Title 3: Trade

What Title III actually covers

Title III is the trade title. It funds U.S. agricultural export promotion, international food aid, and the programs that defend American agricultural exports against foreign trade barriers.

The 2026 farm bill restructures this title in three meaningful ways: it moves Food for Peace from USAID to USDA, doubles funding for export promotion, and gives U.S. producers legal standing to fight foreign restrictions on common food names like parmesan, feta, and bologna.

The big moves

Food for Peace moves to USDA

Title II of the Food for Peace Act has been administered by USAID since the Kennedy administration. Title III transfers all FFP authorities, administration, asset management, contracting, regulations, from USAID to USDA, effective January 1, 2026. References in related laws are deemed transferred.

This isn’t just an administrative shuffle. Title III also requires at least 50% of FFP Title II funds to be used for U.S. agricultural commodities and U.S. flagged ocean transportation. That’s a major shift toward “buy American” food aid and away from local/regional procurement and cash transfers that USAID had increasingly favored.

A new minimum is added: at least $200 million annually for ready-to-use therapeutic foods (RUTF) when global child wasting rates exceed 5% and Title II funding is above $1.2 billion.

Export promotion funding nearly doubles

The Agricultural Trade Promotion and Facilitation Program, which contains MAP, FMD, the E (Kika) de la Garza Emerging Markets Program, TASC, and the Priority Trade Fund, gets a major funding bump:

• FY2026: $255M (current level, unchanged)
• FY2027: $500M
• FY2028–FY2031: $533M annually

The biggest single beneficiary is the Market Access Program (MAP), which goes from $200M annually to $400M in FY2027 and $410M annually after. This is roughly a doubling of funding for the program that pays for U.S. agricultural advertising and trade missions abroad.

A new FMD subprogram addresses infrastructure issues in new markets, port damage, cold chain failures, storage losses. Up to $5M annually starting FY2028.

”Common name” protection, the Parmesan provision

This is one of the more interesting provisions in the bill. The European Union has been aggressively expanding its system of “Geographical Indications”, restrictions on food and beverage names that are tied to specific regions. Under EU rules, “parmesan” can mean only Parmigiano-Reggiano from a specific Italian region. Same with feta, asiago, gorgonzola, and increasingly with wines and beers.

Title III defines “common name” in U.S. trade law for the first time, and adds “prohibiting the use of common names of U.S. agricultural or food products” to the list of foreign unfair trade practices. USDA and USTR are required to negotiate U.S. rights to use common names in foreign markets.

For U.S. cheese, dairy, meat, and beverage producers, this is a meaningful diplomatic tool.

Other notable changes

• Direct credits and export credit guarantees to emerging markets continue at $1B annually through FY2031.
• Mink trade association assistance: repeal of the prohibition on MAP funding for mink associations (the original ban was tied to fur protests).
• Supplemental agricultural trade promotion: repealed (CCC mandatory funding of $285M annually was rolled into the larger trade promotion increase).
• Interagency working group on seasonal and perishable fruits and vegetables, to monitor import threats to domestic producers.
• Required GAO report on shrimp and seafood competitiveness.
• Required reports on USMCA changes and Argentinian beef tariff-rate quotas.

Programs covered under Title III

• Food for Peace (Title II)
• Market Access Program (MAP)
• Foreign Market Development (FMD)
• Common Names Protection

Who Title III matters for

• U.S. cheese, dairy, and meat producers: common name protection is a real legal tool.
• Ag commodity groups: MAP doubling means more dollars for trade missions and foreign advertising.
• U.S. shipping and grain handlers: the 50% U.S.-flagged vessel requirement is mandatory floor, not aspirational.
• Specialty crop growers: TASC funding doubles, plus new biennial competitiveness report.

What’s next

The Senate is likely to keep most of Title III intact. The Food for Peace transfer is bipartisan. The export promotion increase has near-universal industry support. The common name protection is uncontroversial domestically, even if it’ll create diplomatic friction with the EU.

The most likely Senate change: pressure to restore some local/regional procurement flexibility under FFP, which would weaken the 50% U.S. commodity requirement.

---