Soil Carbon Credits: Are They Worth It for Farmers? 2026 Reality Check

A few years ago, soil carbon looked like a new crop: change a few practices, store carbon in your soil, and sell credits to companies that want to offset emissions. In 2026 the picture is more mixed. Big buyers are still signing large, long deals. At the same time, one well-known marketplace has shut down, academic critics question how the carbon is measured, and most programs still don't publish what they pay per acre.

If a carbon program has approached you, the useful question is not "is soil carbon good?" but "is this contract good for my farm?" The answer depends on the payment terms, how long you are committed, what happens if carbon is lost, and whether practices you already use count at all.

This article explains how the market works as of September 2026, who the main players are, what the measurement debate is about, and gives you a list of questions to ask before you sign anything. It is not financial or legal advice. Have an attorney or advisor review any carbon contract.

Key takeaways

• As of September 2026, large buyers are still active. Microsoft has 12-year soil carbon removal deals with both Indigo Ag (2.85 million credits) and Agoro Carbon Alliance (2.6 million credits). Prices were not disclosed.
• Public per-acre or per-ton payments to farmers are scarce. Program totals are the best available signal: Indigo reports $40 million paid to farmers, Agoro $30 million-plus in prepayments.
• The integrity bar is rising. In October 2025, the ICVCM approved two agricultural methodologies, one of which requires a 40-year permanence commitment.
• Measurement and additionality are still disputed. A 2026 study found current additionality rules can shut out farmers who already use good practices.
• Nori, a carbon removal marketplace that paid farmers, shut down in September 2024, citing a stagnant voluntary carbon market.
• Long commitments are the biggest risk to understand. Read permanence, reversal and exit terms closely.

How soil carbon credits work, in brief

A program enrolls your fields, records practice changes such as cover crops or reduced tillage, estimates or measures the extra carbon stored, and has the results verified under a protocol. Verified tons become credits on a registry, which the program sells to buyers. You get paid on some schedule: upfront, on issuance, or both.

Two protocols matter most in the US:

• Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Soil Enrichment Protocol. Indigo's credits are issued on the CAR registry as Climate Reserve Tonnes.
• Verra VM0042. Agoro uses this methodology.

The main players as of September 2026

Sources: Indigo issuance release, Indigo–Microsoft release, Agoro–Microsoft, Agoro five-year update, Cargill, GeekWire.

Company figures come from company press releases. They are self-reported and not independent audits.

What farmers actually get paid

This is the hardest question to answer, and that is itself useful information. Neither Microsoft deal disclosed a per-credit price. Cargill's release did not state a per-acre rate. Program-wide totals ($40 million for Indigo, $30 million-plus in Agoro prepayments) don't tell you what a single farm earns, because acreage, practices, soils and contract types vary.

We are deliberately not quoting a single "$ per acre" figure. Programs differ too much, and most don't publish rates. Anyone who quotes you a number should put it in writing, with the assumptions behind it.

An academic benchmark

A 2026 study in npj Sustainable Agriculture by Kannegieter and Medlock estimated that grain farmers need about $18.44 per megagram of carbon per year to break even on sequestration investment. It also found that, under current additionality rules at $150 per megagram of CO2, oilseed, grain and vegetable farmers do not sequester any additional carbon by 2050. The authors propose paying for existing carbon stocks as an asset class instead. This is one modeling study, not a settled consensus, but it points to a real tension in how credits are designed.

The measurement debate

Additionality

Credits are supposed to pay for carbon that would not have been stored anyway. That sounds fair, but it can mean early adopters who already no-till or cover crop get little or nothing, while their neighbors get paid to catch up. The npj study argues this can block investment.

Permanence and reversal

Carbon in soil can be lost again if practices change, land is sold or the weather turns. That is why integrity standards want long commitments. The ICVCM approved CAR's US Soil Enrichment Protocol v1.1 on October 30, 2025, with a 40-year permanence commitment through a Project Implementation Agreement. That protocol also excludes rotational or intensive grazing as a credited practice. Forty years is longer than many farm leases and some farming careers.

Measuring versus modeling

The same ICVCM decision approved Verra VM0042 v2.2, which requires soil organic carbon to be measured with approved techniques, and excluded digital soil mapping from the assessment. The research literature has been skeptical of how uncertainty in measurement, modeling and verification carries through to credits: see Oldfield and colleagues in Science (2022) and a 2024 review asking whether soil carbon credits are "empty promises" in Soil Use and Management.

Business risk

Nori's shutdown in September 2024 is a reminder that the program you sign with may not last as long as your commitment. Nori cited a stagnant voluntary carbon market and a tough funding environment.

Policy backdrop

The US Growing Climate Solutions Act, enacted in December 2022, set up a USDA process for technical assistance providers and third-party verifiers. USDA appointed an advisory council in January 2025, but no approved list of protocols or verifiers was found as of September 2026, and implementation may have stalled after USDA's 2025 turn away from climate-smart programs. Don't assume a USDA stamp of approval exists for any program.

Balanced view: when it might make sense

Possible upsides:

• Payments can support practices that also improve soil health and may qualify for NRCS cost share.
• Some programs, like Agoro, offer prepayments and fixed pricing, which may reduce price uncertainty.
• Large, long buyer deals suggest some demand will last for years.

Possible downsides:

• Long commitments (up to 40 years under one approved protocol) can limit future land use decisions.
• Payments are often undisclosed and hard to compare.
• Early adopters may not qualify for much.
• Program failure or market slumps can leave you with obligations and little income.

Questions to ask before signing

• What protocol and registry will my credits be issued under?
• How long am I committed, and does the commitment follow the land if I sell or my lease ends?
• What happens if carbon is reversed by drought, flood, tillage or a change of practice? Who pays?
• What is the payment schedule: upfront, on issuance, fixed or market-linked? Get an example in writing for my acres.
• Do practices I already use count, or only new ones?
• How is carbon measured: soil sampling, models or both? Who pays for sampling?
• Who owns the data collected about my farm, and how can it be used?
• Can I stack this with NRCS contracts or other programs?
• What if the program closes or is sold?
• How do I exit, and what does it cost?
• Does my landlord need to sign?
• Has an attorney reviewed the contract?

What to do next

1. Collect written offers from more than one program before committing.
2. Run the questions above past each program and compare answers side by side.
3. Talk to your NRCS office about whether cover crops or grazing plans could get cost share regardless of carbon payments.
4. Have an agricultural attorney and a tax advisor review any contract.
5. Recheck program status before signing. Company details here are as of September 2026 and can change.

Sources

• Indigo surpasses 2 million metric tons of verified soil carbon impact with fifth credit issuance — PR Newswire / Indigo Ag (February 25, 2026)
• Indigo to sell 2.85 million tonnes of carbon removal to Microsoft — PR Newswire / Indigo Ag (January 15, 2026)
• Agoro Carbon 12-year agreement with Microsoft for soil carbon removal credits — Agoro Carbon Alliance (June 24, 2025)
• Agoro Carbon marks five years of verified soil carbon and producer growth — PR Newswire / Agoro Carbon (2026)
• Cargill surpasses 1 million enrolled acres in Cargill RegenConnect — Cargill (November 12, 2024)
• Nori, a Seattle-based carbon removal marketplace that raised $17M, shuts down after 7 years — GeekWire (September 2024)
• Integrity Council approves first sustainable agriculture methodologies from CAR and Verra — ICVCM (October 30, 2025)
• SEP approved by ICVCM — Climate Action Reserve (October 29, 2025)
• VM0042 Improved Agricultural Land Management v2.2 — Verra (accessed September 2026)
• Kannegieter & Medlock, npj Sustainable Agriculture 4:40 — Nature Portfolio (May 26, 2026)
• Crediting agricultural soil carbon sequestration — Science (March 18, 2022)
• Are soil carbon credits empty promises? — Soil Use and Management (2024)
• Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program RFI — Federal Register (May 29, 2024)
• USDA announces appointments to the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program advisory council — USDA (January 7, 2025)