Factory farming is the single largest cause of animal suffering in the world. Not only does it kill more than 83 billion animals each year (that’s 2,632 animals every second), but it also destroys the wonderful and perfect planet that God created. Perhaps even more disturbing than this is the fact that our government actively funds this incredible cruelty, and so by de facto, your tax dollars are being used to cause suffering to animals. In this article, I am going to explore how we got to this stage, what impact all of this money has on our planet and these innocent animals, and try to map a path forward to create a world full of Tikkun Olam.

The history of agricultural subsidies

While the government subsidies of today promote increased agricultural production, the original government subsidies were first implemented to reduce production. During the Great Depression, American farmers were heavily impacted by falling commodity prices and, alongside many other Americans, faced financial ruin. To address these issues, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration enacted the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) in May 1933, with the goal to stabilize agricultural markets by reducing overproduction. The AAA subsidized farmers who agreed to limit their crop acreage and livestock numbers, helping to boost prices by decreasing supply. These initial subsidies were funded through taxes on companies that processed farm products, but they didn’t last long, and in 1936, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the AAA unconstitutional. Despite these challenges, the AAA succeeded in raising farm incomes and commodity prices, and so a revised version that addresses the court’s concerns was set up in 1938. This set the foundation for government intervention in agricultural economics, laying the groundwork for future subsidy programs.

A dramatic shift in agriculture occurred during the second half of the 20th Century. As we only know too well as Jews, chemical warfare was a large part of World War II, and this focus on deadly chemistry led to a wide range of pesticides, insecticides, and other chemicals that could be used to kill ‘pests.’ Coupled with the increases in crop fertility, thanks to the advancements in the production of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers, farmers could grow crops like never before. The increases in crop yields meant that more crops could be fed to more animals in order to produce more meat and dairy for people to eat. This increased growing capacity, the mechanization of farming equipment, and a push for increased food production all led to significant changes in agriculture.

In the United Kingdom, the Agriculture Act of 1947 exemplified this shift. This act guaranteed prices for farm products and provided farmers with money if market prices fell below these guarantees, ensuring farmers’ incomes and promoting agricultural expansion. It was during this time that “agribusiness,” the integration of agriculture with industrial processes, emerged. Agriculture became increasingly characterized by large-scale operations and corporate involvement, with subsidies playing a crucial role in supporting this transformation.

Over time, these agricultural subsidies merged with national policies. The U.S. Farm Bill allocates substantial funds to support farmers, usually favoring commodity crops such as corn and soybeans. Just 6% of global soy production is used directly as food for humans, while the rest is used as animal feed and supports animal agriculture. These trends help to explain why America’s per capita meat consumption nearly doubled during the 20th Century.

Supporters of these subsidies argue that they ensure a future for farmers and help to maintain stable food prices, however, critics explain that they distort market dynamics, encourage overproduction, and contribute to environmental degradation. Moreover, they can hinder the adoption of sustainable farming practices and the development of alternative food systems by maintaining the economic viability of conventional, resource-intensive, and factory farming-centric agriculture.​

Current Landscape of Subsidies

The OECD reports that the total global support to agriculture averages at USD 842 billion per year, and in the EU, over 80% of agricultural subsidies support livestock production. Taken together, we can assume that at least USD 673 billion is spent each year supporting the exploitation of animals used for food. The McKinsey Global Institute estimates that we need to spend an additional USD 3.5 trillion each year in order to reach Net Zero by 2050, yet we are currently spending around 20% of that figure supporting an industry that is the leading cause of deforestation, biodiversity loss, freshwater use, and land use. We have a moral duty to rethink how we are using such large amounts of money.

The USDA spent over USD 72 billion supporting the livestock industry over the last decade, with these subsidies making up around 20% of farmers’ profits. In the European Union, over 46 billion euros are paid to farmers who are directly or indirectly involved in animal production, the majority of which is paid to farmers who produce animal feed. In the UK, government subsidies can represent around 60% of a farmer’s profits. These subsidies are not distributed equally, and the biggest farms are receiving the largest share of available government subsidies, despite making up a tiny fraction of the total farms.

A graph showing the distribution of EU farming subsidies between different types of farms. Source – Faunalytics

It’s easy to blame “factory farmers,” but this ignores the complexities and scale of modern-day farming. Due to fluctuating input costs and artificially low consumer prices at the retail stage, many farmers operate under tight margins and limited options. They are forced into a system that values volume and efficiency over ethics and the environment. Those farmers who can’t keep up go bust and are more likely to be absorbed by larger agribusinesses, who are the main facilitators of factory farming.

The impact of subsidies on the consumption of meat and dairy products

These subsidies don’t just encourage the production of meat and dairy products; they also distort the market and influence consumer behavior. By artificially keeping the cost of meat and dairy products low through the support of government subsidies, consumers believe that these products are more affordable and accessible than the alternative plant-based protein products that do not receive such large subsidies. In the U.S., animal farmers got 800 times more public funding than alternative protein producers, while EU animal farmers got 1,200 times more funding than their alternative protein counterparts. The majority of people explain that cost is a barrier to consuming plant-based products. Just imagine how diets would shift if we could shift government subsidies.

Israel is a world leader in supporting alternative proteins. In 2024, it granted the first global regulatory approval for the sale of cultivated meat and is world-leading in the development of infrastructure to support the protein transition. However, the Israel Innovation Authority only gave USD 12 million in support to alt-protein startups, compared to the recommended USD 2 billion needed to rebalance Israel’s protein supply by 2050 to ensure food security in the face of the climate crisis. Clearly, we need to rethink how we are spending public money if we want a future that is kind to animals and our planet.

Environmental and Ethical Concerns of Livestock Subsidies

Over 100 billion animals are farmed each year, with 99% of them being factory farmed. It’s hard to imagine the true scale of factory farming, but some graphics help to contextualize these figures. Humans and farmed animals make up 96% of all of the mammal biomass on earth, while poultry accounts for 71% of total bird biomass. 

We have fundamentally changed the landscape of our planet, virtually exterminating all wildlife in order to feed our insatiable appetite for meat and dairy.

Regarded as the largest driver of biodiversity loss, factory farming is steering us towards the climate crisis. Propped up by government subsidies and taxpayer money, factory farming and meat consumption are responsible for the majority of global deforestation, nearly 70% of freshwater use, and contributes 18% of global human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. Our governments are literally paying to destroy the planet just so that people can have artificially cheap access to meat and dairy. Research shows that the true cost of meat and dairy is 146% more expensive than what consumers currently pay when factoring in the wider costs to our society. The scale of waste and destruction involved in farming animals is unimaginable to most and conflicts with the Jewish principle of Bal Taschit.

Moreover, factory farming is incredibly cruel. As Jews, we are taught to avoid Tzaar Baali Chayim – causing suffering to animals. However, government subsidies directly facilitate and incentivize the abuse and slaughter of billions of animals. In factory farms, animals are kept in tiny cages, routinely mutilated, sexually abused, worked to the point of exhaustion, neglected when in pain, and suffer psychologically as they are prevented from exhibiting natural behaviors. We must demand that our governments not use our money to support factory farming, both because it’s good for the environment and also out of a moral duty to the animals themselves, as well as to God.

Global Alternatives and Reforms

Opportunities exist to create a more ethical and sustainable world, and revisiting subsidies is a key lever to achieving this. The World Bank recently recommended that high-income countries stop subsidizing animal agriculture and move towards more sustainable alternatives. However, later that year, The World Bank pledged to double global investments in agriculture. The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change has also recommended a shift in subsidies away from livestock production towards more sustainable options and the implementation of measures to “encourage healthier, more plant-based diets.” In the UK, local advocacy groups are lobbying the government to provide subsidies for meat and dairy as a way to achieve existing climate goals.

In terms of what you can do to help put an end to these livestock subsidies:

• Take part in local advocacy groups that are working to end livestock subsidies.
• Write a letter to your local government representative, asking them to advocate for a shift in subsidies.
• Eliminate your consumption of meat and dairy, and instead buy plant-based protein.

When our governments are using our tax money to fund and expand exploitative industries, we have a duty to not just be dissatisfied with this, but to actively lobby against it. One of the simplest ways to step outside of this system of suffering is to stop eating meat and dairy. Trade your smoked salmon for hummus, and your chicken noodle soup for a vegetable noodle soup. Moving beyond this, we should be educating others about the reality of government subsidies, and campaigning for change. Collectively, we can make a difference.