to some diplomatic tensions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Retired Farmer (Nebraska)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't directly feel the impact, but I'm curious how it will play out for current farmers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Agricultural Policy Expert (Illinois)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strategically important but domestically moderate impact. It helps prevent potential conflicts of interest.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Local Grocery Store Owner (Montana)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As long as local farms remain stable, I don't see a direct effect.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Wheat Farmer (Idaho)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might see shifts in foreign investment trends, but my business stays local.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Agricultural Community Leader (Kentucky)
Age: 72 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Protecting American land is vital; this policy ensures our resources stay here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)
Key Considerations
- Chinese entities are significant investors in U.S. agricultural land, which could impact sectors such as real estate and agriculture.
- The policy will involve additional enforcement and compliance measures that can affect its administrative costs.
- Effects on bilateral relations with China should be considered.