You are using software which is blocking our advertisements (adblocker).

As we provide the news for free, we are relying on revenues from our banners. So please disable your adblocker and reload the page to continue using this site.
Thanks!

Click here for a guide on disabling your adblocker.

App icon
FreshPublishers
Open in the app
OPEN
40% delinquency rate prompts extended pause as agency overhauls underwriting standards

USDA freezes vertical farming loans over soaring defaults

The USDA has extended its freeze on federal loan guarantees for vertical farms and controlled environment agriculture (CEA) projects through December 31, 2026, citing a portfolio in sharp decline. The Rural Business-Cooperative Service announced the extension after a portfolio review revealed that 40 percent of CEA loans are now in delinquency. The original 90-day pause from January has become an indefinite hold while the agency develops new lending standards for the sector.

"Continuing to guarantee high-risk projects, particularly those underwritten by lenders lacking expertise, threatens the long-term stability of the program," USDA Administrator J.R. Claeys said. The freeze affects all new applications for vertical farming, hydroponics, aeroponics, and aquaponics. Existing applications already in the pipeline will be withdrawn. Traditional greenhouses and mushroom farms are not affected.

Systemic underwriting failures
The USDA identified pervasive problems in how lenders have been approving CEA projects. One-third of paused projects involve lenders currently under federal audit or pause status themselves. Common failures include incomplete engineering designs, missing or inadequate buyer agreements, repayment plans based on tax credits rather than actual project cash flow, and insufficient analysis of working capital needs.

Beyond high delinquency, the agency found that additional projects are drawing on emergency loss reserves, which is a sign of deteriorating cash flow. A critical distinction here is that CEA equipment and facilities have limited resale value, so when projects collapse, recovery rates are significantly worse than conventional farm failures. "Unlike other sectors where collateral and corporate guarantees mitigate losses, CEA projects are showing erosion of collateral, lower recovery values, and higher loss severity," the USDA said.

Accelerating cost to taxpayers
The financial impact is substantial. The agency's current subsidy rate of 1.09 percent requires $19.75 million in annual appropriations. The projected fiscal 2027 rate is 2.95 percent, requiring $51.625 million, more than doubling the taxpayer cost for the same lending capacity.

Current lender fees of 3 percent at issuance and 0.55 percent annually are often passed to borrowers, creating a secondary cost pressure. "High fees will remain a barrier for many worthy projects as the alternative to appropriation is increased fees to lenders that are often passed on to borrowers," the RBCS acknowledged, describing a structural catch-22.

Not a technology judgment
The RBCS emphasized that the pause is not a verdict on CEA technology itself. "This action does not establish new eligibility requirements and does not reflect a judgment on any specific applicant or technology," Claeys stated. Instead, the focus is on correcting insufficient expertise in the rural lending community. The extended pause will allow the RBCS to develop sector-specific underwriting guidance, assess lender capability, and strengthen collateral standards before resuming approvals.

"The choice is clear. We can continue approving projects we have reason to believe will fail, or we can preserve capital for job-creating rural projects we have strong confidence will succeed." Updated guidance on lending standards and risk mitigation is scheduled for release before year-end.

For more information:
USDA
Dominick Lombardi, Special Assistant to the Administrator
[email protected]
www.usda.gov

Related Articles → See More