John Deere and Right to Repair over the years

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced that she sent a letter to John Deere demanding answers on a number of issues related to the repair of equipment. The senator noted PIRG research that lack of repair options costs US farmers 4.2 billion dollars per year in downtime and higher repair costs. Questions included data on John Deere’s political lobbying, what actions the company has taken to reduce costs for farmers and whether or not the company is in compliance with EPA regulation.

John Deere sent a letter to a number of equipment owners, clarifying to their customers that they could seek repair services of their own choosing. This amendment was coupled with an optional recall of the manuals to a new one with a disclaimer saying “a repair shop or person of the owner’s choosing may maintain, replace or repair emissions control devices and systems …” 

The letter acknowledged that aftermarket repairs or replacement parts are allowed for emissions-related repairs, but did not clarify how these repairs can be conducted without supporting software or documentation. 

Colorado’s Right to Repair law covering farm equipment went into effect on Jan. 1, 2024. The law requires farm equipment manufacturers to give product owners and independent shops the same access to parts, tools and information used by authorized dealers to fix equipment, and enforcement by the Attorney General began.

Rejecting Deere’s motion to dismiss, U.S. District Judge Iain Johnston ruled that the company must face claims that it violated the law while restricting repair of equipment as part of a class action suit filed on behalf of a group of farmers. 

Many in the agricultural equipment industry, including Deere, have argued that a major reason they oppose Right to Repair is that repair tools could lead to equipment modifications in violation of Clean Air Act emissions standards. 

After being pressured by repair advocates, the EPA, in a letter to the National Farmers Union, clarified its position around Right to Repair: “nothing in the Clean Air Act or the EPA’s regulations limits a manufacturer’s ability to provide service tools and information to consumers and independent repair facilities for the purpose of repairing their equipment.” The agency also asserted that monitoring compliance to clean air standards is the job of the EPA, not the manufacturer. 

U.S. PIRG Education Fund’s report “Service Obstructor” examined how the software repair tool that John Deere sells to customers redacts key information and removes critical features necessary to complete a host of repairs. The report compares this limited tool, called Customer Service ADVISOR, to the more comprehensive version available to authorized repair technicians. 

On April 25, 2023, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed the first Right to Repair law for farm equipment. This legislation guaranteed farmers and independent mechanics access to the software and repair materials required to fix their tractors and other agricultural equipment. The legislation was supported by repair advocates including Repair.org and PIRG, but also a wide range of farming groups, including Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, Colorado Cattlemen’s Association and the Colorado growers associations of corn, wool, wheat, fruit and vegetables. 

The Department of Justice filed a “statement of interest” in support of the group of farmers in their class action lawsuit against Deere’s repair restrictions. In their letter, the DOJ forcefully pushed back on Deere’s position, and laid out how Supreme Court precedent supports the farmers’ position. 

John Deere and the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) signed a Memorandum Of Understanding around Right to Repair. In the agreement, Deere pledges to provide farmers and – at the request of a farmer – independent mechanics, with the same “Tools, Specialty Tools, Software and Documentation,” that the company provides to its dealers, with some caveats. In exchange, the AFBF agreed not to support Right to Repair legislation. 

The agreement has no enforcement mechanism and allows the equipment supplier to back out altogether with just a 30-day notice, among other limitations that gave pause to pro-repair advocates. 

PIRG and Repair.org launched an effort to get the U.S. EPA to look into whether the restrictions John Deere places over repair of equipment violate protections under the Clean Air Act. While manufacturers often argue that the Clean Air Act prevents them from allowing the repair of emissions related functions, advocates point to language in the underlying legislation that requires independent repair access. 

Filed on behalf of PIRG and several Farmers Union groups, an official complaint submitted to the FTC outlined how repair is restricted in farm equipment, and why that could be viewed as a violation of existing competition law. The filing argues that Deere engaged in “unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive trade practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.” The complaint was built upon the research of the National Farmers Union, U.S. PIRG and Repair.org, and their collective investigation into how Deere restricts repair of equipment. 

Forest River Farms, in association with others nationwide, filed a class action lawsuit in Chicago against John Deere for allegedly monopolizing repair. The suit, which is still active, alleges that John Deere has been using software locks and restricted repair materials to force farmers to make repairs exclusively through their authorized network. This repair network is described as being expensive and inconvenient for farmers in need of repairs, but is alleged to be three to six times more profitable for John Deere than the sales of original equipment, demonstrating the incentive for Deere to retain that service revenue. 

Green Century Capital Management, a PIRG-affiliated mutual fund company, filed a shareholder resolution in September of 2021 asking John Deere to evaluate their anti-competitive repair practices. 

Later, these shareholders announced that Deere had petitioned the SEC to block the resolution on the grounds that they are already addressing repair issues and that it would interfere with their “litigation strategy”.

U.S. PIRG Education Fund published the “Deere in the Headlights” report, which analyzed the repair process for John Deere equipment and how restricted software tools are necessary to complete repairs. The report lays out what changes are necessary to give farmers control over repairs.

Despite promises (the “Statement of Principles” signed in 2018) to make repair software available starting in January of 2021, VICE’s Motherboard called a number of dealerships and learned that the promised tools were not available. 

As Right to Repair legislation gained speed, the leading farm equipment and dealership trade associations made a voluntary agreement around the topic of repair, which they called their “Statement of Principles“. These principles, hosted on a website called “R2R Solutions,” promised that the supporting manufacturers and dealers would improve access to repair documentation, trainings, diagnostic service tools, and products guides to their customers through authorized dealers by the beginning of 2021. However, the document specifically says the companies will not allow farmers to reset equipment when the immobilizer is triggered, or program any new “electronic processing units”, among other restrictions. 

In a 2017 investigation, VICE journalist Jason Koebler dove into the secretive software trade for John Deere equipment amongst American farmers. The article and documentary segment showcased the ways in which Right to Repair extends not just to the mechanical hardware of our products, but especially the software. The investigation showed that, frustrated by a lack of support from Deere and their dealerships, farmers were sourcing the necessary software resources from Eastern Europe in secretive online marketplaces. 

In 2017, as Right to Repair was just beginning to be discussed in state legislatures, Nebraska became one of the early states to hold a hearing on proposed state legislation. The bill’s hearing showcased new stories and perspectives from farmers that had not been given the spotlight in the past.