European Union governments have agreed a negotiating position on new agricultural market rules intended to take effect under the bloc’s 2028–2034 budget, advancing reforms to support arrangements for farmers while leaving the most contentious financial questions unresolved.

The Council approved its partial negotiating mandate on Monday, 19 October, covering changes to the Common Market Organisation regulation, which governs agricultural markets across the European Union.

The proposals include new arrangements for wine producers, protein crops and oilseeds, revised marketing standards, changes to the EU school food programme and provisions intended to improve preparedness for agricultural market disruptions.

However, the agreement does not settle future funding allocations or the broader structure of agricultural subsidies, which remain under negotiation as EU governments attempt to reconcile farming expenditure with competing demands for defence, industrial investment and regional development.

Agricultural markets under review

The Council’s negotiating position retains much of the European Commission’s original proposal while introducing amendments intended to accommodate national differences in agricultural production.

Under the proposed arrangements, sector-specific interventions would become mandatory in several areas, including beekeeping, fruit and vegetables and, under certain circumstances, wine production.

The Council has also proposed flexibility for countries where particular sectors are absent or relatively undeveloped.

For the wine industry, governments would be able to seek exemptions from certain obligations where national circumstances justify different arrangements.

This would allow the framework to retain common European rules while avoiding requirements that would be inappropriate for member states with little or no domestic wine production.

Sectoral interventions form part of the mechanisms through which the EU supports agricultural markets and producer organisations. They can cover measures intended to improve competitiveness, manage production and strengthen farmers’ commercial position.

New provisions for protein crops

The Council has endorsed the establishment of a separate sector for protein crops and oilseeds, replacing existing provisions covering dried fodder.

The objective is to encourage domestic production and reduce dependence on imported agricultural inputs, particularly crops used in animal feed and food production.

European livestock producers rely on protein-rich feed ingredients, including soyabeans, that are often sourced internationally.

Greater domestic production could reduce exposure to fluctuations in global commodity prices, transport costs and disruptions to international supply chains.

Under the Council’s proposal, member states would be encouraged to recognise producer organisations specialising in protein crops and oilseeds.

Such organisations can help farmers coordinate production, marketing and investment, although the effectiveness of the proposed measures will depend on how they are implemented nationally.

The proposals follow broader EU efforts to improve supply security in sectors extending from agricultural inputs to critical industrial materials.

School food and product labelling

The negotiating mandate also preserves the EU school scheme, which provides support for the distribution of fruit, vegetables and milk to schoolchildren.

Under the proposed framework, the programme would move from a school-year financing cycle to a calendar-year system, with transitional provisions intended to prevent disruption during implementation.

The Council has maintained the Commission’s objective of encouraging healthier eating habits by limiting products containing high levels of free sugars and fats.

The proposal also opens the possibility of additional marketing standards for several agricultural products, including protein crops, beef, pork, sheepmeat, goatmeat and rice.

These standards could provide consumers with more detailed information about product origins, subject to the final legislation.

Such measures would also have implications for producers and food businesses, which would need to comply with any new requirements concerning classification, marketing and labelling.

The Council additionally supports the harmonisation of rules covering industrial hemp, while retaining safeguards concerning seed certification and the permitted level of tetrahydrocannabinol.

Farming subsidies remain contested

The agricultural market agreement forms part of negotiations over the next Common Agricultural Policy, which will operate within the EU’s new seven-year financial framework.

Under the Commission’s proposed budget structure, several funding streams, including agricultural and cohesion programmes, would be brought together within national and regional partnership plans.

The restructuring has encountered opposition from governments and agricultural interests concerned that farming could lose protected access to EU funding.

As EU Today previously reported, 17 member states have called for agricultural and regional development expenditure to be protected against further reductions.

The Council’s latest position addresses how agricultural markets should operate rather than determining the size of the financial support available to them.

A separate debate concerns the conditions for receiving direct farm payments, including the definition of an active farmer and the degree of discretion granted to national governments.

Those questions remain central to the continuing CAP negotiations, which are due to return to the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 26–27 October.

Negotiations move to Parliament

The Council’s partial mandate now provides a basis for negotiations with the European Parliament on the agricultural market provisions.

The legislation will still require agreement between the institutions, while its financing will depend on the eventual settlement of the 2028–2034 budget.

Governments must also complete negotiations on the wider CAP framework, including direct income support and the distribution of responsibility between Brussels and national administrations.

The market agreement reached on 19 October therefore establishes important elements of the proposed agricultural rules, but leaves unresolved the level of financial support available to European farmers after 2027.

Agriculture ministers are moving towards an October agreement on the rules governing farm support from 2028, with the definition of an active farmer, direct income payments and national flexibility still central to negotiations.

European agriculture ministers are moving towards an October agreement on the rules governing farm subsidies after 2027, with negotiations now concentrating on who should receive direct support and how much freedom national governments should have in distributing it.

Ministers met in Brussels on Monday, 28 September, to review progress on the next Common Agricultural Policy, which will operate alongside the EU’s 2028–2034 long-term budget.

The Council agenda for Monday’s meeting identifies farm incomes, the targeting of payments, generational renewal, resilience and the balance between common EU requirements and national flexibility as the principal elements of the reform.

The Irish presidency of the Council intends to push the negotiations towards a partial general approach at the Agriculture Council on 26 and 27 October.

Technical discussions will continue before then, including meetings of national experts and the Special Committee on Agriculture.

Monday’s discussion therefore marks the point at which governments are moving from examining the Commission’s proposals towards defining a common Council negotiating position.

EU Today previewed the meeting on Friday in an article examining the CAP negotiations, fertiliser pressures and the 2028 EU budget.

The debate now turns increasingly to the detailed rules determining which farmers qualify for support.

One contested issue is the definition of an “active farmer”.

Member states have spent months debating whether EU legislation should establish a tighter common definition or allow national authorities considerable discretion.

Earlier discussions showed resistance among several governments to rules that would make eligibility dependent on farming being a person’s principal economic activity.

That question is important because many European farms — particularly small and medium-sized holdings — depend partly on income earned outside agriculture.

A narrow definition could therefore exclude people who actively farm land but also have another job or source of income.

The Commission’s stated objective has been to improve the targeting of agricultural support, while several governments have argued that overly restrictive definitions could disadvantage part-time farmers and create further administrative complexity.

Another central issue is the design of the proposed degressive area-based income support, known as DABIS.

The Swedish government identified the structure of the payment as one of the important questions before ministers on Monday.

Direct area payments remain one of the most politically important parts of the CAP because they account for a substantial proportion of farm income in many sectors.

The debate concerns not only payment rates but whether support should be concentrated more heavily on smaller farms, younger farmers or producers deemed to have greater economic need.

The negotiations also take place within a wider argument over the architecture of the next EU budget.

The post-2027 CAP will have to compete for resources with substantially increased demands for defence, industrial investment, migration, infrastructure and other programmes.

The European Parliament has previously called for agricultural funding to remain distinct and protected within the EU budget, warning against changes that could dilute the CAP by placing it inside broader national funding plans.

National governments, however, are also seeking greater flexibility in how European funds are deployed.

That creates one of the central tensions in the negotiations: maintaining a genuinely common agricultural policy while giving capitals more discretion to adapt payments and environmental conditions to their own agricultural sectors.

Ministers on Monday were also discussing current agricultural market conditions.

The Council said particular attention would be given to the consequences of Russia’s war against Ukraine, with Ukrainian Agriculture Minister Taras Vysotskyi expected to participate in part of the discussion.

The agenda also includes rising input costs, market pressures and the effects of recent heatwaves and drought in several member states.

Agriculture ministers were due to discuss the Commission’s fertiliser action plan during a working lunch.

Those immediate pressures form part of the political background to the CAP negotiations.

Governments are being asked to agree a funding and subsidy structure that will apply from 2028 into the middle of the next decade while farmers are already dealing with volatile input costs, climate-related losses and changing trade conditions.

No final agreement on the post-2027 CAP was expected on Monday.

The more important deadline is now the Agriculture Council on 26–27 October, when the Irish presidency intends to seek agreement among member states on as much of the regulatory framework as possible.

Questions involving the overall size of the EU budget will remain part of the wider negotiations on the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework.

The October agreement, if reached, would nevertheless establish the Council’s position on many of the rules that determine how agricultural support is ultimately distributed — including the increasingly contentious question of who qualifies as the farmer the CAP is intended to support.