Title III Explainer: MAP, FMD, Food Aid, GSM-102 in Farm Bill 2.0

TL;DR: Title III of H.R. 7567, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, reauthorizes USDA's core export promotion and international food aid programs, including the Market Access Program (MAP), the Foreign Market Development (FMD) program, GSM-102 export credit guarantees, Food for Peace, and McGovern-Dole. Final funding levels for MAP and FMD are to be confirmed, and the scope of cash-based food aid authority remains a contested policy question as of May 2026.

Key takeaway

Title III of H.R. 7567 reauthorizes every major U.S. agricultural export promotion and international food aid program, but final dollar figures and cash-versus-commodity food aid rules remain unresolved.

What this section does

Title III of H.R. 7567 covers international trade and food assistance programs administered primarily by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). It reauthorizes the programs U.S. agricultural exporters and overseas food aid recipients rely on, while updating credit guarantee authorities and addressing a long-running dispute over how food aid is delivered abroad.

The five core programs reauthorized in Title III are MAP, FMD, GSM-102, Food for Peace (P.L. 480), and McGovern-Dole. Together they fund overseas market promotion, extend credit to foreign buyers who cannot access commercial financing, and deliver emergency and school-feeding nutrition assistance in developing countries. For a full picture of how Title III fits within the broader bill, see the full bill summary.

Market Access Program (MAP): MAP provides cost-share funding to agricultural trade associations, cooperatives, and state regional trade groups for activities that promote U.S. commodities in foreign markets, including trade shows, consumer advertising, and technical seminars. MAP was funded at $200 million annually under the 2018 Farm Bill. Farm groups have publicly advocated for a significant increase in the 2026 authorization to address growing competition from subsidized foreign exporters, but the final figure in H.R. 7567 is to be confirmed.

Foreign Market Development (FMD) Program: Also called the Cooperator Program, FMD supports nonprofit agricultural organizations conducting long-term technical market development work overseas. It differs from MAP in that it focuses on building trade infrastructure and industry capacity rather than brand-level promotion. FMD was funded at $34.5 million annually under the 2018 Farm Bill; any change in the 2026 authorization level is to be confirmed.

GSM-102 Export Credit Guarantees: The GSM-102 program allows USDA to guarantee repayment of private credit extended to foreign governments and buyers who purchase U.S. agricultural products. When a buyer in an emerging market cannot obtain affordable commercial financing, a GSM-102 guarantee lowers the lender's risk and makes the sale possible. The program operates within a portfolio ceiling set by Congress and USDA. The 2026 bill is expected to continue the program with possible updates to eligible country lists and risk assessment procedures; details are to be confirmed.

Food for Peace (Title II Grants): Food for Peace authorizes the U.S. government to provide food assistance to vulnerable populations overseas through nonprofit and international organization partners. The 2018 Farm Bill codified limited flexibility for cash-based assistance alongside traditional in-kind commodity shipments. Whether H.R. 7567 expands, maintains, or constrains that flexibility, including authority for local and regional procurement (LRP), is a key contested point as of May 2026. LRP allows aid organizations to purchase food in or near recipient countries rather than shipping U.S. commodities.

McGovern-Dole International Food for Education Program: McGovern-Dole funds school feeding and maternal nutrition programs in low-income countries using U.S. agricultural commodities and financial assistance. The 2018 Farm Bill made no major structural changes to the program; whether H.R. 7567 increases the authorization level above the 2018 baseline is to be confirmed.

The bill also addresses the Farmer-to-Farmer technical assistance program and other FAS capacity-building tools; reauthorization status and any funding changes are to be confirmed. For a detailed comparison with the previous farm bill, visit the what's new vs. 2018 page.

What it means

Title III directly affects four broad groups: U.S. export-focused agricultural organizations, foreign buyers in developing markets, overseas food aid recipients, and the nonprofits and commodity shippers that implement food aid programs.

For U.S. exporters and trade groups: Organizations representing wheat, soybeans, meat, dairy, and specialty crops use MAP and FMD cost-share funding to run promotional campaigns, participate in international trade shows, and conduct technical training for foreign buyers and retailers. If the final bill increases MAP funding above the 2018 level, export-oriented commodity groups would gain more resources to counter subsidized competition from foreign exporters. If funding stays flat or is restructured, organizations in sectors with smaller budgets, such as specialty crops, may be disproportionately affected.

For foreign buyers: Importers in emerging and developing markets who cannot access affordable commercial credit use GSM-102 guarantees to finance purchases of U.S. commodities. Country eligibility and portfolio exposure under the program are subject to ongoing USDA rulemaking and geopolitical factors beyond the farm bill cycle.

For food aid recipients and implementers: The LRP and cash-voucher debate has direct consequences for the speed and cost of food assistance delivery. Humanitarian organizations argue that cash-based and local procurement models can be faster and more cost-effective than shipping U.S. commodities. Commodity groups and some members of Congress counter that in-kind shipments support U.S. farm income and maintain the domestic commodity supply chain that underpins food aid logistics. The outcome of this dispute in the final bill text will shape how Food for Peace dollars are spent and how quickly aid reaches recipients in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and conflict-affected regions.

Implementation of new provisions in Title III also depends on FAS capacity and coordination with USAID, which has faced significant organizational disruption as of early 2026. The funding breakdown page tracks budget authority across all titles as figures are confirmed.

What's next

As of May 2026, H.R. 7567 has passed the House. The Senate has not yet taken up the bill, and the trade title provisions, particularly MAP and FMD authorization levels and the scope of food aid cash programming, are expected to be points of negotiation if the bill proceeds to a Senate version or conference committee. See the senate status page for current developments.

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring of Title III, especially any MAP or FMD increases above the 2018 baseline, is to be confirmed and could affect overall bill affordability under budget rules. Final authorization levels will likely shift depending on Senate priorities and the outcome of any conference process.

USDA rulemaking will be required to implement updates to GSM-102 country eligibility and risk assessment procedures after enactment. FAS and USAID coordination timelines for food aid program implementation are not yet confirmed.

Frequently asked questions

What is MAP and who can apply for MAP funding?

MAP, the Market Access Program, provides cost-share funding administered by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service for overseas promotion of U.S. agricultural products. Eligible applicants include agricultural trade associations, cooperatives, and state regional trade groups. Individual farmers do not apply directly. Organizations that receive MAP funds use them for activities such as foreign consumer advertising, trade show participation, and retail promotions for U.S. commodities.

How does FMD differ from MAP in what it funds and who receives it?

FMD, the Foreign Market Development program, funds long-term technical market-building work conducted by nonprofit agricultural organizations, often called cooperators. MAP focuses more on brand-level consumer promotion and is open to a broader set of applicants. FMD targets upstream trade infrastructure development, such as milling industry training or port handling standards, and is generally used by commodity sector organizations with established international technical programs. Both programs use cost-share arrangements requiring recipients to match federal dollars.

What is GSM-102 and how does a foreign buyer use a credit guarantee?

GSM-102 is a USDA export credit guarantee program. When a foreign government or private buyer wants to purchase U.S. agricultural commodities but cannot obtain affordable commercial financing, a U.S. bank extends credit and USDA guarantees repayment if the buyer defaults. The guarantee lowers the lender's risk, enabling sales to buyers in emerging and developing markets that might otherwise be priced out of U.S. commodity markets. USDA sets the program's portfolio ceiling and eligible country list through rulemaking.

Is U.S. food aid under Food for Peace sent as actual food or as cash?

Food for Peace has historically relied on in-kind shipments of U.S. agricultural commodities, such as wheat, vegetable oil, and fortified foods, purchased domestically and shipped abroad. The 2018 Farm Bill codified limited authority for cash-based assistance and local or regional procurement in some circumstances. Whether H.R. 7567 expands or constrains that flexibility is a contested question as of May 2026. Both models remain authorized; the relative emphasis depends on the final bill text and annual appropriations.

How does McGovern-Dole work and which countries benefit?

McGovern-Dole provides school meals and maternal nutrition assistance in low-income countries using U.S. agricultural commodities and supplementary financial assistance administered by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service. Programs typically operate in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, targeting countries where child hunger and school attendance barriers overlap. Implementing partners, usually U.S.-based nonprofits or international organizations, manage in-country distribution and complementary nutrition education activities.

Why do commodity groups oppose expanding cash-based food aid procurement?

Commodity groups argue that in-kind shipments of U.S. agricultural products support domestic farm income, maintain the U.S. bulk shipping and handling infrastructure that makes large-scale food aid logistics feasible, and ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars flow through the American agricultural supply chain. Critics of that position, primarily humanitarian organizations, contend that cash-based and local procurement can deliver more food more quickly at lower cost per beneficiary, particularly in regions where U.S. commodity shipments face long lead times.

Has the 2026 Farm Bill increased export promotion funding compared to 2018?

Final MAP and FMD authorization levels in H.R. 7567 are to be confirmed. Under the 2018 Farm Bill, MAP was funded at $200 million annually and FMD at $34.5 million annually. Farm groups have publicly advocated for increases to both programs in the 2026 bill, citing growing competition from subsidized foreign exporters and market disruptions experienced after 2018. Whether the final enacted figures reflect those increases depends on Senate action and any conference process.

Sources

• House Agriculture Committee -- H.R. 7567 section summaries and markup materials, 2026.
• USDA Foreign Agricultural Service -- program descriptions for MAP, FMD, GSM-102, Food for Peace, and McGovern-Dole.
• Congressional Research Service -- 2018 Farm Bill trade title baseline figures and program comparisons.