A new study out of North Dakota State University's Challey Institute for Global Innovation and Growth has put a dollar figure on a question dozens of state legislatures have wrestled with since 2021: what do foreign farmland ownership bans actually cost landowners? Research specialist Nicholas Orlando found that states with outright bans on foreign ownership of agricultural land saw land values fall by an estimated $1,008 per acre, compared with states using narrower acreage-cap restrictions, where the decline was closer to $537 per acre. The findings, published this week and covered by AgWeb on August 20, 2026, put a real economic number behind laws written primarily around national security concerns — and suggest lawmakers may be facing a trade-off they haven't fully reckoned with.
How We Got Here
- 2021 onward: A wave of state legislatures begin restricting foreign ownership of farmland, real estate, or property near military and critical-infrastructure sites, largely targeting China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela.
- 2023: North Dakota passes a law restricting foreign businesses and governments from certain countries from owning property, directly prompted by a proposed Chinese-owned land purchase near Grand Forks Air Force Base.
- August 20, 2026: NDSU's Nicholas Orlando publishes research (covered by AgWeb) finding that older-generation state foreign-ownership laws of 1970s-80s vintage were associated with measurably lower farmland values — the first attempt to quantify the economic side of this now-nationwide policy trend.
Note: many newer state laws — and their specific economic effects — are still too recent to have been studied directly. Treat that as an open question, not yet confirmed by data.
What the Study Found, by Law Type
| Law Type | States Studied (1970s-80s laws) | Est. Land Value Effect | Productivity Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Outright Foreign Ownership Ban | Minnesota, Missouri, Iowa | -$1,008/acre | Not statistically significant |
| Acreage Restriction (ownership cap) | North Dakota, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin | -$537/acre | Not statistically significant |
Figures reflect Orlando's primary staggered difference-in-differences model using USDA NASS land value data and USDA-ERS total factor productivity data, 1960–2015. A separate panel-data robustness check found a negative effect for both law types, though only the outright-ban result was statistically significant in that model.
See what your land is worth — get a cash offer →
Thinking about selling land in North Dakota? Read our full guide →
Estimated value decline in states with outright foreign-ownership bans
Estimated value decline in states with acreage-cap restrictions
The study period covered by the primary model
Fewer Buyers, Lower Prices
Orlando explains the effect through basic supply and demand: farmland supply is fixed in the short run, so removing a class of potential buyers — foreign investors — reduces demand while supply holds steady, which can push prices down.
"When you have a restriction on land ownership, that represents a drop in demand," Orlando told AgWeb. "You're holding the supply curve constant, demand drops, and that can cause a reduction in the price."
That matters because land is typically a farmer's largest balance-sheet asset. Lower values can affect collateral, borrowing capacity, and long-term wealth even when day-to-day farm operations don't change at all.
Productivity Didn't Move the Same Way
Using USDA-ERS total factor productivity data, Orlando found neither type of restriction had a statistically significant effect on how productively the land was farmed. His explanation: "Those who work the land are not always the same as those who own it."
A restriction on who can own land doesn't necessarily change who farms it, what's planted, or how quickly new practices are adopted.
"We can't predict the future right now. But my research opens the possibility that there could be price drops in these sectors that are subjected to these restrictions."
Today's Laws Are a Different Animal
Orlando cautions that the 1970s-80s laws he studied aren't a perfect match for the current wave. Older laws applied broadly to any foreign owner and focused specifically on farmland. Newer laws are narrower in who they target — often naming specific countries of concern — but broader in what they cover, extending beyond farmland to real property, natural resources, and land near military installations and critical infrastructure.
"They're a little narrower in who they're targeting, but they're broader in the different property types," Orlando says. Because of that, he frames the implication as a possibility rather than a prediction.
What It Means for Landowners in Restriction States
For landowners in the roughly 30-plus states that have passed foreign-ownership restrictions since 2021 — or are considering them — the study is a reminder that even well-intentioned regulation can move the market you're selling into.
It doesn't mean your land is worth less today. Local demand, land quality, and use case still dominate any individual sale. But it is one more reason to get a real, current valuation rather than relying on last year's comps or a neighbor's sale price from before a new law passed. Owners who want a starting estimate can run their acreage through our land value calculator.
What Happens Next
NDSU researchers say the next step is confirming these patterns with actual transaction-level sales data — this study used self-reported USDA survey estimates, not recorded deed prices — and studying the newer 2021-and-later laws directly once enough time has passed to measure them.
Expect more state legislatures to debate both ownership bans and acreage caps in their 2026-27 sessions.
Wondering What Your Land Is Actually Worth Today?
Get a free, no-obligation cash offer in 24-48 hours — no agents, no fees.