Compliance assistance for law firms and business teams
Explore potential civil-penalty exposure with the free calculator. Examine the filing records behind your compliance question. Request a written scope for source analysis and documented workpapers. Counsel determines applicability, legal relevance, and conclusions.
Research packs are in preparation; purchases are not open. You may discuss a proposed scope. The public calculator is free and does not expire.
Compliance capabilities
FIRMS combines a public calculation tool with scoped filing research for counsel’s compliance review.
Enter the foreign person’s interest value, reporting scenario, and event timing. Compare modeled dollar exposure and assessment schedules under current policy and separately labeled proposed rules, subject to a 25% ceiling.
Proposed scenarios may require adversary status or a hypothetical transition effective date. Discretionary reductions, disputed dates, appeal pauses, and post-transition track changes are not modeled.
Open the free calculatorReview source Owner IDs, interests, acquisition history, country codes, and independent value fields. Identify missing dates, instruments, filings, or valuation evidence that the scenario requires.
A reported acquisition year is not an exact event date. A historical purchase price or value-at-filing is not automatically the relevant fair market value.
Request a research scope and written quoteCurrent reporting requirements and civil penalties are set out in 7 CFR Part 781. The calculator models current late-filing policy before discretionary reductions.
The June 25, 2026 proposal, 91 FR 38315, is a separate planning scenario, not current law or an assumed effective date.
The White House America First Investment Policy and USDA National Farm Security Action Plan explain the national-security policy context. They do not establish an individual holder’s liability. Counsel determines applicability and legal conclusions.
Calculator build reference: web asset v=20261013. Policy sources checked October 16, 2026. The calculator assumes a reporting obligation; it does not determine whether one exists.
Review the work
Use the compliance guide and county sample together to understand our capabilities and the underlying work.
The six-page guide explains compliance assistance, policy sources, the penalty calculator, filing analysis, quality checks, deliverables, access, and cost.
Read the compliance capabilities guide (PDF, 6 pages)A complete FY2024 county report for Aroostook County, Maine, FIPS 23003. It demonstrates the county reporting engine; it is not a commissioned legal matter or a custom holder investigation.
Read the county sample (PDF, 12 pages)The county sample is the starting point. Additional holder tracing, county comparisons, or document checks are specified in your written scope.
Request a research scope and written quoteRead the Aroostook article with corrected source and valuation notes
Read the Aroostook article: Land Is National Security
The public sample is available for review. Other counties’ Citizen Reports and the companion book are available through AFIDA Watch.
Articles & Research
Read the research behind the headlines and the records behind a defined inquiry.
Recurring source records across 2010, 2016 and 2024, with independent population and economic context.
Read the Hidalgo featureCounty acreage, source Owner IDs and the limits of reported values in a compliance review.
Read the Aroostook featureExplore the articles, supporting references and paths to additional filing research.
Browse Articles & ResearchFrom a compliance question to source records
The $5 Citizen Report is a readable county overview. FIRMS scope inquiries start where a specific business or professional question needs additional work.
Follow one source Owner ID through agreed counties and a named report year. Review country-code variations and keep uncertain entity matches separate.
Proposed output: a filing register, county-location list, source references, and reconciliation notes. Corporate-control research requires a separately agreed scope.
Discuss holder research →Compare selected counties using the same source snapshot and consistent acreage, holder, land-use, and value-field definitions.
Proposed output: comparison tables and a short findings memo with data limits. Geography and record limits are agreed first.
Discuss a county comparison →Identify which public records support a finding, what is missing, and what additional filings or local records would need review.
Proposed output: a source register, documented checks, and open questions. Original filing availability and any local-record searches are confirmed in scope.
Discuss source checks →01 / Research workflow
Match records within an agreed snapshot, identify uncertain links, and assemble source-backed workpapers. Counsel determines relevance and applies legal analysis.
Existing AFIDA reporting obligations already carry penalties. The June 25, 2026 proposal is presented as a proposal, separately from current requirements. Use the calculator to examine illustrative schedules and assumptions, not to diagnose a violation.
Open the current-and-proposed penalty calculator
2,127 of 11,050 normalized holder-name groups have at least one screening flag. A flag count is not a legal risk score or finding of misconduct.
Other interests, including possible long-term leaseholds, requiring instrument review. This code alone does not establish lease duration.
998: no foreign investor listed. 999: no predominant country code. These are country/source categories, not deed-duration codes.
The screening script checks primary China, Iran, and Russia codes, plus secondary China. This is not a complete legal designation or control analysis.
Energy-related owner-name patterns prompt land-use review. They do not establish actual property use.
Country attribution varies across records grouped under a normalized holder name. Matching names do not prove one legal entity.
Purchase Price and Current Value are zero or blank. Estimated Value or other valuation evidence may still be available; this does not automatically block a calculation.
02 / Proposed deliverables
Proposed packs organize matching records in the specified USDA snapshot, a parcel inventory, reconciliation notes, and unresolved matches. Each output identifies the source version, grouping method, and checks performed.
Underlying FSA-153 documents are included where obtained; availability and redactions must be recorded. We do not promise every filing, unknown holdings, a complete ownership chain, or a legal conclusion.
A documented factual record supports counsel's review.
03 / Proposed packs
Indicative pricing below is for planning. Paid packs have not been released.
$750 proposed
Introductory review of one agreed holder or county. The matter, record limits, files, and delivery date must be agreed before any paid work.
$1,500 proposed
Research on matching records within one selected county and report year. National dataset coverage does not make this a national deliverable.
$2,500 proposed
A scoped review of one holder group across agreed counties. Name matches remain subject to reconciliation; they do not establish common legal identity.
Holder Readiness, County Analytics subscriptions, and Divestiture Watch are planned services. Availability, delivery, and pricing have not been approved; no subscriptions are open.
Scope inquiry
Provide your research question, county or holder, report year, and requested deadline. We review the request and reply with a proposed scope, deliverables, fee, and delivery date for your acceptance. Fees depend on the agreed work; submitting this form is free. No work, payment, or delivery date is committed by an inquiry.
Submit only basic contact and scope details. Do not include confidential client records or privileged material.
The calculator remains publicly available without a trial period.