Listen to this story.Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
There was a time when Kim Reynolds, the governor of Iowa, had no problem with Chinese investment. In 2012, when she was the state’s lieutenant governor, she met Xi Jinping, then China’s vice-premier, on a visit to Beijing. In 2017, as governor, she visited again, this time posing with Vice-Premier Wang Yang. No longer. In her Condition of the State address to Iowa’s legislature on January 9th, Ms Reynolds claimed that “China continues to grow more aggressive, and buying American land has been one of the many ways they have waged this new battle.” Later this year she intends to introduce a new law that would toughen land-ownership reporting rules in Iowa. “American farmland should stay in American hands,” she says.
Ms Reynolds joins a chorus of state and federal politicians who worry about Chinese land grabs. On January 2nd Missouri’s governor, Mike Parson, issued an executive order banning “foreign adversaries” from buying land within ten miles of a military facility. Last October Arkansas ordered a Chinese-owned agricultural firm to sell 160 acres of land. Laws to restrict Chinese ownership of land have spread to Florida and Texas. In recent years the number of states with restrictions on foreign ownership has grown from 14 to 24, according to Micah Brown, of the National Agricultural Law Centre in Arkansas. Federal politicians are getting in on the act, too. Jon Tester, the Democratic senator from Montana, is among those to have proposed tighter federal laws on foreign land ownership.
Yet there is little reason to think that Chinese firms are really buying much American land—whether near military bases or otherwise. If official data are to be believed, Chinese landholdings are both tiny and shrinking. Chinese investment into America has collapsed in the past few years. Is it all a storm about nothing?
Since 1978 foreign owners of agricultural land have been required to declare it to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). The agency’s data show that, at the end of 2022, around 3% of privately held land nationwide was declared foreign-owned. The biggest holders were firms and individuals from Canada, followed by the Netherlands and Britain. Declared Chinese entities held less than 1% of all foreign-owned land, or 0.03% of the total. People in Luxembourg own more. Foreign land ownership has grown by 40% since 2016, but China is not evidently the driver. From 2021 to 2022 the total amount of land owned in full or in part by Chinese firms shrank from 384,000 acres to 347,000. In Iowa, Chinese holdings totalled just 281 acres—an area smaller than the state fairgrounds in Des Moines.
So why the panic? Mr Brown says that the surge of lawmaking is driven by a change in the political climate, caused by two relatively high-profile incidents of Chinese land purchases near military bases. One was for a grain-milling plant in North Dakota, a few miles away from Grand Forks Air Force Base. The other was land purchased to build a wind farm in southern Texas, near Laughlin Air Force base. Those, combined with the shooting down of a Chinese spy balloon last year, meant that: “Nobody wanted to stand up against restricting [Chinese] purchases of land,” says Mr Brown. Politicians of various stripes have suggested that the Chinese either want to spy, or to control America’s food supply, or both.
The patchiness of official data does not help. That 281 acres in Iowa is owned by Syngenta, an agricultural-science firm. The firm was purchased outright by ChemChina, a state-owned chemicals firm, in 2017. But until 2021 the land was listed as Swiss-owned in the USDA records—as were several other Syngenta sites. Late last year, tax records revealed that Chen Tianqiao, a Chinese billionaire with past links to the Communist Party, who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area, owns almost 200,000 acres of forestry land in Oregon, which was not declared as foreign-owned. (Mr Chen’s firm now says that, following media questions, it has submitted the relevant USDA filings.) A review by the Government Accountability Office published on January 18th found that the Treasury and Defence departments need timelier and more accurate data to judge security risks.
Still, it is unlikely that data gaps hide a surge of secret Chinese purchases. Overall Chinese investment into America peaked in 2016, and has fallen off a cliff since the pandemic, says Derek Scissors, who maintains a database of Chinese foreign investment for the American Enterprise Institute, a think-tank. What investment is continuing is generally confined to the supply chain for electric vehicles. The flood of Chinese land purchases that began a decade or so ago was more to do with wealthy Chinese people trying to get their money out of China than about spying, according to Mr Scissors. The new laws are a bit like ones “preventing snow emergencies in Florida”, he says. That is to say, pointless.
From California to the New York island
Some politicians are frustrated with the endless focus on land. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democratic congressman who is the ranking member of the House select committee on China, admits that enforcement of filing requirements for USDA’s database is “pretty lax”. But some laws intended to stop any Chinese-origin individuals buying any land at all, such as one passed in Florida last year that restricted even residential-property purchases, drift into “outright racism and xenophobia”, he complains. He wishes politicians would focus more on improving American competitiveness in general. Sadly that is harder than blustering about farmland. ■
Correction (January 23rd 2024): This article was updated to note that Chen Tianqiao no longer has links to the Chinese Communist Party.
Stay on top of American politics with Checks and Balance, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter, which examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
People walk past digital billboards at the Moynihan Train Hall displaying a new initiative from New York Governor Kathy Hochul titled ‘New York Wants You’, a program designed to recruit and employ displaced federal workers across New York State, in New York, U.S., March 3, 2025.
David Dee Delgado | Reuters
Mixed signals lately from the labor market are adding to angst for investors already on a knife’s edge over the potential threat that tariffs pose to inflation and economic growth.
Depending on the perspective, employers either are cutting workers at the highest rate in years or skating by with current staffing levels.
What has become clear is that workers are increasingly uncertain of their employment status and less prone to seek other opportunities, at the same time as job hunters are reporting it harder to find new positions, according to several recent surveys.
The sentiment indicators counter otherwise solid numbers showing up in more traditional data points like nonfarm payrolls growth and the jobless rate, which is still at a level historically associated with full employment and a bustling labor market.
Sound fundamentals
“Fundamentally speaking, things are still relatively sound in the United States. That doesn’t mean there are no cracks,” said Tom Porcelli, chief U.S. economist at PGIM Fixed Income. “You can just whistle past that and just hang your hat on the payrolls report, or recognize that the payrolls report is a lagging indicator and some of those other indicators that give you a better flavor of what’s happening under the surface are looking softer by comparison.”
Markets will get another snapshot of labor market health when the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics releases its February nonfarm payrolls report Friday at 8:30 ET. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones expect growth of 170,000 jobs, up from 143,000 in January, with the unemployment rate holding steady at 4%.
While that represents a stable labor market, there are a number of caveats that point to more difficult times ahead.
Outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas reported Thursday that layoff announcements from companies soared in February to their highest monthly level since July 2020. A big reason for that move was the effort by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to cull the federal workforce. Challenger reported more than 62,000 DOGE-related cuts.
DOGE actions as well as other labor survey indicators showing worker angst likely won’t be reflected in Friday’s jobs number, primarily due to the timing of the cuts and the methodology the BLS uses in its twin counts of household employment and jobs filled at the establishment level.
Consumer confidence drop
But a recent Conference Board report showed an unexpectedly large drop in consumer confidence that coincided with a spike in respondents expecting fewer jobs to be available as well as harder to get. Similarly, a University of Michigan’s survey saw a slide as respondents worried about inflation.
In the world of economics, such fears can quickly become self-fulfilling prophecy.
“If workers don’t feel confident that they’re going to be able to find a new job … then that’s going to be reflected in the economy, and the same in terms for how willing employers are to hire,” said Allison Shrivastava, economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Don’t ever discount sentiment.”
In recent days, economists have been ramping up the potential impact for DOGE cuts, with some saying that multiplier effects involving government contractors could take the total labor force reduction to half a million or more.
“They’re going to have some trouble being reabsorbed into the economy,” Shrivastava said. “It also does shake people’s confidence and sentiment, which can certainly impact the actual economy.”
For now, Goldman Sachs said the DOGE cuts probably will lower the headline payrolls number by just 10,000 or so and exepcts weather-related impacts to be small. Overall, the bank said the current picture, according to alternative figures, is one of “a firm pace of job creation, and we expect continued, albeit moderating, contributions from catch-up hiring and the recent surge in immigration.”
In addition to the employment numbers, the BLS will release figures on pay growth. Average hourly earnings are expected to show a 0.3% monthly gain, up 4.2% from a year ago and about 0.1 percentage point above the January level.
Scott Bessent, US treasury secretary, during a Bloomberg Television interview in New York, US, on Thursday, Feb. 20, 2025.
Victor J. Blue | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Thursday offered a full-throated defense of the White House’s position on tariffs, insisting that trade policy has to be about more than just getting low-priced items from other countries.
“Access to cheap goods is not the essence of the American dream,” Bessent said during a speech to the Economic Club of New York. “The American Dream is rooted in the concept that any citizen can achieve prosperity, upward mobility, and economic security. For too long, the designers of multilateral trade deals have lost sight of this.”
The remarks came with markets on edge over how far President Donald Trump will go in an effort to attain his goals on global commerce. Stocks fell sharply Thursday despite news about some movement from the administration on Mexican imports.
In a speech delivered to a crowd of leading economists, Bessent indicated that Trump is willing to take strong measures to achieve his trade goals.
“To the extent that another country’s practices harm our own economy and people, the United States will respond. This is the America First Trade Policy,” he said.
Earlier in the day, Commerce Department data underscored how far the U.S. has fallen behind its global trading partners. The imbalance swelled to a record $131.4 billion in January, a 34% increase from the prior month and nearly double from a year ago.
“This system is not sustainable,” Bessent said.
Economists and market participants worry that the Trump tariffs will raise prices and slow growth. However, White House officials point out that tariffs did little to stoke inflation during Trump’s first term, touting growth potential from reshoring as companies look to avoid paying the duties.
“Across a continuum, I’m not worried about inflation,” Bessent said. He added that Trump considers tariffs to have three benefits: as a revenue source with the U.S. running massive fiscal deficits, as a way to protect industries and workers from unfair practices around the world, and as “the third leg to the stool” as Trump “uses it for negotiating.”
Thursday’s talk was hosted by Larry Kudlow, the head of the National Economic Council during Trump’s first term.
In addition to discussing tariffs, the two chatted about deregulation as well as the onerous debt and deficit burden the government is facing. The budget is already $840 billion in the hole through just the first four months of fiscal 2025 as the deficit runs above 6% as a share of gross domestic product, a level virtually unheard of in a peacetime, expansionary economy.
“This is the last chance bar and grill to get this done,” Bessent said of imposing fiscal discipline. “Everyone knows what they should do. It’s, do they have the willpower to do it?”
Bessent also advocated a deep examination of bank regulations, particularly for smaller institutions, which he said are burdened with rules that don’t help safety.
As Bessent spoke, stocks added to losses in what has been a tough week for Wall Street.
“Wall Street’s done great, Wall Street can continue doing well. But this administration is about Main Street,” he said.
Political disgrace isn’t as constraining as it used to be. Andrew Cuomo, whose public career was thought to be dead just three years ago, is back in the spotlight as a candidate for mayor of New York City—and he is topping polls. Mr Cuomo resigned as governor of New York state in August 2021 amid multiple sexual-harassment allegations (which he denied). On March 1st he announced his comeback.