Producers with localized yield losses or entirely prevented-planted farms have a reason to examine Agriculture Risk Coverage–Individual Coverage before the Dec. 11, 2026, commodity-program election deadline, according to university researchers. ARC-IC uses farm revenue rather than county revenue, but pays on a smaller share of base acres, making the comparison more demanding than simply identifying a poor harvest.
Henrique Monaco of the University of Minnesota, Nick Paulson and Gary Schnitkey of the University of Illinois, and Carl Zulauf of Ohio State University describe that tradeoff in their latest analysis. They report the deadline from a USDA announcement. Any payments triggered for the 2026 crop year would not arrive until October 2027.
The election also differs from last year’s arrangement. In an October review, revised Oct. 14, the researchers explain that producers enrolled in ARC-CO or Price Loss Coverage received the higher payment for 2025 under a one-time provision. That protection does not carry into the 2026 election, even though the revised program payment parameters remain in effect.
How the farm-level revenue test works
For each Farm Service Agency farm, producers can choose Agriculture Risk Coverage–County Coverage, known as ARC-CO, or PLC separately for each base-acre crop. Alternatively, they can enroll all covered-commodity base acres on that FSA farm in ARC-IC. The distinction matters: ARC-IC evaluates revenue across the planted covered commodities, rather than treating each crop as a separate payment decision.
ARC-IC’s guarantee equals 90% of benchmark revenue. When actual revenue falls below that guarantee, the payment calculation covers the difference, subject to a cap of 12% of benchmark revenue. Those parameters took effect for the 2025 program under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and continue for 2026, the researchers explain.
The benchmark starts with each covered commodity planted in 2026. For each year from 2020 through 2024, farm yield is multiplied by the higher of the marketing-year average price or effective reference price. An Olympic average, which drops the highest and lowest values, establishes each crop’s benchmark. Those benchmarks are weighted by the crop’s share of 2026 planted acres.
Actual revenue uses 2026 farm yields and marketing-year average prices, also weighted by planted acres. Farm yields must be certified to FSA. The researchers describe replacement rules for benchmark years: yields below 80% of the county transitional yield receive that floor, while years when a crop was not planted use the county ARC-CO yield.
The payment-acre difference is central. ARC-IC pays on 65% of base acres, compared with 85% for ARC-CO and PLC, a 20-percentage-point gap. A farm-level loss must be large enough to overcome that smaller payment base. Higher farm yields can raise the benchmark and potential payment size, but do not necessarily make a payment more likely.
Loss situations worth comparing
An entirely prevented-planted farm is one situation the authors flag. If FSA approved prevented planting for all initially intended covered-commodity acres, actual revenue is zero and ARC-IC reaches its maximum payment. But if any covered commodity was planted, the calculation uses the planted crop revenue. Prevented planting on one crop does not automatically produce the maximum.
Localized losses offer another reason to compare. Hail, flooding or drought may reduce a farm’s revenue without causing enough countywide damage to trigger ARC-CO. ARC-IC may respond to that difference. Still, it measures the combined performance of covered crops: stronger revenue from one crop can offset weaker revenue from another and reduce the potential payment.
Fruit, vegetable and wild-rice planting on base acres adds another consideration. According to the authors, planting those crops above 15% of base acres reduces ARC-CO and PLC payment acres, while ARC-IC allows up to 35%. That difference narrows the payment-acre gap; it does not reverse it or establish that ARC-IC will deliver the larger payment.
Pooling can dilute or increase payments
Pooling can change the answer again. All FSA farms a producer enrolls in ARC-IC within a state are combined into one ARC-IC farm. FSA does not calculate each farm’s payment and then average the checks. Instead, it combines benchmark and actual revenue across covered crops and enrolled farms, using planted acres as weights.
As a result, a farm with strong revenue can dilute losses elsewhere, while another combination may increase the total payment. The authors suggest estimating results for individual FSA farms, then testing combinations. The comparison with ARC-CO and PLC needs to include payments across all covered crops on the same farm, not just the crop with the largest loss.
Harvest information can sharpen the comparison, but it cannot settle every input: final 2026 marketing-year average prices remain unknown. ARC-IC also requires farm-yield certification, and the authors say its payments historically have taken longer to process. A useful calculation therefore needs both the expected payment and the enrollment combination, rather than a yield-loss estimate alone.
