So did you ever eat far less than 2030 and also not lose?

Meaning, if your body had adapted slower to compensate for huge deficit you used to have, you could have been eating much less and stopped losing weight.
Therefore eating at maintenance - suppressed maintenance.

Now you increased calories to 2300-2600 and maintained at 143-147.
That proved some former level obviously wasn't potential maintenance, but suppressed.

But is 2300-2600 potential or suppressed?

You didn't gain after the water weight, but that doesn't prove anything, because former eating level you also didn't gain either, and it obviously wasn't potential maintenance.

So now you've cut to 2030 and after water weight drop, no loss.

Does that mean this is potential TDEE then? Obviously not either.

What I'm saying is the lack of gaining on 2300-2600 doesn't prove it was potential TDEE.

I'm curious, when you were guessing TDEE level, did you take in to account it is based on a sedentary desk job as work, with exercise hours on top?
Did you select a TDEE level based purely on the Xfit time, so like Moderately Active?
Or did you correctly include the fact a farmer is already up at Moderately Active, and exercise would have pushed you to Extremely Active?

If you did not, I'll bet a more honest TDEE level estimate would show that 2300-2600 is still a big deficit, and your body never actually went up to burning potential TDEE level calories.

It was still suppressed at that level that whole time, you took a deficit from that level, lost some more water weight from even less carbs stored, and body slowed right down again a tad more.

I'm estimating 35 hrs weekly on your feet moving a lot for farming, about 5 hrs a week standing moving slowly. That's just to replace the 40 hr desk job you don't have. If you actually have more hrs than that on farm duty, then even higher.
TDEE - 2350.
Depending on how long those Xfit sessions are, like 4 hrs total weekly, I'm showing upwards of 2800 TDEE.

So if you didn't lose weight on 2600, you likely have a higher BMR and TDEE that would benefit from using Katch BMR for bodyfat%.

have you read this post??

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1347262-interesting-changes-for-this-newbie

just might help define that scale number might not be correct?

I was loosing eating less than 2030. But it was winter, homeschooling in a tiny house . I upped cals because in spring when my activity level went up I was still loosing but I just didn't have enough energy to work. Found EM2WL and came up with the tdee from multiple online calculators.
I just ran my numbers through a katch on iifym.com and came up with 2850, but that was for physical job + work out everyday and I only do four days so it would seem 2600 would be right?

I'm totally open to the idea that I ate a suppressed tdee for 12 weeks. But if that's true what do I do now? Another reset with higher numbers? Or up cals 50/ week? Or....what?

All I know is I'm freak in' hungry at 2030, and I'm not loosing so that sucks.

Any advice welcome! Thanks!

I ran the numbers I provided through the spreadsheet on my profile page.
If the 35 and 5 is not correct and you actually have some hours almost every day not just 5 doing farm work, than 35 is too short.
Stay on Simple Setup tab, and Progress tab, only.
Delete all the yellow cell example stats after you see what is there, and enter your own stats.

IIFYM has been shown by many to be notoriously under-estimating of TDEE. This by people that have result based TDEE figures, so very trustworthy.

I'd suggest spreadsheet with best estimate of TDEE - and see how far away you were when you were eating more.
Pretty far away, then it shows the prior eating level was still suppressed TDEE, to far away and not enough time to repair.

This study shows that RMR and TDEE sped up when eating at current maintenance, just took a long time.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/heybales/view/reduced-metabolism-tdee-beyond-expected-from-weight-loss-616251

The attempt you did was to make it quicker by moving up to potential TDEE, but if you missed it by 200-300, then still looking at months for partial recovery.