Farm Succession Planning Lessons from a Wall Street Journal Story

This Wall Street Journal article says it all: “Farmers Are Aging. Their Kids Don’t Want to Be in the Family Business.”

The story is about Don Guinnip, a 74-year-old farmer from southern Illinois. The Guinnip family farm traces its roots back to prior to the Civil War. Don is still actively farming but thinks he has only about two years left in him to continue the rigors of day-to-day farming. The problem is, he is the last active farmer in the family. His kids have moved to metropolitan areas to pursue their own careers. While Don farms all of the acres, he shares beneficial ownership with his siblings, David, Susan, Sallie, and Dan through trusts set up by their parents. The parents did not divide the acres among their children or set up a limited liability company to own the acres. There was an heir apparent to run the farm – Don’s son, Andy. Andy came back to help on the farm when Don had a battle with prostate cancer but ultimately decided to return to his job in St. Louis in the pharmaceutical industry.

Now, what is the family to do? Andy has a sister who is a lawyer in the insurance industry. The article shares a scene of a multi-generational family meeting at the family homestead. At the family meeting, Don’s daughter, Molly, the lawyer, throws out some good ideas. She encourages business succession planning discussions. The family discusses setting up a limited liability company to own the farm or dividing the farm into distinct parcels, with each branch taking a parcel. Don is also willing to buy out his siblings, but they cannot come to an agreement. The family meeting results in no decision regarding a succession plan for the farm. For now, all the family can agree upon is to put 40 acres in a USDA program that will pay the family to take the acres out of production. The proverbial can is kicked down the road.

The scene is set in southern Illinois, but it could be anywhere in Midwest farm country.

For the Guinnip family farm, the future is uncertain. The story may end with third-party tenants after Don finally wears out. Or the farm may end up being sold to the highest bidder.

This might have ended up differently if Don’s parents had made some tough decisions rather than distributing the farm to a trustee for the benefit of all children with Don as the tenant. Is fair always equal or equal always fair? What if Don’s parents had divided up acres and granted Don the right to farm the acres at a fair rental rate tied to an index and provided Don with a first right to purchase if his siblings wanted to sell? Or what if Don’s parents started the estate planning early enough when they could have purchased life insurance relatively cheaply to either compensate the non-farming children or provide enough liquidity to allow Don to buy out his siblings? If Don’s operation had been more profitable because he had control of all of the acres and the income, Andy might have ended up with a significant economic incentive to stay and run the farm rather than pursuing a job in the city. Don’s parents could have opted for the limited liability company route, which would have provided options to purchase non-farming siblings’ interests when they wanted to cash out. The key takeaway from this article is the planning appears to be one generation too late. Families who find themselves in the position of Don’s parents are encouraged to make tough decisions if the goal is to maximize the chances for the farm to stay in the family for multiple generations. These are the issues that the attorneys at Endacott Timmer are skilled at working through with their farm and ranching clients.

Source: Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2026