Tim Taschner and Corey Stanley from Onshore return to Farm4Profit's What's Working in Ag to explain new IRS guidance, a significant tax court decision, and what these developments could mean for farmers. From seed and fertilizer expenses to potential tax savings worth tens of thousands of dollars, this conversation could change how you approach your farm's tax planning. Episode Summary
Farmers, there's potentially good news if you thought you'd missed your opportunity to claim research and development (R&D) tax credits. Tim Taschner and Corey Stanley from Onshore return to the Farm4Profit studio for an important What's Working in Ag update. After an earlier conversation emphasized the July 4 deadline, the Onshore team explains that newly issued IRS procedural guidance has clarified how producers can amend prior-year tax returns to claim credits. While filing before July 4 offered certain advantages, Tim says the new guidance makes pursuing eligible credits after that date more practical than initially expected. Farmers may still be able to look back at prior tax years, although applicable filing deadlines and individual tax circumstances remain important.
One of the biggest developments is a February 2026 tax court decision involving George's of Missouri, a major poultry producer. Tim and Corey spent nearly a decade working on the case and explain why they believe the ruling has significant implications beyond the poultry industry. The case involved evaluating commercially available poultry genetics and animal health products in a real-world production environment. According to the Onshore team, the court recognized that certain experimentation with products developed by other companies can qualify as research activity when the applicable requirements are met. They compare this to row-crop farmers evaluating different seed hybrids, testing new fertility products, or changing production practices to improve performance. The key distinction is that a farmer doesn't necessarily have to invent a product to conduct qualifying research; how the product is evaluated, the purpose of the activity, and the supporting documentation all matter.
The discussion also tackles how much money could potentially be available to qualifying farms. Tim uses the example of a 2,000-acre producer who could potentially generate $60,000 to $120,000 in tax savings, depending on eligible activities, expenses, and the farm's tax situation. Unlike a deduction, which reduces taxable income, a tax credit can directly reduce tax liability. The Onshore team explains how existing farm records—including planting maps, hybrid information, fertilizer applications, harvest data, and agronomic evaluations—can help document qualifying activities. They also discuss why farmers should explore available tax credits before automatically purchasing additional equipment or using Section 179 depreciation solely to reduce their tax bills. However, they emphasize that credits don't necessarily produce an immediate refund, especially when a farmer has little or no current tax liability.
Finally, Tim and Corey address common misconceptions surrounding agricultural R&D tax credits. They explain why a farm doesn't need a large employee base to potentially qualify, why purchasing a piece of farm equipment is different from conducting qualifying research with that equipment, and how certain labor expenses associated with new production practices may be eligible even when the equipment purchase itself is not. They also respond to concerns about insufficient IRS guidance, documentation requirements, skeptical tax professionals, and audit risk. Onshore says it works directly with farmers' CPAs to evaluate eligibility and support claims. The team encourages producers to review their situations before approaching tax filing deadlines, particularly because older tax years can eventually become unavailable for amended claims.