Meat

DOJ, USDA Ramp Up Antitrust Investigation Into "Big 4" Beef Packers

Fri, 08 May 2026 18:34:40 GMT

The Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Agriculture are intensifying scrutiny of concentration and pricing practices across the meat industry, announcing this week that federal investigators are ramping up a criminal antitrust investigation into the nation’s four largest beef packers.

During a joint press conference Monday at DOJ headquarters, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the effort as part of a broader push to address competition issues in agriculture and food pricing.

“Today we are here to talk about our progress here at the Justice Department to hold meat packers accountable,” Blanche says.

Federal officials allege price-fixing and collusion may have contributed to higher meat prices for consumers, while also limiting competition within the cattle industry.

“We prioritized investigating potential antitrust violations in U.S. cattle and beef markets,” Blanche says. “In the beef industry, the Big Four processors control over 85% of the beef processing market. Two of the Big Four are primarily foreign-owned.”

The “Big Four” — referenced during the press conference — are JBS, Cargill, Tyson and National Beef. The administration argues the current structure of the meat industry allows competitors to exchange competitively sensitive information across the protein sector — practices DOJ says it is now investigating.

DOJ Encourages Whistleblowers to Come Forward

Blanche also encourages whistleblowers within the meatpacking industry to provide information to federal investigators. DOJ says individuals who provide information leading to antitrust convictions or major enforcement actions could qualify for financial rewards.

“The idea of whistleblowers of people coming forward with information they have is one of the best and most efficient ways that we can solve antitrust violations criminally or otherwise,” he says. “And so we just want to make sure people realize that people in this industry realize that we’re putting money where our mouth is. We’re not asking you to come forward and then see what happens. We’re saying if you come forward and if your information results in a finding, in a conviction, and the amount of money is over a million dollars, which in this industry is not a very high bar, that you stand to recover up to 30%. And so we have to incentivize people to make a very difficult choice and come forward with information if they had it.”

R-CALF USA Applauds Investigation

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard says the biggest takeaway from Monday’s announcement is that DOJ is actively seeking public assistance through its antitrust whistleblower program.

“The biggest takeaway was that the Department of Justice is reaching out to the public seeking help through DOJ’s antitrust whistleblower program, to find out what the public knows
about these anticompetitive practices,” Bullard says.

Bullard says R-CALF USA has spent years warning policymakers about growing concentration in the cattle industry.

“We’ve been calling attention and warning that this is a threat to our national security, our economy, and particularly to our food safety here and food security in the United States,” Bullard says.

Rollins Links Herd Decline to Regulatory Pressure

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also focused heavily on the shrinking U.S. cattle herd and declining number of ranchers during Monday’s event.

“In the past decade alone, we’ve lost over 17% of our cattle ranchers,” Rollins says. “More than 100,000 ranches across this country are no more.”

“The low herd size inherited by the Trump administration can be attributed to a variety of factors,” she says. “The biggest one, at least from our perspective, is the radical left’s ongoing assault against ranching as a way of life.”

Today, just four companies — JBS, Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef — control roughly 85% of the cattle processing market. That level of concentration has surged from just 25% in 1977 to 71% by 1992, and now to an astonishing 85%.

Together, these companies operate through… pic.twitter.com/s4naYFcjt7
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) May 4, 2026

Rollins argues drought alone is not responsible for cattle liquidation.

“For years, they used climate alarmism to wage a war on cattle in America,” Rollins says. “And when you pair that with droughts, wildfire, overregulation from previous administrations and volatile markets, this is how we have ended up here today.”

The administration also outlined several policy initiatives it says are designed to support cattle producers, including:

Opening more federal land for grazing
Implementing new “Product of USA” labeling rules
Supporting small processors through a grading pilot program
Updating dietary guidelines to emphasize the role of meat in the American diet

Rollins says additional announcements are expected later this week.

Agri Stats Settlement Targets Information Sharing

The DOJ’s broader push against anticompetitive behavior escalated Thursday when the department announced a proposed settlement with Agri Stats .

Federal officials accuse the company of helping major meat processors share confidential pricing and production data involving chicken, pork and turkey markets for decades.

Under the proposed settlement , Agri Stats would be prohibited from continuing several data-sharing practices DOJ alleges distorted competition and increased prices.

The agreement would also increase market transparency by making more information available to buyers and sellers throughout the supply chain.

Although the Agri Stats case does not involve beef, Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing Peter Navarro referenced the pending settlement during Monday’s press conference.

“This is like the mathematician’s worst nightmare in terms of monopoly behavior,” Navarro says. “Basically, what the companies in this concentrated industry were doing was individually sending in data on everything, consumers, production, everything in between. And what did that computer do? It spit back what the monopoly price should be.”

With the settlement he explains, “Justice Department said no more. That’s not going to happen on our watch and that case I believe is going to be settled well or at trial in a way which not only will take care of that problem but implicate some of the bad actions that we’ve seen by the two American companies Tyson and Cargill and JBS on the Brazilian side along with National Beef.”

1 – The Department of Justice continues to bring affordability to the American people. Today, we announced a historic settlement with Agri Stats, whose business model directly raised the price of chicken, turkey, and pork in local grocery stores across our nation. 🐔🐖⚖️
— Acting AG Todd Blanche (@DAGToddBlanche) May 7, 2026

On X, Blanche says the settlement will create a more level playing field by making Agri Stats reports available to all buyers and sellers and calls it part of the administration’s broader push to fight anticompetitive behavior in the food supply chain.

Rollins also confirms the DOJ antitrust investigation into meatpackers originally announced in November remains ongoing.

“As ranchers face fewer options for selling their animals, the Big Four grow stronger and stronger,” Rollins says. “These companies now have an unprecedented ability to wield market power and influence prices paid for cattle — definitely more so than if we had greater competition.”

Industry Analysts Push Back on Concentration Claims

Not everyone in the cattle industry agrees that concentration itself is evidence of anticompetitive conduct.

John Nalivka, president of Sterling Marketing, says consolidation largely reflects economics and efficiency within the packing sector.

“As a business, you have to continually look to lowering costs,” Nalivka says. “And you can manage costs and you can manage revenue both. But the cost, you can have a direct impact on your cost structure. And one way of doing this, consolidating and gaining greater capacity and economies of scale.”

Nalivka also disputes the administration’s market concentration figures.

(Sterling Marketing Inc.)

“Well, to begin with, it’s not 85% now, it’s something more close to 78%, or even maybe a little bit lower than that when the Greeley strike was on,” he says.
The timing of the investigation is notable as packer profitability remains under pressure.

Nalivka says Sterling Marketing’s profit tracker showed beef packers losing nearly $200 per head at the end of April.

“From 2011 to 2015, we had the same set of circumstances, significant herd liquidation and pulling the numbers down,” Nalivka says. “And with the packing plant, the capacity is driven by — and I generate the numbers based on slaughter capacity — so it’s all about cattle numbers.”

Nalivka says his data shows the market share of the four largest beef packers has declined in 2026, with Tyson Foods’ share decreasing.

(Sterling Marketing Inc.)

According to Nalivka, the four largest beef packers now account for approximately 73% of fed-cattle slaughter capacity, leaving nearly one-quarter of processing capacity outside what the administration refers to as the “Big Four.”

“I have told people who have made these comments about these big bad packers,” Nalivka says. “I’ve said, first of all, I’ll start out with a statement, what would you do if you didn’t have one, a packer? And secondly, if you think it’s easy and you think you know so much about it, go build one.”

Producers Need Packers

Justin Tupper, U.S. Cattlemen’s Association president, says the DOJ action is less a brand-new effort than a continuation of long-running scrutiny. Tupper was a guest on AgriTalk Thursday .

Tupper acknowledges the seriousness of DOJ’s work, saying, “I sure do” believe they’re ramping it up, and called the probe “long-awaited and long-needed.” But he repeatedly warns about unintended consequences for producers if the investigation disrupts slaughter capacity.

“We like to vilify the packers all the time, but there is one truth to it, we need them,” he says, adding that if a major plant closed, it, “would cause more disruption than any good that could come from it.”

His concern is when cattle numbers rebuild, predicting, “When we get back to cattle numbers that they can control us, then they’re going to use that and weaponize that against us.”

Tupper stresses producers are not trying to deny packers a profit. “All we want as cattle producers is a fair shake; we don’t want to be used and abused when the cattle numbers are high.”

He warns the administration must understand “how tight that supply is and how few of places that slaughter them” and avoid “big disruptions.” He calls for thoughtful, balanced solutions developed with “cool heads and a lot of the smart people in the room” so the investigation doesn’t “disrupt the chain.”

Calls for Structural Reform Continue

Bullard says R-CALF USA continues pushing for significant structural reforms in the cattle industry.

“We’re asking them to do one of two things,” Bullard says. “Either break up the packers to provide more competition within the industry, or regulate those packers to ensure that they don’t engage in the antitrust conduct and anti-competitive practices.”

Bullard says the group is also urging the Trump administration to investigate what it describes as a “formula pricing scheme,” where cattle are increasingly sold through contracts instead of negotiated cash markets.

Critics argue those arrangements give major meatpackers greater influence over cattle pricing.

When asked whether the administration is listening to cattle producers’ concerns, Bullard points to Monday’s press conference as evidence of a major shift in Washington.

“Well, clearly it is,” Bullard says. “The press conference that was held talking specifically about the problems associated with beef packer concentration was unprecedented for the past 100 years. We have not seen our policymakers stand up and take a stand against the concentration of the cattle market. And so we’re excited that this administration is focused on this issue, understands that it is a national security issue, understands that as a result of our failure to properly enforce our antitrust laws, we’ve hollowed out rural American communities all across this country.”

Whether the federal investigation ultimately leads to major reforms within the cattle industry remains uncertain. But the debate over market concentration, competition and who controls pricing power in the U.S. cattle market is now squarely at the center of Washington policymaking.

Your Next Reads:

What Does the JBS Strike Mean to Beef Producers?

Mon, 16 Mar 2026 14:25:47 GMT

Union workers at the JBS packing plant in Greeley, Colo., have gone on strike Monday morning. This is the first walkout at a U.S. beef slaughterhouse since the 1980s.

According to The Colorado Sun and the UFCW Local 7 , union workers were picketing early this morning. The workers are calling for higher wages, safer working conditions and respect on the job .

After months of disrespect and unfair labor practices, the workers at JBS Greeley are done waiting.

The line is drawn. The strike has begun.

UFCW Local 7 members are standing up for dignity, safety, and the contract they deserve. ✊#jbsulpstrike #greeleyco #ufcw7 #unionstrong pic.twitter.com/nBPsazGyF8
— UFCW Local 7 (@UFCW_7) March 16, 2026

According to a union press release , the unfair labor practice (ULP) strike at the JBS-owned Swift Beef plant was set to start at 5:30 a.m. Monday, March 16.

JBS spokesperson Nikki Richardson says, “This morning, many JBS Greeley team members chose to report to work rather than participate in the strike called by UFCW Local 7, and we expect that number to continue increasing in the days ahead. Our team members want stability, they want to support their families, and they deserved the opportunity to vote on the company’s historic offer — an opportunity the union leadership has denied them. We are paying all team members who come to work, and we are operating the facility to the best of our ability this week.”

The union says workers hoped a recent bargaining session would have led to a breakthrough in negotiations with JBS, but instead JBS sent the workers a clear message that the company is putting profits ahead of its people.

“The Union’s member-led bargaining committee has met more than two dozen times with the company in an effort to reach a mutually agreeable contract. JBS is failing to listen to the 99% of its workers who authorized a ULP strike,” the union says in the release. “The Company needs to give them an offer that takes life saving safety equipment seriously, provides wages which meet the rising cost of living in Colorado and ensures rising health care costs do not consume workers’ wages. The Company committed numerous Unfair Labor Practices which are preventing an agreement. The Company continues to threaten to withhold both a proposed bonus and lump-sum pension payment if workers strike. The Company also retaliated against workers who have stood up for their rights and co-workers.”

The union represents 3,800 workers at the plant.

The Greeley plant did not harvest cattle the week of March 9.

“To ensure continuity for our customers and partners, we are temporarily adjusting production across our network as needed,” Richardson explains. “By utilizing available capacity at other JBS facilities, we can maintain supply, protect the long‑term stability of the beef chain and minimize disruption for consumers and retailers. Our priority is to keep product moving while we work toward a resolution in Greeley.”

She summarizes, “We remain focused on supporting our team members, and any employee who reports for their scheduled shift will have work available and will be paid. We will continue scaling operations this week as more team members return.”

Markets Lack Reaction

Live and feeder cattle futures opened higher on Monday morning. Brad Kooima with Kooima Kooima Varilek says there are a couple of reasons why the market ignored the strike and the biggest are the higher equity markets and lower crude oil. However, he says it is also tied to the fact the strike news was already priced into the market.

Don Close, senior animal protein analyst at Terrain Ag, joined Chip Flory on AgriTalk Thursday, summarizing the strike will increase packer leverage and help reduce negative margins.

He says even with Greeley down, the industry still has excess slaughter capacity.

“Even with Greeley, with the limited cattle supply we’re dealing with, we still have excess slaughter capacity,” he stresses. “It’s going to give way more leverage to the packers, but it will help them shore up their negative margins.”

Close adds the biggest headache to the industry will be additional freight and added shrink from the extra haul to a different plant.

Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University professor of agricultural economics, agrees with Close. “Any disruption in labor availability has largest impacts on producers operating closest to involved plants. In aggregate, I do not expect large fed cattle price impacts as the industry is operating with excess physical capacity, relative to available cattle supplies.”

From an industrywide standpoint, Close downplays the potential disruption to supply.

“From the industry as a whole, the supply of product going out to meet our demand side of the market should be fine,” he says.

John Nalivka, Sterling Marketing Inc. president, says it is hard to predict the impact on the market.

“We have had Tyson’s closure of Lexington [in Nebraska] and a shift taken off the Amarillo plant [in Texas], tariffs, the current Iran situation and oil back to $100/barrel with little to no impact on the market,” he summarizes. “Supplies are tight and demand is strong. These are the overriding factors impacting this beef market. I would not be comfortable with predicting the impact of an impending strike.”

Hyrum Egbert, Riverbend Meats vice president of strategy, sales, accounting, HR, FSQA, logistics, purchasing and warehousing — who authors the biweekly The Big Bad Beef Packer newsletter, which takes a look at packinghouse truths, trends and tough questions — predicts if Greeley goes dark, even temporarily, the immediate reaction is cattle backup fear.

“A potential strike at JBS Greeley is loud ... but it’s not automatically structural,” he says. “Yes, it’s a big plant. But in 2026, cattle availability is the governor, and packers have already been living in ‘under-utilized capacity’ land for a while.”

Egbert summarizes, “This is likely more of a pricing/psychology event than a true supply collapse ... unless it turns into a long, messy, multi-plant labor domino.”

Your Next Read: Can Cattle Recover and is the Greeley Strike Priced In? Row Crops Follow Oil

98% of U.S. Households Are Buying Meat: New Report Shows Record Sales

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 18:02:03 GMT

Meat sales hit a record high of $112 billion in 2025, with a pound increase of 2%. Millennials and Gen Z were a driving force behind the growth, according to the 21st annual Power of Meat report released today at the Annual Meat Conference by the Meat Institute and FMI — The Food Industry Association .

According to Circana, more than 98% of American households purchase meat, and 45% of shoppers are actively trying to prepare more meals containing meat or poultry. According to 210 Analytics, of the five dinners shoppers prepare at home per week on average, 90% already contain a portion of meat or poultry.

“The meat department is outperforming because it delivers what shoppers want right now: protein, flexibility, value and taste,” says Rick Stein, FMI vice president of fresh foods. “Retailers that balance convenient ground options with premium, indulgent cuts will be best positioned to capture both budget-conscious and experience-driven shoppers.”

Which Generations Are Driving Meat Sales Growth?

Millennials and Gen Z shoppers accounted for 67% of unit growth. They are more likely than other shoppers to be actively trying to prepare more meals containing meat or poultry — Gen Z 50% and Millennials 57%. In 81% of households with children, kids have some level of influence on meat and poultry purchase decisions. Seventy-two percent of shoppers with teens at home say their teens request meat and poultry, far ahead of requests for protein bars, shakes and powders.

How is AI Changing How Consumers Buy Meat?

Younger generations also lead the way in using social media and artificial intelligence (AI) platforms for meal inspiration. Twenty-four percent of Gen Z and Millennial shoppers use AI tools, compared to 10% of Gen X and 4% of Boomers. Overall, 15% of shoppers use AI tools, a 650% increase compared to just two years ago.

Is Meat Still Considered Part of a Healthy Diet?

Meat and poultry continue to feature positively in shoppers’ health and nutrition perceptions, with 77% of shoppers agreeing that meat and poultry are part of a healthy diet, up more than 20% since 2020. GLP-1 users over-index versus non-users for eating somewhat or a lot more meat than last year (161) and for frequently including meat and poultry in snacking occasions (171).

“Americans are more focused on making smart food choices than ever before, and this latest Power of Meat report reinforces meat’s clear and irreplaceable role at the center of healthy, convenient, affordable meals today and for generations to come,” summarizes Julie Anna Potts, Meat Institute president.

Read more about how the food pyramid puts protein back on top:

New Dietary Guidelines Move Food Pyramid Closer to the Farm

The New Food Pyramid Flips the Script

The Power of Meat study was conducted by 210 Analytics on behalf of FMI and the Meat Foundation and sponsored by Cryovac Brand Food Packaging. Sales and purchase dynamics data are provided by Circana for the 52 weeks ending Dec. 28, 2025.

Your Next Read:
Consumer Craze for Protein Drives Beef Demand
Why Aren’t High Beef Prices Causing Sticker Shock With Consumers?
What Do Consumers Buy in the Meat Aisle When Money is Tight?
Global Protein Demand Surges 2% Annually as Producers Navigate Volatile Markets

Global Protein Demand Surges 2% Annually as Producers Navigate Volatile Markets

Thu, 19 Feb 2026 19:28:01 GMT

While global protein demand is growing at roughly 2% annually, livestock producers must navigate a complex landscape of regional shifts, disease risks and policy battles that will define the next decade of production.

“The Global Protein Outlook: Demand, Trade and the Supply Picture” panel discussion during this year’s Top Producer Summit brought together experts from the beef, dairy and pork industries to explore demand, trade dynamics and risks facing the livestock industry today.

Beef, dairy and pork experts explain how foreign animal disease and climate extremes threaten herds and what risk-management strategies producers can use to stay profitable.

(Farm Journal)

On the panel were:

Kenny Burdine, University of Kentucky agricultural economist
Stephen Cain, National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC)
Renee Strickland, Strickland Ranch & Exports, Inc.
Scott Hays, Missouri Pork Association

Five key takeaways from the discussion include:

1. Global protein demand is structurally strong, driven by population growth, rising incomes and a broad cultural focus on protein.

“Globally, we are seeing an increase in protein demand broadly across the board,” Cain summarizes.

He describes a few demand patterns:

Regions like sub-Saharan Africa and India: demand mainly from more mouths to feed, not big per-capita jumps.
Regions like Southeast Asia and China: both population and per-capita protein consumption have risen sharply.
Developed regions like the U.S. and Europe are in a fortified-protein trend: “We are cramming protein into everything,” Cain describes. “We have protein water on the market now … it’s across the world.”

Plant-based and alternative proteins seem to be a niche.

Burdine explains: “They’ve not taken any market share. It’s still kind of staying in that niche and not impacting the major protein categories.”

Cain adds the dairy alternatives are seeing category declines, with more consumers realizing milk is a whole food compared to the ingredient in an almond beverage.

2. Supply and trade are shifting toward more regionalized production and stronger competitors, but U.S. strengths in productivity and quality remain critical.

On the supply side, Cain explains rising demand does not always translate into equally increasing exports.

“We’ve seen that slow down,” he says. “More of that protein demand is being filled by domestic production, more regionalized players.”

He links this to some pushback against globalism and more inward-looking, domestic strategies. The U.S. remains a key exporter but faces growing regional competition.

Burdine adds while the U.S. has the smallest cow herd since 1961 , productivity gains mean more output per animal. He points out Brazil passed the U.S. as the largest beef producer.

“It’s not that there’s not competition out there, but we absolutely [have] a great advantage here in the states,” he says.

From pork’s perspective, Hays says the U.S. pork supply should stay steady into 2026, while global pork supply is shrinking. He predicts China may decrease 1.4 million sows, Spain is cutting numbers due to African Swine Fever, yet Brazil is continuing to grow its numbers.

3. Risk and resilience — disease, climate extremes and feed quality — are central concerns, making biosecurity, preparedness and careful storage essential.

Hays highlights herd health is the biggest concern for all livestock producers.

“What keeps every producer up is herd health,” he stresses.

He points out to these concerns today:

Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS): PRRS causes “very, very significant losses” and takes a multiyear recovery
Foreign animal diseases – African Swine Fever, foot-and-mouth disease and New World screwworm .

“Foot and mouth should scare everybody at this conference,” he stresses. “We would lose all of those exports on all of those products, from dairy to beef to pork.”

From the cattle perspective, Strickland adds climate extremes are a concern for ranchers today.

“I also fear the climate change extremes that we’re all experiencing,” she says. “Extreme drought, extreme rains… that’s really challenging for me as a producer.”

More information about disease challenges facing the livestock producers today:

PRRS ‘Still Sucks’: New Strain Plagues Pork Producers in Ohio

Strategies to Help Raise PRRS-Positive Pigs

Is a World Without PRRS Possible? Two Veterinarians Say ‘Yes’

Help Protect the U.S. from African Swine Fever

African Swine Fever: What it means for America if it were to get into the country

What Do Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreaks in Europe Mean for the U.S.?

The Smell You’ll Never Forget: A Calf Infested with New World Screwworm

New World Screwworm: An Infestation, Not Infection

4. Consumer behavior shows both opportunity and caution: strong protein demand despite high prices, but some trade-down, weaker foodservice and ongoing debates over “ultra-processed” foods.

Burdine compares today’s protein enthusiasm to past diet waves like Atkins and South Beach, but emphasizes: “Consumer trends are always challenging, but it’s the most encouraging in my career.”

Two features about the demand craze he points out are:

How widespread it is across species and products, including eggs.
Price behavior — despite very high retail prices, demand remains strong.

Burdines explains this suggests a deeper, more durable shift for increased protein demand, not just a short-lived fad.

Cain adds in the protein world trade-down due to inflation and increasing costs is real, especially in foodservice.

He notes lower-income consumers pull back on fast food and quick service, which hurts cheese and dairy demand. Cheese consumption, which usually increases about 2% per year, fell 2% last year, which he says is largely due to weaker foodservice traffic.

Burdine adds that trade-down happens across and within species.

Hays emphasizes the new dietary guidelines are a big win for protein and specifically animal protein.

“We’re excited,” he says. “Pork is at the top on the left-hand side, but it’s more about shifting the conversation. We’re moving away from ‘animal fat makes you fat.’ Meat provides hard-to-replace vitamins and minerals, including in the fat portion.”

He did share concern about how ultra-processed concepts are being used.

“We’ve taken this word ‘ultra-processed’, and now it’s a household word. It is the single unit of measure [for] whether or not we should or should not eat something,” Hays says. “And we don’t even know what the definition of it is.”

He explains if ultra-processed is the only metric, a sausage patty and a honey bun look identical, which is misleading for real nutrition decisions.

Cain adds allowing whole milk in schools is a big win, but schools are facing a higher cost than skim and calorie caps that make menu-balancing harder.

5. Strategic actions for producers: robust risk management, efficiency and quality focus, diversification and a commitment to mentoring the next generation.

Cain encourages producers to use risk management and pricing strategies to help make them viable at today’s prices.

“If you’re not economically viable today, you’re not going to be economically viable tomorrow,” he says.

Burdine adds to think about risk management broadly considering price tools and protection from acts of God. This includes biosecurity strategies and insurance.

“Focus on efficiency and quality to stay competitive in good and bad markets,” he stresses.

Hays asks grain producers to protect feed quality. Poorly stored corn or DDGs (dry distillers grains) can create toxin issues that hurt animal performance and reduce demand.

“Your consumer really needs it to be high quality,” he stresses. “And we’ll buy more of it.”

Strickland encourages producers to diversify their income and not put all their eggs in one basket. Her business includes a ranch, export company and a non-ag title search company.

“When one of them is not doing so well, something else bails me out,” she summarizes. “If you’re in a position that you can diversify just a little bit, it can get you through the hard times.”

The final message was a question: Who are you mentoring and investing in? All producers need to consider how they are going to pass information on to the next generation and help them be successful and thrive.

Your Next Reads:
U.S. Cattle Inventory Hits 75-Year Low at 86.2 Million Head
What Do Consumers Buy in the Meat Aisle When Money is Tight?
New Dietary Guidelines Move Food Pyramid Closer to the Farm

Brazil Surpassing U.S. As Top Beef Producer, Easing Global Supply Squeeze

Thu, 08 Jan 2026 16:01:53 GMT

Brazil surpassed the U.S. as the world’s top beef producer last year, according to market estimates, after the South American country beat output forecasts by hundreds of thousands of tons, easing a global supply squeeze and helping limit a surge in meat prices.

Brazil was already the biggest beef exporter, shipping meat worth almost $17 billion in 2025, according to government trade data released on Tuesday. Beef production numbers are not due until February, but analysts have recently raised their estimates. Farmers have been sending more animals to slaughter, cashing in on high export demand from countries including China and the U.S., where low supply has pushed beef prices to record levels.

Elevated slaughter typically leads to a period of low output as producers hold back animals to breed and rebuild herds. But productivity gains in Brazil may limit or even prevent a downturn, people in the industry say. They noted that farms have been inseminating cattle quicker, fattening them faster and slaughtering them younger.

“Ten years ago, the average age of cattle slaughtered in Brazil was five years,” said Vinicius Barbosa, a commercial manager responsible for tens of thousands of cattle at the CMA feedlot in Barretos, about 260 miles (420 km) north of Sao Paulo. “Now it is 36 months and going rapidly to 24,” he said.

Mauricio Nogueira, head of livestock consultancy Athenagro, said Brazilian beef production far surpassed his forecast in 2025. Output grew 4% for the year, where he had predicted a 2.7% drop. The increase of around 800,000 tons was about equal to total annual exports of Argentina, the world’s No. 5 beef shipper.

Rabobank, which had expected Brazil’s beef production to decline in 2025, now sees 0.5% growth to 12.5 million tons carcass weight equivalent. The U.S. Department of Agriculture in December raised its estimate for Brazilian beef output by 450,000 tons to 12.35 million tons.

If the official numbers confirm market estimates, 2025 will be the first year that Brazil’s output will have surpassed U.S. production, which fell 3.9% to 11.8 million tons in 2025, according to USDA estimates, following years of drought.

Feedlots, Rising Carcass Weight Drive Output

U.S. beef production will fall a further 0.9% to 11.7 million tons in 2026, the USDA said. In Brazil, the USDA and Rabobank project a decline in output, but Nogueira said rising productivity could actually boost Brazil’s production by around 300,000 tons.

Almost 28% of cattle slaughtered in Brazil will be fattened in feedlots by 2027, up from 22% in 2025, according to consultants Scot Consultoria.

“Feedlots do in 100 days for cattle what pasture does in between 18 and 24 months,” said Barbosa, adding that CMA’s Barretos feedlot would process 80,000 cattle in 2026, up from 65,000 last year.

A drone image shows cattle entering a feedlot at CMA Farm in Barretos, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

(Joel Silva/Reuters)

Brazil’s booming corn ethanol industry is generating a byproduct known as dried distillers grains that has higher protein than corn and helps cattle fatten faster, analysts said.

Cows are becoming pregnant more often as farmers adopt more efficient insemination techniques, allowing producers to slaughter more animals without reducing herd size.

Scot Consultoria expects Brazil’s pregnancy rate - the proportion of females that become pregnant during a breeding season - to rise to 54% in 2027 from an expected 50% in 2026.

Better genetics are also improving cattle growth and boosting meat quality, analysts say. And Brazil still has not matched the 90% proportion of cattle passing through feedlots as in the U.S., or Australia’s 40%.

If Brazil’s pregnancy rate rose to 66%, equivalent to neighbouring Argentina, the number of calves birthed each year would rise from an estimated 32 million to 40 million, according to consultants Datagro. The pregnancy rate in Canada is 96%, they said.

Government data show Brazil has 238 million cattle, well over double the 94 million in the U.S. Higher productivity would allow output to expand without increasing cattle numbers or the area of pasture land. That could ease one economic driver of deforestation of the Amazon rainforest.

Brazil’s cattle herd is expected to grow just 4% between 2024 and 2034 while beef production increases 24%, according to Brazilian beef exporter group ABIEC. U.S. beef production will rise 3.5% and cattle numbers will grow 5% over that period, by USDA estimates.

Brazil Key As Top Producers Scale Down

Global beef prices will hinge on whether Brazil can avoid a production downturn this year.

The USDA expects output in the world’s six biggest producers to fall in 2026 by a combined 2.4% - the biggest annual drop in decades - after rising 0.4% in 2025. These producers are Brazil, the U.S., China, the European Union, Argentina and Australia. The list excludes India, which the USDA names as one of the six top beef producers even though that country produces buffalo meat rather than beef.

The USDA expects Brazilian production to fall 5.3% to 11.7 million tons carcass weight equivalent this year. If Nogueira’s estimates are confirmed and output rises instead to around 12.6 million tons, the decline in the top six producers would be just 0.2%.

“There has never been so much international demand for Brazilian beef,” said Guilherme Jank, a Datagro analyst, adding that local beef packers have also ramped up capacity.

“We are witnessing firsthand a significant shift in how the beef cattle supply system works in Brazil, in terms of quality, scale, efficiency, and productivity,” he said.

(Reporting by Ana Mano in Barretos and Peter Hobson in Canberra; Additional reporting by Ella Cao in Beijing and Tom Polansek in Chicago; Editing by Brad Haynes and David Gregorio)

Shrinking Slaughter Capacity: What's Next in 2026?

Wed, 24 Dec 2025 17:33:42 GMT

The long-feared rightsizing of shackle spaces to more closely match the number of cattle has begun.

“The market’s reaction to the November announcement was a good reminder that market volatility still exists even when the supply and demand fundamentals continue to be positive forces into the start of 2026,” says Dave Weaber, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, in his Q1 2026 Outlook .

In late November, Tyson Foods announced its plan to end operations at its Lexington, Neb., beef facility and convert its Amarillo, Texas, beef facility to a single, full-capacity shift.

“Terrain estimates the changes will eventually reduce U.S. slaughter capacity by about 6.6%,” Weaber explains. “However, slaughter plant capacity utilization is still nearly 6% behind historical norms, as the number of cattle is still well short of filling available slaughter capacity.”

Weaber predicts this positive shift in operational efficiency will likely encourage plants to fill available capacity and better compete for the available cattle.

“I expect utilization to decline by about 2% during 2026 when two new plants in Nebraska and Missouri complete their startups,” he adds.

A proposed plant in the Panhandle of Texas that would handle 6,000 head per day has the potential to lower utilization rates back to early-2025 levels if completed.

“Even without additional future slaughter capacity, utilization rates will remain low; fed cattle numbers are expected to decline during the next two to three years because of cow-calf producers’ beef cow herd expansion efforts,” Weaber summarizes.

The reduction in current fed slaughter capacity will help the remaining plants run more volume, improving efficiency by spreading fixed and semi-variable costs across more head and pounds of beef. This positive shift in operational efficiency will likely encourage plants to fill available capacity and better compete for the available cattle.

“I expect that in the near and intermediate term, this effect will at least partially offset the shift in market leverage, which currently favors the packer,” Weaber says.

Markets and Beef Prices Remain Resilient

Beyond the near-term impacts to futures traders’ sentiment, the market impacts of the announced closures are fading.

“Calf, feeder cattle and fed cattle cash markets are already recovering and have posted significant rallies,” Weaber says. “Fed cattle supplies for the first half of 2026 are not going to change. The number of cattle placed into feed yards is the number placed and will be the number that gets slaughtered. The location the cattle get processed into beef may change, but overall beef production is mostly set.”

(USDA NASS, Terrain)

He adds: “ Consumer beef demand and spending remain strong and supportive of cattle prices. Presidential and executive branch rhetoric about lowering beef prices has had little to no impact on retail and wholesale beef prices. Tariff reductions on imported lean trimmings from South America are driving volumes, but prices for contracted loads delivering in the first quarter of 2026 are record high, up 20% from a year earlier.”

“I expect the choice cutout to average between $375 per cwt and $385 per cwt and fed cattle prices to average between $234 per cwt and $238 per cwt in Q1.”

— Dave Weaber

Q1 2026 Price Outlook

“I expect available fed cattle supplies during the first quarter of 2026 to be 6% to 7% smaller than the year prior,” Weaber says. “Even with a 2% shift in leverage (fed cattle price to comprehensive cutout) to the packers’ favor, I expect the Choice cutout to average between $375 per cwt and $385 per cwt and fed cattle prices to average between $234 per cwt and $238 per cwt in Q1.”

By early December, light feeder cattle and calf auction prices have recovered much of the losses incurred since late October and appear poised to start 2026 at record levels.

“Changes to the U.S.-Mexico border status remain the greatest known risk for cattle prices,” Weaber stresses.

Further rallies in deferred live cattle futures will drive the balance of the recovery in prices for heavy feeder cattle that make up the CME feeder cattle price index. He explains demand for light cattle to be turned out on wheat pasture and California coastal range has been a key driver for the rally in light cattle.

Biggest Risk Is South of the Border

Changes to the U.S.-Mexico border status remain the greatest known risk for cattle prices.

“The Mexican government has implemented broad cattle movement and import restrictions within the country as well as greater fly control measures in partnership with the USDA,” Weaber says. “Meanwhile, U.S. and Mexican officials have begun inspections of only one border crossing into New Mexico. Additional cases of New World screwworm have been found in Mexico, which I expect to further delay the reopening.”

Active risk management to preserve operation equity should remain a priority.

“If the border were to reopen, cash feeder cattle and calf prices and feeder cattle and live cattle futures would be the first to move down,” Weaber explains. “The magnitude of the impact will depend on the rate-limiting and cost impacts of the protocols that are implemented and the number of backlogged cattle south of the border.”

One Lesson From Plant Closures

“If we’ve learned anything from the market reactions to the plant announcements, it’s that price volatility should be a focus for producers in all segments of the cattle industry,” Weaber says. “Active risk management to preserve operation equity should remain a priority.”

Your Next Reads:
Navigate Market Volatility with Risk Management Strategies

Beef’s Future: Consumer Demand, Risk Management and the Path to Continued Profitability

Buffalo Bills Beefing Up: QB Josh Allen's Hearty Gift to His Protectors

Tue, 23 Dec 2025 16:55:30 GMT

This Christmas, Buffalo Bills quarterback Josh Allen delivered a gift that’s sure to keep his offensive line well fueled: a generous supply of protein-packed beef.

While social media feeds overflow with holiday gift boasts, Allen’s substantial and thoughtful present for his protectors stands out.

Josh Allen and Hailee Steinfeld Gifted His Offensive Lineman a 'Quarter of a Cow' for the Holidays https://t.co/gF56mJ2Xyg
— People (@people) December 22, 2025

According to People magazine , Allen and his wife, Hailee Steinfeld, gifted his O-line a quarter of beef. Considering the Bills’ “everybody eats” mantra on offense, it seems like the perfect present as the team prepares for the playoffs.

@alyshamonet_ Alec’s Oline gift this year from our qb1!! Always so thoughtful & we couldn’t be more grateful! 🫶🏽#nfl #holidays #lovelanguage #healthandwellness #bills ♬ original sound - Alysha Monet S. Anderson

Alysha Monet, wife of Bills offensive tackle Alec Anderson, shared a TikTok video discussing the gift, captioned: “Alec’s Oline gift this year from our QB1!! Always so thoughtful & we couldn’t be more grateful!”

In the video, Monet picks up each item in the bag to show her followers the different cuts of meat Allen gifted them.

Showing four shopping bags, Anderson helps her narrate. “I feel like this is something we’ve always wanted to get for ourselves,” she says. “We actually had to go and buy a deep freezer from the store right now just to put all this meat in, but we’re so grateful to Hailee and Josh. They are the sweetest people ever and this is such a good, functional gift.”

Quarterbacks giving gifts to the players who protect them most is nothing new. In addition to the quarter of beef, Allen and Steinfeld gave each lineman a Schwank Infrared Grill.

Reports reveal Allen and other quarterbacks spare no expense for their linemen this time of year. Previous presents from Allen in the past include custom Bills scooters, Callaway golf clubs, along with private golf lessons and a Traeger smoker grill.

What Does Tyson's Announcement Mean to Beef Producers?

Mon, 24 Nov 2025 23:32:27 GMT

Chaos in the cattle market continues as Tyson Foods announced on Friday its plan to end operations at its Lexington, Neb., beef facility and convert its Amarillo, Texas, beef facility to a single, full-capacity shift. The cattle complex was limit down Monday reacting to the announcement.

The Lexington plant employs nearly 3,200 people and can harvest 4,500 cattle a day, but has been running 3,600 to 3,700 according to John Nalivka of Sterling Marketing. It is one of 11 beef facilities in the company and one of the largest. The transition in Amarillo is expected to reduce daily harvest numbers from 5,500 to 2,700 to 2,800 and impact 1,700 workers. Tyson says the changes will go into effect on Jan. 20, 2026.

Jeff Stolle, Nebraska Cattlemen’s Association director of marketing, predicts the Lexington plant closure will reduce Nebraska cattle harvest capacity by 15%.

“The Tyson plant in Lexington has been a very valuable and consistent piece of our packer processor infrastructure in the state for up against 35 years now, and to lose this amount of harvest capacity on a daily basis is definitely going to be a challenge,” Stolle says.

The announcement is a shock as Stolle says there are significant feedyard expansion projects in the works, and he hopes there’s a future opportunity to bring the Lexington facility online with different ownership.

“Given the feeding infrastructure that is located near the Lexington plant, and the availability of high-quality feeder cattle and feedstuffs, we obviously hope there is some sort of path toward the plant continuing to operate as a harvest facility,” Stolle summarizes.

Don Close, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, explains the announcement comes following a rough year for the meatpacking industry and admits a plant closing has been a possibility for the last 18 months.

“Fed beef packers have been losing an average of $200 per head,” he says. “Those margins have certainly improved over the last two or three weeks, but it has been a tough year, and I don’t know that we’re near the end of this yet.”

Tyson’s announcement says it is shifting production to other plants to increase efficiency. But why close Lexington?

Elliott Dennis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln livestock and meat economist, predicts Tyson targeted its least efficient plant for closure to maximize profitability across its operations, highlighting the importance of operational efficiency in the beef industry.

Other analysts speculate competition from the new Sustainable Beef Plant in North Platte might have played a role.

According to Trey Wasserburger, Sustainable Beef is currently harvesting 1,100 head per day but plans to ramp up to 1,500 by Jan. 1.

Overcapacity Issue

Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University, says the Tyson announcement reduces capacity in the industry but does not solve the problem of overcapacity.

“This will reduce industry slaughter capacity by roughly 7,000 to 8,000 head per day,” he explains. “The exact impact will depend on forthcoming details, especially how Tyson will manage a one-shift plant. Depending on the details, the reduction represents roughly 7.5 to 9% of total industry slaughter capacity.”

Peel says Monday to Friday daily fed slaughter thus far in 2025 has averaged 90,529 head per day, down 3.6% from the recent peak (93,931 head per day) in 2022. However, Saturday slaughter has averaged 4,878 head this year, just 13.1% of the 37,137 head per day average in 2022.

For the first 45 weeks of the year, total weekly fed slaughter has averaged 457,524 head compared to 506,793 head per week in 2022, a decrease of 9.7%. The Tyson planned reduction in packing capacity might be nearly (but not quite) enough to balance the decrease in cattle slaughter since the peak in 2022. However, fed slaughter is expected to continue decreasing in 2026 and 2027.

“Excess packing capacity will continue to be an issue for beef packers for the foreseeable future,” Peel summarizes.

Short- and Long-Term Impacts of Lexington Plant Closure

Dennis says the Lexington plant closure will have immediate short-term effects on cattle prices. Drawing parallels to the 2019 Holcomb, Kan., plant fire, he predicts prices potentially falling and taking months to recover.

“Back in 2019, it took us about five to six weeks to find a bottom on the live cattle market,” Dennis says. “From the time we had that announcement of the fire, we ended up going about 12% down from where we were at pre-fire, and it took us almost three, three and a half months to get back to pre-fire prices.”

Dennis says the finished cattle will redistribute to other regional plants and the impact will be more about change in value proposition and logistics for producers than the ability to find a buyer.

Hyrum Egbert, meatpacking industry analyst, explains, “Tyson just changed the math on U.S. beef.”

He predicts the short-term impact will be:

Live cattle and feeders. Nearby futures and regional cash should soften, especially around Lexington/Amarillo as cattle lose a local bidder and get pushed farther to other plants. Expect weaker basis in those draw areas.
Beef cutout/wholesale. He says this is a rationing signal to beef buyers. Even if some volume is picked up elsewhere, the headline is tighter kill space which will lead to bullish cutout as buyers front-load coverage.
Packer margins. Less capacity chasing the same tight cattle supply will equate to better gross margins for packers.
Logistics and spreads Longer hauls for cattle will lead to higher freight, wider regional price dispersion and more noise in cash versus formula debates.

Long-term Egbert summarizes: “This isn’t a Saturday kill adjustment; it’s a permanent trim in hooks. Capacity is being pulled closer to the ‘new normal’ cattle supply, which reduces the odds of prolonged negative packer margins in the next phase of the cycle.”

Likewise, Dennis predicts long-term the closure will reduce cattle prices due to lower processing capacity and less competition. Yet despite disruptions, he says the fundamental demand for beef is historically high, driven by consumer preference and quality improvements, which should help support cattle prices in the long run.

“With tighter U.S. kill space on top of a small herd, imports — especially lean for grind — matter even more,” Egbert adds. “Tariffs, quotas and border policy will have an even stronger influence on spreads and retail prices. This is not likely going to be the last of plant closures. Regional plants are still extremely vulnerable and susceptible to closure.”

What’s Next for Producers and Packers

“I don’t think producers necessarily need to do anything different,” Peel says. “I still think there’s excess capacity in the industry, even with this downsizing, so there will be plenty of demand. I don’t think it changes anything. It doesn’t change the supply fundamentals at all.”

Close agrees with Egberts prediction that this might not be the last plant closure. He says Tyson’s announcement clears the path for other packers to follow suit.

“It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that we see another large plant or some of the smaller regional plants closed before we reach bottom in this cattle supply,” Close says.

Peel says with Tyson’s decision to reduce a shift and not close Amarillo is a positive.

“By only making a one shift adjustment in Amarillo, that tells me that decision was very much just directly a function of availability of cattle, but it also means they have the ability to go right back up to two shifts when the time gets right, as far as cattle availability,” Peel explains. “They just spent a lot of money in Amarillo remodeling and refurbishing that plant, so I don’t think they’re going to walk away from it completely, unless things continue to deteriorate for them in terms of their beef business.”

Dennis reminds producers the importance of managing price risk using available tools (like futures and options) because market volatility is unpredictable. He stresses risk management should be proactive, not reactive.

Close was a guest on AgriTalk Monday discussing the impact of the Tyson announcement as well as other beef industry economic factors today.

Your Next Read: CattleFax Predicts Profitability Despite Increased Uncertainty

Tyson Foods to Close Lexington, Neb., Beef Plant

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 21:43:35 GMT

Tyson Foods today announced network changes designed to right-size its beef business and position it for long-term success. The company will end operations at its Lexington, Neb., beef facility and convert its Amarillo, Texas, beef facility to a single, full-capacity shift. To meet customer demand, production will be increased at other company beef facilities, optimizing volumes across its network.

The Lexington plant, which operated for 35 years, employs nearly 3,200 people and can slaughter almost 5,000 cattle a day, according to industry estimates. It is one of 11 beef segment facilities in the company and one of the largest. Another 1,700 workers will be impacted in Amarillo.

Tyson Beef Division Faces Losses
In the latest U.S. Security and Exchange Commission report Tyson Foods reported operating loss for the beef division of $1.135 billion for the fiscal year ending September 27, 2025 with adjusted operating losses of $426 million also released by the company. Tyson reported its cattle costs were up $1.575 billion versus a year ago.

For 2026, Tyson projects additional losses in its beef division. In a Nov. 10 news release the company stated that USDA projects domestic beef production will decrease approximately 2% in fiscal 2026 as compared to fiscal 2025. Therefore anticipate adjusted operating loss is estimated between $(600) million to $(400) million in fiscal 2026.

Beef Packing Industry Faces Negative Margins
“As I have commented several times this year, a packer or packers would eventually reduce capacity,” says John Nalivka of Sterling Marketing. “Capacity is critical to the success of any business with the natural economic incentive to increase capacity to gain economies of scale and reduce per unit costs. Sharply reduced cattle numbers became the downside of economies of scale for packers in the face of significant herd liquidation that took the cattle inventory to its lowest numbers since 1951.

Nalivka says the packing industry has been reducing absolute capacity since 2000.

“Fed plants have still been operating at an average of 78% utilization this year compared to the low-to-mid 90% range from 1994-2008,” he adds.

Industry Faces Historically Tight Cattle Supplies
Record fed and feeder cattle prices during 2025 have been a result of a 70 year low in the cattle herd tied to consecutive years of drought in major cattle producing regions of the United States. The supply was recently constricted even further by the closure of the Southern border to Mexican feeder cattle to prevent New World Screwworm (NWS) from entering the U.S. Plus, the 50% increase in tariffs on Brazilian beef in mid-August nearly shut off imports of lean trimmings and grind which are blended into ground beef.

The rebuilding of the U.S. cow herd has also been slower than expected due to a number of factors including the older age of producers, higher interest costs and the desire of cattle producers to pay down debt. That has all attributed to less heifer retention.

Negative Reaction
In a news release from the company, Tyson Foods said it recognizes the impact these decisions have on team members and the communities where we operate. The company said it is committed to supporting its team members through this transition, including helping them apply for open positions at other facilities and providing relocation benefits.

Nebraska Senator Deb Fischer (R), who also serves on the Senate Agriculture Committee, released a statement following the announcement.

“I am extremely disappointed by this news from Tyson today. As the single largest employer in Lexington, Tyson’s announcement will have a devastating impact on a truly wonderful community, the region, and our state. Nebraskans are nothing if not resilient, and Lexington has a robust workforce. I hope their skill and experience will be sought after by other employers.

Senator Deb Fischer (R-NE)

With these changes, Tyson Foods says it is ensuring it will continue to deliver high-quality, affordable and nutritious protein for generations to come.

The plant is scheduled to close on Jan. 20.

What Does Talk of $10 Ground Beef Mean to Producers?

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 20:00:36 GMT

While the core fundamentals of the beef industry remain unchanged, the overall environment has become much more volatile and uncertain in recent weeks.

Omaha Steaks CEO Nate Rempe, in a recent interview on Fox Business’ Mornings with Maria , predicts ground beef prices will reach $10 per pound by the third quarter of 2026.

In response to that prediction, ag economist Glynn Tonsor from Kansas State University reports, according to September Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the national average price for ground beef was $6.32 per pound. He explains while niche markets such as Omaha Steaks could see some products priced at $10, the national average is unlikely to reach that level within the next three years.

Tonsor emphasizes Omaha Steaks serves a distinct customer base, and their prices should not be generalized to represent all U.S. ground beef prices.

Lance Zimmerman, senior animal protein analyst with Rabo AgriFinance, adds: “It’s possible, but that’d be pretty wild. Is it probable? I would say no, based on history.”

He explains his stance also referring to the BLS historic data, although prices spiked radically during the pandemic posting the highest year-over-year increases on record, that event only resulted in a 34% jump, far short of the 54% increase needed to see $10 ground beef by the third quarter of 2026.

What Does All This Beef Chatter Cause?

The beef industry has found itself in national headlines since Sept. 15. The industry has been experiencing chaos in the markets since President Donald Trump made statements regarding the need to lower beef prices as well as his request for the Department of Justice to investigate meatpackers for driving up the price of beef.

“The base fundamentals of the industry have not changed in the last four weeks,” Tonsor says. “The volatility, the noise in the business environment, has definitely elevated.”

Read more about the industry chaos today:
Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Zimmerman explains while political sound bites and promises to lower food prices draw media attention, they do not directly affect the day-to-day decisions by producers who remain focused on long-term business fundamentals.

“At the end of the day, the average cow-calf producer, stocker operator and feedlot operator, have a business to run, and all of this noise doesn’t change much surrounding their day-to-day business,” Zimmerman summarizes. “The challenge is the president is making this a very regular soundbite, as is the rest of his administration. And, cyclically, there is no quick fix.”

Zimmerman shares his frustration regarding the broader impact of political statements, especially presidential promises to bring down food prices. He explains that, historically, the only way to significantly reduce food costs is to enter a recession. The catch, he argues, is that neither administration nor producers desire such an outcome. This underscores the conflict between policy rhetoric and on-the-ground market drivers.

Tonsor adds media attention and dramatic statements, such as $10 ground beef, often do not accurately represent broad market reality.

“I’m trying to use this as an excuse to educate on why prices are higher; [it’s] not just because cow numbers are down,” Tonsor explains. “When we just jump to the number of cows, we don’t give credit to the demand story that the public wants beef.”

Read more about beef demand:
Consumers Confirm Protein is In: Meat Continues to Have Its Moment on the Plate
How Many Minutes Does a Consumer Have to Work to Buy A Pound of Ground Beef?

One question on the mind of producers and industry stakeholders is if the political and media attention will heighten consumer awareness to beef prices and cause a change in buying behavior.

Tonsor says, so far, there is little impact from these headlines on consumer demand.

“It’s too early to tell if there’s been a consumer demand impact from all the chatter,” he says. “My best guess is little-to-no direct impact.”

Both analysts agree beef prices are fueled by demand. Tonsor notes consumers are willing to pay the retail price of beef today because of their continued demand for taste and protein. He points out if public demand for beef stays strong, prices will remain robust.

“The public still thinks taste is the most important thing when they make a decision,” he summarizes.

Slowing Down Rebuilding

“This uncertainty has wrecked the market potential in Chicago in the short run,” Zimmerman explains. “But the timing of it also couldn’t be worse for the cow-calf producer who’s making those fall retention decisions right now.”

Both analysts agree the heightened uncertainty is making producers more hesitant to invest or expand their herds, which will lead to slower industry investment and herd growth.

Read more about herd rebuilding:
Rebuilding the U.S. Cow Herd: A Calculated Climb

“I think we’re going to slow investment compared to even a month ago, just because those that are anxious or don’t like uncertainty are a little more cautious today than they were a month ago,” Tonsor explains. “Those that are extra uncomfortable with elevated uncertainty, like not knowing what the trade environment might be, it’s going to give them pause. So, they will be less likely to hold back a heifer and expand. They’ll be less likely to modernize the feedyard. They’ll be less likely to do whatever that capital investment was.”

Will Tarriff Reduction Impact Prices?

Late last week, Trump signed an executive order that modifies the scope of the reciprocal tariffs he first announced on April 2. The executive order now exempts several agricultural products from tariffs, including beef.

Zimmerman explains Brazil’s beef processors and beef exporters would have gained the most if the country’s additional tariffs were removed by the U.S. The previous rate was an additional 50% tariff on top of the 26.4% tariff that exists on all imports from countries without a free-trade agreement on beef after the first 65,005 MT each calendar year. However, the Brazil tariffs are structured under two separate practices. Ten percent are reciprocal tariffs, and the additional 40% that came in August are through another process.

“The latest removal of reciprocal tariffs on beef effectively changes Brazil’s country-specific import tax from 50% to 40%,” he explains. “This is not going to significantly change the competitive landscape for global exporters shipping into the U.S. market. It is still incredibly tough for Brazil to compete with Australia, New Zealand and other major lean beef importers in the U.S. market.”

Tonsor adds reducing tariffs could marginally lower beef prices for consumers, but the effect would not be dramatic. He points out the U.S. produces the majority of its own beef (more than 80%), so changes in import tariffs have a limited impact on domestic prices.

He says recent record import months only moved the import share from around 15% to slightly more than 20%. Tonsor expects the net effect of the tariff reduction on beef prices to be fairly small, potentially less than a 5%-to-10% change, and that overall, strong domestic demand will continue to be the main driver of prices.

Challenge to Producers

Tonsor says his advice to producers is to steady the ship.

He encourages a steady approach, suggesting those comfortable with uncertainty should move forward as planned, while others might pause on major decisions. Ultimately, he expects less herd expansion and more caution among producers, even as demand fundamentals continue to provide underlying strength for the industry.

Tonsor says while general industry investment and expansion might slow, producers who move forward despite the uncertainty could be rewarded, especially if fewer others do the same. His overall message is for producers to carefully weigh their risk tolerance and business needs before making significant changes and not to let the current noise distract from their long-term goals.

Despite recent market corrections, Zimmerman says strong demand and cyclical tightness mean profitability remains high for most producers. He shares these six strategies for producers to consider looking forward:

Consider Strategic Heifer Retention. He advises producers to begin or continue retaining heifers, even if only enough to replace natural attrition in the cow herd, as a step toward gradual herd rebuilding in tight supply conditions.
Use Price Protection Tools. He emphasizes the importance of locking in profit floors using risk management tools such as Livestock Risk Protection (LRP) insurance , futures or options contracts, encouraging producers not to wait for the highest prices but to protect profitability when opportunities arise.
Maintain Long-Term Perspective. Despite recent market corrections, he urges producers to keep a long-term view; demand is strong, and rebuilding will be slow, so planning for sustained higher prices is key.
Stay Vigilant and Informed. He recommends producers remain watchful for profit opportunities in the market, be proactive in their strategic decisions and stay informed about both market trends and policy changes.
Be Cautious, Not Reactionary. He suggests not overreacting to political headlines or media narratives, emphasizing that day-to-day operational fundamentals should guide decisions rather than short-term noise.
Prepare for Continued Volatility. He encourages resilience and adaptation strategies as the industry faces persistent uncertainty from trade policy and disease threats such as New World screwworm .

Your Next Read: Did the Administration’s Plan to Lower Beef Prices Wreck the Bull Run in the Cattle Market?

Did the Administration's Plan to Lower Beef Prices Wreck the Bull Run in the Cattle Market?

Fri, 14 Nov 2025 20:54:30 GMT

2025 has been a historic year in the cattle market. The tightest cattle numbers in 70 years laid the ground work for cash and futures prices to push to record and all-time highs.

From All-Time High to Crash
The peak in the cattle futures market was hit on Oct. 16. However, by Nov. 6, live cattle saw a $30 correction from the highs and feeder cattle futures set back nearly $70. The cattle market chaos wasn’t tied to fundamentals but liquidation by speculative traders on fear of policy changes by the administration as President Donald Trump announced a plan to lower beef prices for consumers.

Fundamentals Have Not Changed
Don Close, senior animal protein analyst with Terrain, says the market fundamentals that started the bull run in the cattle market are still intact.

“Certainly with domestic supplies, they have not changed in any fashion when you’re looking at the tightest cattle numbers that we’ve had in 70 years,” he says.

With high retail beef prices, there is no evidence of consumer sticker shock or trading down to other lower-priced proteins. Close says the beef industry has not seen any erosion in demand.

So, what changed? Analysts say it was the shift in market psychology in reaction to President Trump’s announced plan to lower beef prices for consumers on Oct. 16.

While the President’s announcement lacked details, the goal seemed to be to mimic the success the administration had in bringing down egg prices. With the prospect of government intervention, the live and feeder cattle futures touched limit down the following day as speculative traders who had been long in the cattle futures market for many weeks took profits and liquidated.

Jeff Hoogendoorn, with Professional Ag Marketing, says the managed money fund traders did not want to bet against the government.

“If you’re a hedge fund manager, you look at this cattle thing and say ‘Yeah it’s gone up an awful lot. We’ve made a lot of money,’” he says. “‘Now the administration’s going to be fighting against me. I think I’ll go find something else to do’, and you move your money elsewhere.”

Trump Administration Quadruples Argentina Beef Imports
Just days later, President Trump made an announcement to quadruple the Tariff Rate Quota for Argentina beef imports . That triggered additional selling in cattle futures despite the insignificant impact it has on U.S. beef supplies.

Patrick Linnell, director of market research with CattleFax, explains: “That change from 20,000 metric tons to 80,000 metric tons would represent around 132 million lb. And really, that comes down to about three-tenths of a lb. per capita to net beef supplies.”

(Allendale )

The move drew immediate fire from the nation’s cattle groups, including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA).

Colin Woodall, NCBA chief executive officer, explains that with the current trade imbalance with Argentina, the administration needed to push for more market access in Argentina instead of importing more of its beef.

“Over the past five years, Argentina has sent over $800 million worth of their beef into the U.S. market, and they’ve only accepted $7 million of our beef into their market,” Woodall explains.

Justin Tupper president of the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, adds that increasing beef imports was a slap in the face to U.S. cattle producers, and they opposed the move because countries like Brazil and Argentina have lower food safety standards and other practices that put the U.S. at a disadvantage.

“I think we want to be able to play on the same level playing field,” he says. “And I don’t think that happens with Argentina and Brazil. And again, I really don’t think it’s going to lower prices.”

Tupper adds neither producers or consumers stood to gain from increasing beef imports.

For more about Tupper’s thoughts:
South Dakota Producer Speaks Out About Beef Imports and “Product of USA” Push

Cattle Groups Tell Trump to Stay out of the Cattle Business
As a result, cattle groups and outraged producers warned the president to stay out of their business.

Woodall says: “We have worked really hard through the free market to be able to achieve the prices that we’re seeing. We don’t want government intervention coming in and messing with that and taking away these great opportunities we’re seeing.”

Tupper agrees: “It’s an industry that wants to work on competition and merit based, and we can do that if we make sure we don’t get to many outside interests — the government being one.”

Government Policy Pushes Prices Higher
However, two government policies pushed live cattle from $210 to $250 from July through September.

1. Increased Tariffs on Brazil. The U.S. increased tariffs on Brazil an additional 50% in mid-August, which nearly halted imports of beef trim coming into the U.S. Linnell explains, prior to that time, Brazil was a top importer of trim used to blend in ground beef.

“As of July on a 12-month basis, we’d imported just shy of 1.1 billion lb. from Brazil,” he says.

2. Closing the Mexican Border. The biggest policy change that tightened cattle numbers came from the U.S. closing the border to feeder cattle imports . Linnell says prior to closure, the U.S. imported more than 1.2 million feeder cattle annually. So, dropping the ban would have an immediate supply shock.

“We won’t see all 1.2 million head coming across at once but approaching that 25,000 head a week isn’t out of the question,” he adds.

(CattleFax )

While USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins has confirmed there’s no date for resuming trade, speculative traders are headline driven. Every time USDA hosts a news conference on New World screwworm, it tanks the market — especially feeder cattle futures.

The market has also been sensitive to rumors of the border reopening, says Scott Varilek, of Kooima Kooima Varilek.

“There’s this large supply in Mexico. That would be the one thing that would probably affect this market the most,” Varilek says. “So, we’re penciling that in.”

Trump Calls for DOJ Investigation
The latest attempt to curb beef inflation came Nov. 7, as the president announced on his Truth Social site the Department of Justice was launching an investigation of the nation’s meat packers .

The president’s announcement says he vows to “ensure these corporations aren’t criminally profiting at the expense of the American people.”

Packer concentration has long been a hot button issue for cattle producers and is at the root of R-CALF’s six-year lawsuit, explains Bill Bullard, chief executive officer.

“We have alleged that the meat packers had unlawfully colluded in order to artificially depress cattle prices, while at the same time raising or inflating the price of beef to the consumers,” he says.

Currently 85% of the U.S. beef packing industry is owned by four entities, and Bullard says this monopoly violates antitrust law.

“Both the producers on the beginning of the supply chain and consumers at the end of the supply chain were exploited as a result of this monopolistic marketing structure,” he says.

Read more about Bullard’s thoughts regarding the DOJ investigation: Is the Beef Market Broken? One Cattleman Says Yes

But according to Derrell Peel, livestock marketing specialist at Oklahoma State University, past DOJ price fixing probes and research have disputed that.

“While there’s a very small level of negative price impact due to the concentration of market power, if you will, it’s far outweighed by the by the benefits in terms of cost efficiencies that the large firms bring to the industry,” he summarizes.

Read more about Peel’s comments regarding the industry chaos today: Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Cattle Producers Say Trump’s Beef Plan Topped the Market
Some of the other aspects of the President’s plan to rebuild the cattle herd were met with favor, such as opening more public land to grazing. However, in the end, the president’s beef plan has wreaked havoc in the cattle market and outraged producers, according to Varilek.

“They’re mad,” he summarizes. “That’s all it took was just kind of the government shoving in there and wrecking [the] market. I think the biggest thing was that there were some claims that the tariffs were the reason that we got this high, and that is not at all the case.”

Linnell agrees the negative headlines have hurt the market, adding: “There is no doubt that these policy decisions are making a big impact on the marketplace. They also just increase a lot of uncertainty and volatility in the industry.”

Cattle Market Chaos Further Slows Herd Rebuilding
The loss in value of females just over the last three weeks has also hurt producer confidence, and according to Close, that could further slow heifer retention and herd rebuilding efforts .

“We’re seeing one more round where we’re going to kick that can down the road instead of actually retaining the females needed,” he explains.

Market analysts, including Peel, say the reality is lowering beef prices is like turning the Titanic — and the president’s plan is unlikely to affect much change.

“It took several years of of drought and other impacts to get us here,” Peel explains. “It’s going to take several years for us to grow our way out of this situation.”

Close says once the market refocuses on fundamentals, cattle could retest the highs.

“As crazy as it sounds today, I’m not yet convinced we’ve seen the high of the cash market, and I would readily argue that we get into next spring, next summer to see a cash market back in that $240 to $245 plus level. I think is entirely possible,” he predicts.

Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Wed, 12 Nov 2025 20:04:16 GMT

The current state of the cattle market and beef industry has been described as chaotic. “There’s chaos in cattle,” as Chip Flory, AgriTalk host, put it.

The industry turmoil follows recent statements made by President Donald Trump regarding the need to lower beef prices as well as his request for the Department of Justice to immediately begin an investigation into meatpackers for driving up the price of beef.

Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University, affirms these are unique times, emphasizing while political factors have always indirectly influenced agriculture, it’s unprecedented for the cattle and beef markets to be at the center of direct political debate.

On a recent AgriTalk segment, Peel points out the inherent biological and production constraints of the cattle industry — particularly the fixed timeline to raise cattle — make quick fixes impossible. Both Flory and Peel stress that no political policy can shorten the cattle production process; any effective supply response requires patience and long-term adjustment.

Packers Under Fire

The concept of industry consolidation and foreign packer ownership has long drawn scrutiny with frequent government investigations. Peel says highly concentrated industries such as beef packing have been targets for skepticism and regulatory attention for over a century, to the point suspicion of packers is almost “a cultural thing” within segments of the industry.

He characterizes the latest call as another attempt to target convenient scapegoats rather than addressing deeper systemic realities of supply and demand.

“The reason we have the industry structure we do is because the economies of size and cost efficiencies are such a powerful economic force,” Peels explains.

He confirms researchers have long studied market power, and while concentration does have a small negative price impact for producers, the efficiency and cost-savings from large-scale firms more than compensate. These benefits, he says, keep cattle prices higher for producers and beef prices lower for consumers than they would be with a less efficient structure.

Dissecting the economics of margin markets Peels explains why price changes in different parts of the beef supply chain — cow-calf, feeders, packers and retailers — don’t move in lockstep. He uses a “bungee cord” analogy to illustrate the complex, dynamic and time-lagged interactions linking cattle prices at the farm with retail beef prices.

“All cattle prices and beef prices are ultimately connected, but they’re not connected with a stick or a chain,” Peel summarizes.” They’re connected with a bungee cord. There’s just an enormous amount of dynamics in this thing.”

Regarding the foreign ownership debate, Peel says there is no evidence foreign ownership alters packer behavior within the U.S. marketplace. He emphasizes foreign firms have made large investments in U.S. facilities and continue to operate them by the same market logic that would govern domestic ownership.

He also points out it is unclear who else would be in a position to make such significant investments if these foreign companies were not involved. This pragmatic view suggests the ownership issue might be less important than is commonly believed, at least concerning everyday operations and market outcomes.

A Lot Hinges on Rebuilding the Cow Herd

In his latest article, “ All Bets are Off ,” Peel says: “The latest edition in the torrent of recent political attentions directed at the cattle and beef industry includes allegations of market manipulation against the beef packing industry. Beef packers are the one segment that has been most negatively impacted in the current market, incurring huge losses due to poor margins and limited cattle supplies.”

(Meat Institute)

Peel reports packers have been losing enormous amounts of money for about the past 18 to 24 months. According to the Meat Institute, packer margins slipped into the red in September 2024. Through the week ending Oct. 4, 2025, packer margins were a negative $126.50 per head, up slightly from a year earlier at a negative $125.65 per head, according to Sterling Profit Tracker. The outlook for the year is a negative $165.96 per head packer margin.

“There’s just simply not enough cattle for them to operate at cost efficient capacities,” Peel explains.

This negative trend was anticipated — the reduced supply of cattle has made it difficult for packing plants to function at cost-efficient capacities, leading to the accumulation of operating losses. Peel points out the combination of low unit margins and insufficient cattle supplies challenges the economic viability of packers, further illustrating the complexity of the current environment.

This decline in inventory is not the result of a single factor but is driven by several years of drought and other market pressures. It is clear high beef and cattle prices are a result of these tight supplies and, according to Peel, these high prices are likely to persist for several years. The industry simply cannot turn around production levels quickly, and it will take time — a matter of years, not months — for conditions to normalize.

“Using logic that only works in the office of a politician, packers are supposedly wielding unacceptable market power while paying record high cattle prices and artificially raising beef prices … but not enough to avoid losing a couple hundred dollars on every animal they process — certainly many millions of dollars,” Peel says. “If beef packers had any significant ability to exercise market power, I am certain that we would not have record high cattle prices and packers would not be losing money.”

Peel suggests the federal government attacks on beef packers are aided and supported by a vocal minority of the cattle industry and a few sympathetic politicians who view packers as a perennial villain and always worthy of attack anytime the opportunity is presented.

“The timing of such attacks this time is particularly puzzling as dismantling the packing industry would certainly jeopardize current record high cattle prices and the best economic returns most producers have ever enjoyed,” Peels says. “I guess some cowboys just can’t stand prosperity.”

R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard says the cattle market is fundamentally broken citing years of an inverse relationship between falling cattle prices and increasing retail beef prices when the only ingredient in beef is cattle. Read more about his perspective.

Patience not Politics

Beef and cattle prices, Peel notes, are historically high, a result of industry-wide low cattle inventory. Rebuilding the nation’s cow herd will be a long, slow process, keeping prices elevated for an extended period. And Peel says there is no definitive evidence producers are saving heifers to start the rebuilding process.

“2025 may prove to be technically the cyclical low, but 2026 is going to be barely bigger, if it is, and no growth in 2026 and probably none in 2027 ... it’s 2028 into 2029 before that turns into increased beef production,” Peel predicts.

He summarizes neither regulatory nor political action will can speed up the rebuilding process. It will take years of concerted effort, market healing and stability before the industry can expect a meaningful rebound in herd numbers and production — a reality that requires patience across the industry.

“There is absolutely nothing anybody can do to make beef prices go down, or cattle prices, other than maybe tear up the industry completely,” Peels says. “And if we tear up the industry, it’ll make cattle prices go down, but it won’t make beef prices go down. It’ll make beef prices go even higher for consumers and the only way to fix this is to give the industry time to rebuild, and that’s going to take two to four years if we ever get started.”

He says a majority of cattle producers understand the beef industry is extremely complex and all segments are critical and essential.

“Though the outcome of current political actions is uncertain, the potential for long-term harm to the industry is substantial,” Peel says. “Anytime politics trumps economics, the strong supply and demand fundamentals that have determined the outlook for the industry to this point become irrelevant. Expectations for prices and production going forward are now completely clouded…therefore… all bets are off.”

Your Next Read: You Be The Judge: The Big Bad Beef Packers Are On Trial

Trump Asks DOJ to Investigate Meatpackers over Beef Prices

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 21:41:18 GMT

President Donald Trump says he wants the Department of Justice to immediately begin an investigation into meatpackers for driving up the price of beef. The directive marks a turnabout from previous statements about U.S. ranchers making good profits and their impact on the price of beef at the grocery store, which the administration has said remains too high.

In a statement on his Truth Social site, the president calls for “An investigation into the meat packing companies who are driving up the price of beef through illicit collusion, price fixing and price manipulation.”

He says American ranchers are being blamed for what is being done by majority-foreign-owned meatpackers.

“[The packers] artificially inflate prices and jeopardize the security of our nation’s food supply,” writes Trump. “Action must be taken immediately to protect consumers, combat illegal monopolies and ensure these corporations are not criminally profiting at the expense of the American people.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi responding to the post saying the DOJ investigation is already underway.

”My Antitrust Division, led by [Abigail Slater, Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice Antitrust Division], has taken the lead in partnership with our friend [Ag Secretary Brooke Rollins] at USDA,” she says.

Our investigation is underway! My Antitrust Division led by @AAGSlater has taken the lead in partnership with our friend @SecRollins at @USDA. https://t.co/KP0zlO9RQg
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) November 7, 2025

Rollins, also responded to Trump’s social post, thanking him for standing up for America’s farmers, ranchers and consumers.

“For far too long, hardworking ranching families have been squeezed by massive foreign-owned meatpacking corporations manipulating prices and driving family operations out of business,” Rollins wrote. “These global monopolies profit while everyday Americans pay more at the grocery store and rural communities struggle to survive.”

Rollins, in her post, calls for transparency and accountability that lead to a fair market for beef producers.

THANK YOU, @POTUS for standing up for America’s farmers, ranchers, and consumers! 🇺🇸

For far too long, hardworking ranching families have been squeezed by massive foreign-owned meatpacking corporations manipulating prices and driving family operations out of business. These… https://t.co/qiftHNtA1q
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) November 7, 2025

“Thank you, President Trump, for fighting for the heartland, for our farmers and ranchers, and for standing up to the corrupt forces that threaten our food security and American independence,” Rollins said.

According to Reuters , “Ranchers have long complained about consolidation in the packing industry, where Tyson, Cargill, JBS and National Beef Packing Co. together control around 80% of the market.”

Industry Reaction

The Meat Institute released a statement following President Trump’s comments:

“Despite high consumer prices for beef, beef packers have been losing money because the price of cattle is at record highs,” said Meat Institute President and CEO Julie Anna Potts. “For more than a year, beef packers have been operating at a loss due to a tight cattle supply and strong demand.

“The beef industry is heavily regulated, and market transactions are transparent. The government’s own data from USDA confirms that the beef packing sector is experiencing catastrophic losses and experts predict this will continue into 2026.

“U.S. beef processors welcome a fact-based discussion about beef affordability and how best to meet the needs of American consumers, who are the industry’s most important stakeholders.

“Beef packers rely on cattle producers and cattle producers rely on beef packers. The entire beef value chain is strongest when supply is balanced by demand. Beef packers remain committed to ensuring safe, delicious, and nutrient dense beef remains affordable to American families who rely on its nourishment. We welcome the President and his team to visit our members’ beef facilities, both large and small, to witness firsthand the pride, skill, and dedication they bring to their work every single day.”

For more on beef and cattle market conditions go here.

United States Cattlemen’s Association shared their thoughts on social media , “Yes, let’s keep American ranchers out of the crosshairs. But, USCA will continue to state that beef prices in the grocery store are not too high. Prices are a direct reflection of consumer demand — consumers want US beef.

“Ranchers continue to show resilience and dedication, battling drought, inflation, and unpredictable pressures daily, yet still deliver top-quality, safe beef for families across the country.”

National Farmer’s Union also shared these thoughts : “We agree— American ranchers aren’t to blame for high beef prices.”

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard issued the following statement in response to the announcement.

“We greatly appreciate President Trump’s announcement that he’s directed the Department of Justice to investigate the beef supply chain to determine if there are any violations of our fair competition laws or antitrust laws.

“There has long been a disconnect between cattle prices and beef prices, and we believe this is evidence of market failure. We welcome this investigation to ensure that cattle producers receive competitive prices for their cattle, and that consumers pay prices set by a competitive market rather than a monopolistic one.”

Previous Retail Price Comments

Trump previously posted : “The Cattle ranchers, who I love, don’t understand that the only reason they are doing so well, for the first time in decades, is because I put Tariffs on cattle coming into the United States, including a 50% tariff on Brazil.”

Donald J. Trump Truth Social 10.22.25 12:42 PM EST

The Cattle Ranchers, who I love, don’t understand that the only reason they are doing so well, for the first time in decades, is because I put Tariffs on cattle coming into the United States, including a 50% Tariff on Brazil. If…
— Commentary Donald J. Trump Posts From Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) October 22, 2025

Following the post, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) made a post on Facebook in response and also released a statement on the president’s steps to undercut U.S. cattle producers: “In a misguided effort to lower the price of beef in grocery stores, President Trump said he plans to increase the volume of beef being imported from Argentina . Efforts to manipulate markets only risk damaging the livelihoods of American cattlemen and women, while doing little to impact the price consumers are paying at the grocery store.”

“The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and its members cannot stand behind the President while he undercuts the future of family farmers and ranchers by importing Argentinian beef in an attempt to influence prices,” said NCBA CEO Colin Woodall. “It is imperative that President Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins let the cattle markets work.

“The U.S. already faces a deep trade imbalance with Argentina, one that is made worse by the President’s plan,” he continued. “During the past five years, Argentina has shipped beef valued at more than $800 million to the U.S., while purchasing only $7 million of U.S. beef. Furthermore, Argentina is a nation with a long history of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), and USDA has not completed the necessary steps to ensure Argentina can guarantee the safety of the products being shipped here, further endangering America’s cattle herd.

“If President Trump is truly an ally of America’s cattle producers, we call on him to abandon this effort to manipulate markets and focus instead on the promised New World screwworm facilities in Texas; making additional investments that protect the domestic cattle herd from foreign animal diseases such as FMD; and addressing regulatory burdens, such as delisting of the gray wolf and addressing the scourge of black vultures,” Woodall said, concluding the statement.

Your Next Read: Unpacking the Beef: Report Clarifies Cattle Market Realities, Packer Challenges & Trade Tensions

Unpacking the Beef: Report Clarifies Cattle Market Realities, Packer Challenges & Trade Tensions

Fri, 31 Oct 2025 20:17:59 GMT

Since President Donald Trump’s comments last week, a lot has been discussed on social media and at the coffee shop about increasing beef imports from Argentina, beef retail prices, the cattle market and beef processing concentration.

“It is complicated,” the Meat Institute posted on LinkedIn regarding the current state of the beef industry and the dialog about beef prices. In response, the Meat Institute released a nine-page document — The Reality of Beef and Cattle Markets — addressing import trends, market conditions, industry concentration, ground beef production, policy proposals and international trade challenges.

Key discussion points include:

1. Argentine Beef Imports

The report summarizes increasing beef imports from Argentina is unlikely to significantly lower ground beef prices in the U.S. If Argentina fills the proposed 80,000 metric ton quota, it will only increase its share of U.S. beef imports from 2% to 5%, which is unlikely to significantly impact retail or restaurant beef prices.

Argentina primarily exports grass-fed frozen lean trim for ground beef production, with limited impact on overall U.S. beef imports. In 2024, Argentina was the eighth-largest beef supplier to the U.S., exporting 32,798 metric tons, while the U.S. imported 1.56 million metric tons overall.

2. Beef and Cattle Market Conditions

The report summarizes current market conditions with these six statements:

Cattle producers are enjoying record prices, while beef packers are suffering under negative margins.
The shortage of market-ready cattle continues, adding further pressure to packers’ margins, which first dropped to negative values in September 2024.
Packing plant utilization rates have dipped, and some facilities are scaling back operations, including reduced shifts and shortened workweeks. Uncertain immigration policy moving forward can have an impact here as well.
Trade policy uncertainty from proposed tariffs adds to the cost pressures on the cattle market.
Additionally, foreign animal disease import restrictions — particularly on Mexican feeder cattle — are another contributing factor to increasing costs.
Consumer demand has remained resilient with improved beef quality. However, prospects for elevated cattle prices and the beef those cattle yield remain directly tied to the extent end-user consumer demand can remain robust.

“Cattle prices were at record levels for most of 2023, surpassing the 2014-2015 previous record highs as the cattle herd rebuilt from the previous low points of the cattle cycle,” the report says. “Through 2024, prices continued at new record levels and increased further into 2025, exceeding an average of $242 cwt. in August, the highest nominal price on record.

“Cash prices have declined to $232 cwt. in the first two weeks of October, but futures contracts are at record levels, even after adjusted for inflation. The previous highs in October 2015 would be $222 cwt. in today’s dollars, a full $10 cwt. below the current prices as of Oct. 14.”

The report goes on to say: “This has put U.S. beef packers under financial pressure. Packer margins slipped into the red in September 2024. Through the week ending Oct. 4, 2025, packer margins were a negative $126.50 per head, up slightly from a year earlier at a negative $125.65 per head, according to Sterling Profit Tracker. The outlook for the year is a packer margin of negative $165.96 per head.”

(Meat Institute)

For 2025, cow-calf producer margins are estimated to be up 122.3% from 2024 and 180.67% from 2023 to $900 per head. Feedlot margins are estimated to be up 351% from 2024 to $514.33 per head. But packer margins have declined 120% from already negative margins in 2024 and are estimated to be down 269% from 2023.

“With fewer market-ready cattle available, plant utilization rates have dipped and some facilities are scaling back operations, including reduced shifts and shortened workweeks. Packing plants were operating at 77% capacity for the week of Oct. 4, down from 85% a year ago. Uncertain immigration policy moving forward can have an impact here as well,” the report summarizes.

(Meat Institute)

The share of the retail beef dollar also indicates producers have been faring well. The producers’ share of the retail beef dollar was 55% in August 2025 and has averaged 54% so far in 2025. The packers’ share has dropped from 13% to 5%, reflecting the negative packer margins.

Download the Meat Institute’s full Cattle and Beef Market Update .

3. Concentration in the Beef Packing Sector

“The U.S. meat packing sector is a dynamic, resilient and highly competitive industry with a long history of providing an abundant supply of high quality, safe and affordable products to American consumers and serving as a vital economic engine that supports America’s farmers and ranchers,” the report says.

(Meat Institute)

The top four beef packers in the U.S. account for the purchase and slaughter of about 81% of all fed cattle in the U.S., according to the most recent report from the USDA’s Packers and Stockyards Division. But those fed cattle make up only about 78% of the Federally Inspected cattle slaughtered in the U.S. The other 22% is made up of cows, both dairy and beef and some bulls.

“Much of the rhetoric about beef industry concentration implies that consolidation in the beef packing sector is ongoing and that market power is becoming increasingly concentrated. That is not the case,” the report says. “The four-firm concentration ratio in the beef cattle industry has not changed appreciably over the past 30 years. According to USDA, in 1994, for example, that ratio was 82%, compared with 81% today.”

4. Ground Beef

Ground beef accounts for approximately 50% of U.S. beef consumption. Imported lean trim complements U.S. beef production from cull cows, helping maintain affordability without directly competing with domestic beef.

“Without imported lean trim, more highly marbled quality U.S. beef would be used, and ground beef would be more expensive,” the report explains.

5. Policy Issues

Despite record cattle prices and the smallest cattle herd in 75 years, there are increasing calls for mandatory country-of-origin (COOL) labeling for beef.

“The mandatory COOL experiment was implemented and it failed,” the report says. “From 2002 through Congress repealing the law in 2015, we learned that mandatory COOL adds massive compliance costs — the industry incurred implementation costs of approximately $1.5 billion, plus $200 million in additional annual compliance costs thereafter — yet by USDA’s own analysis, it did not increase consumer demand. Mandatory COOL simply adds cost, not value.”

On Jan. 1, 2026, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service will begin implementing its voluntary COOL rule.

“Let the rule and the free market work: if consumers demand ‘Product of the U.S.’ labels on their meat, then processors can and will provide it,” the report says.

For more info, download the Meat Institute’s mCOOL paper .

The reports also explains proposals like the PRIME Act and interstate shipment of state-inspected meat are seen as threats to food safety and international trade relationships.

“The concept in the PRIME Act is even worse,” the report explains. “Under Rep. Thomas Massie’s legislation, custom exempt meat establishments would be allowed to slaughter animals, process the meat and sell it directly to consumers or to restaurants, hotels or grocery stores within the state, without any inspection. It is a recipe for foodborne illnesses, and consumers in restaurants and hotels would have no idea they would be eating uninspected meat (and grocery store consumers would only know if they look for and can’t find the USDA inspection symbol). Food safety should be the top priority, not something legislated away.”

6. China Beef Exports

The Meat Institute urges action as China blocks more than 415 U.S. beef facilities from exporting.

“In 2024, China was the U.S.’s third largest market, by value, for beef, at over $1.5 billion,” the paper summarizes. “The strong beef exports to China were thanks to President Trump’s leadership in securing the U.S.-China Phase One Agreement during his first term. However, since the beginning of 2025 — and in contravention of the terms of the Phase One Agreement — China has failed to renew the registrations for more than 415 U.S. beef establishments, making them ineligible to export to China. This is a massive market loss for the U.S. that Brazil and other countries have been eager to fill.”

Trump Says His Administration is Working on Lowering Beef Prices

Fri, 17 Oct 2025 13:59:26 GMT

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that his administration was working to lower the price of beef in the country.

“We are working on beef, and I think we have a deal on beef,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

The price of beef is “higher than we want it, and that’s going to be coming down pretty soon too. We did something,” Trump added, without elaborating.

Beef prices have climbed to record highs after cattle ranchers slashed their herds due to a years-long drought in the western U.S. that dried up lands used for grazing and raised feeding costs.

By the beginning of the year, the herd had dwindled to 86.7 million cattle, the smallest number for the time period since 1951, according to U.S. government data.

The Meat Institute, which represents meatpacking companies, said it needed to learn more about Trump’s plans to lower prices.

The administration of former President Joe Biden blamed meatpacking companies for rising food costs.

Last week, processors Tyson Foods TSN.N and Cargill agreed to pay a combined $87.5 million to settle a federal lawsuit brought by consumers who accused the companies of conspiring to inflate beef prices by restricting supply. The companies have denied wrongdoing.

Meatpackers such as Tyson have lost money in their beef businesses as tight cattle supplies force them to pay more to buy animals to slaughter.

Supplies tightened further this year after USDA halted imports of Mexican livestock to keep out a damaging pest spreading in Mexico. Mexican cattle were formerly imported to be fattened in U.S. feedlots and slaughtered in U.S. processing plants.

Tariffs that Trump imposed on Brazilian goods have also slowed U.S. imports of Brazilian beef that was mixed with U.S. supplies to make hamburger meat.

Recently, some U.S. ranchers have begun taking initial steps to start rebuilding the herd . However, it takes about two years before beef output rises after they make the first moves to expand because that is how long it takes to raise full-grown cattle, ranchers said.

Last month, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the USDA in mid-October would provide details on a plan to revitalize the decimated herd that would not include payments to producers.

(Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt and Costas Pitas and Tom Polansek; Writing by Ismail Shakil, Editing by Franklin Paul and Diane Craft)

Your Next Read: Cattle Crash on Trump’s Plan to Lower Beef Prices: Row Crops Rally

How Many Minutes Does a Consumer Have to Work to Buy A Pound of Ground Beef?

Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:02:49 GMT

It’s a balancing act — consumer demand, economic challenges and beef pricing.

“The consumer has been saying I’m willing to work a little bit more to pay for that pound of beef,” says Lance Zimmerman, RaboResearch Food & Agribusiness senior beef industry analyst. “That’s a positive demand story.”

Zimmerman’s analysis has found that regardless of income bracket, consumers are willing to work more minutes to afford a pound of beef.

According to Zimmerman:

Highest income earners work about 6 minutes to buy a pound of ground beef
Lowest income earners work two to three times longer — around 26 minutes
The median (middle 50%) works about 14 minutes to purchase a pound of ground beef

Zimmerman says his research suggests U.S. minutes worked to pay for a pound of USDA Choice beef or ground beef at retail might have been higher in the late 1970s or early ‘80s.

“Using an adjusted disposable personal income as a proxy, suggests the highs may have been 1979-1980, but the price points experienced in 2014-2015 would have been a close second,” he explains.

The uptrend beef demand has experienced recently is indicative of the demand growth for beef since the 1998 lows.

“It shows an increased willingness to pay from U.S. consumers in terms of minutes of labor allocation,” he explains. “This is why it is so important for the U.S. beef industry not to get hung up on a price point. They shift with income changes.”

(RaboResearch)

The USDA Choice retail beef price has been above $9/lb. since June, and the 2025 annual average will certainly be above $9/lb. At the 2015 annual highs, the average price was $6.29/lb., but income growth created opportunity for beef price increases to be substantially higher before hitting the recent highs in minutes worked for a pound of beef – either USDA Choice beef or ground beef.

“My opinion is that we need to stop saying beef is a luxury item,” Zimmerman says. “It is for a portion of the population, but for many, it’s just another price that has increased. Convert beef prices to minutes worked per lb. There is a long-run uptrend, but relative prices aren’t crazy today.”

Don Close, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, has also tracked beef prices compared to hourly wages. He says when he correlates the monthly all fresh beef price to hourly wages, he found they are in lockstep.

“Yes, beef prices have escalated, but beef prices have not risen any faster than the improvement in overall hourly wage,” Close explains. “So, from the consumer’s perspective, their share of their paycheck committed to beef is essentially the same as it’s been on a comparative basis for years.”

He says the Bureau of Labor Statistics post the average hourly wage by month, for the year-to-date average hourly wage is $36.17 an hour.

“The calculations I have run are for All Fresh Beef,” Close says. “I have 14.21 minutes to buy a pound of beef. I have the numbers for pork, and comprehensive broilers as well. I believe the data. I have gone so far as to walk grocery stores and run the numbers.”

He adds the analysis looks at absolute basic commodity items.

“As soon as you start looking at any value-added products the price escalates,” Close says.

How High Can Beef Prices Survive?

“From a production standpoint, we’re continuing to check all the right boxes,” Zimmerman says. “We’re continuing to produce better, high-quality, very safe, nutritious beef. As long as we see some gains in income and a strong labor market going forward, there’s further opportunities for this beef, and cattle market by proxy, to have some additional runway.”

He predicts retail beef prices can easily be supported above $9 and probably $9.50 to $10 by the end of the year.

Two Threats to Beef Demand

“This is not a risk-free environment from a demand standpoint,” Zimmerman says. “The reason the analyst and economist community has said demand has some threats is because the threats are real.”

He outlines two key threats to consumer demand:

1. Economic Threats: He points out housing affordability, student loan debt, credit card debt and the “buy now, pay later” credit services are economic challenges facing today’s consumer.

2. Consumer Behavior Threats: These challenges include potential drop in income, recession risk and multiple financial pressures competing for consumer dollars.

Zimmerman’s message is that while these threats exist consumer demand remains resilient. He suggests the industry must monitor these potential disruptions while understanding consumers’ continued willingness to prioritize beef purchases.

Consumer Adaption

Zimmerman says consumer adaptation strategies are minimizing the stress of higher beef prices.

He explains today’s beef consumer is cooking more meals at home, increased couponing, buying more in bulk, seeks deals through shopper ads, leans toward discount retailers and a growing preference for store brands/private labels.

Consumers are shifting within the chain, rather than out of the beef supply chain, he explains.

“For example, the cost of an at-home meal has increased around $1.50/meal since 2005, but the cost of a restaurant meal has increased nearly $10/meal in that time,” he says. “So, consumers are choosing to buy more at retail and eat out less frequently. That doesn’t necessarily hurt beef as long as it remains a part of that at-home meal solution.”

Close adds three other key factors impacting consumer demand:

Protein craze. Close points out the number of “center-of-the-aisle” items that have grams of protein or protein added on the packaging. He adds consumers realize, “Beef is king as the original protein source.”
Processing efficiency and value options. “We’re doing such a good job of trimming that there’s essentially very little or zero waste,” he says. “New cuts like petite tender and Denver steak fit portion control better with the smaller households.”
The wealth effect. “If you look at the consumer wealth index and the equities market and when the housing market is strong, consumers feel the wealth effect that improves their confidence to spend money,” he explains. “Even if their salary alone, they might be in a position maybe to draw back a little bit, but those with those secondary wealth drivers going on, they just feel better about the world.”

Zimmerman summarizes today’s consumer is not choosing to substitute beef.

“As beef prices go up, all else equal, consumers don’t just default run,” Zimmerman says.

“Beef is expensive, and yes, the consumer has said it’s expensive, but worth it.”

Are We Seeing Signs of Herd Rebuilding?

Fri, 12 Sep 2025 19:50:44 GMT

The U.S. beef cow inventory has reached its lowest point since 1962, marking what appears to be the bottom of the current cattle cycle. Tight supply is driving the strong pricing environment beef producers are enjoying today.

“For cow-calf producers right now, things are as good as they’ve probably ever been,” says Troy Rowan, University of Tennessee assistant professor. “Even though things are really good, producers are conscientious and vigilant about potential challenges,” Rowan summarizes.

Agreeing with Rowan, South Dakota cattleman Ken Odde adds while profits are currently strong, inflation quickly erodes economic gains. He stresses the importance of risk management and diversification.

Early Signs of Herd Rebuilding?

This is the million-dollar question: Are there encouraging signs of expansion?

“The beef industry is not currently in herd expansion mode, with producers hesitant to retain heifers due to high costs and economic uncertainties,” says Dave Weaber, Terrain senior animal protein analyst.

In Drovers State of Industry Report to be released the week of Sept. 15, we breakdown the July USDA cattle inventory and cattle on feed reports. While the USDA reports showed the smallest U.S. herd in history and continuing tightening numbers on feed, analysts predict producers have not experienced the highest cattle prices, yet.

“Our national herd size has the industry at an interesting point,” Rowan says. “Prices are at all-time highs, inputs are reasonable and more cow-calf enterprises are profitable than ever. When the industrywide rebuild will happen remains up in the air, but producers are keeping in mind that the high-flying industry right now is not going to stick around forever. They’re starting to adopt new technologies, leveling up their crossbreeding programs and expand opportunities for non-cattle related income on their ranches.”

Weaber adds producers need to be intentional about herd expansion, understanding the financial implications of adding new cattle.

Beef-on-Dairy Fills the Beef Supply Gap

“The current dynamics of supply is going to be a challenge,” says Jarrod Gillig, Cargill senior vice president, managing director for beef.

Gillig summarizes the cattle industry is experiencing a critical period of transition. He doesn’t expect the cow herd to return to previous peak levels of 32 million head. Instead, he predicts the gap in supply will be filled by beef-on-dairy calves.

Nick Hardcastle, Cargill senior director of meat grading and technical specialist, explains how the beef-on-dairy calves are an upgrade to the traditional Holstein steer and the positive impact they are making on beef supply.

“Beef-on-dairy is more desirable because it helped overcome several Holstein difficulties,” he says. “Improvements include red meat yield — more meat to a consumer — as well as improved acceptance in branded programs.”

Hardcastle says the beef-on-dairy cattle are filling the supply gap by filling pens in the Plains states where feeders are needed, and they are widely accepted by feeders and packers.

Defining Future Beef Producer Success

Odde says the beef industry is not just surviving but positioning itself for significant transformation.

“Producers who remain flexible, technologically savvy and strategic in their approach will be best positioned to thrive in this changing environment,” he says.

Weaber agrees saying successful producers will be those who can adapt, manage costs effectively and align themselves with evolving market trends.

“Don’t let cost get away from you,” Weaber warns, emphasizing that “being a low-cost, high-productivity producer means you get to make money seven, eight or nine years of the cycle.”

He stresses the importance of understanding financial implications, particularly during market transitions.

“If we’re not working on the business, we can’t work in the business,” Weaber adds, summarizing his philosophy regarding producers’ need to adopt more strategic, data-driven approaches.

The State of the Beef Industry Report includes input from nearly 500 beef producers. The annual report provides information to help producers when making decisions. Click here to download the full report.

Your Next Read: 47% of Beef Producers Plan to Increase Herd Numbers

Beef Flourishes, Grains Struggle: The Shifting Landscape of American Agriculture

Wed, 20 Aug 2025 19:27:59 GMT

Agriculture is experiencing a dramatic transformation, characterized by what Dan Basse, president of AgResource Company, calls “two sides of the fence.” On one side, grain farmers are struggling, but on the other, protein producers are thriving. While grain farmers are facing rising costs and declining revenues, the beef industry is enjoying unprecedented demand and pricing power. Beef is projected to generate $113 billion in revenue this year versus $57 billion for the entire corn crop.

“That’s how important the beef industry has become to American agriculture,” he stresses. “We in the beef industry are domestically domiciled. We can’t get enough beef today for our own domestic consumers. Beef demand is almost insatiable.”

That demand level is driving significant economic opportunity.

Basse says beef prices have reached unprecedented levels without experiencing demand reduction, driven by rising disposable incomes and changing dietary preferences. The market has not yet found a price point that will significantly impact consumption.

Here are four additional points Basse shared during the Certified Angus Beef Feeding Quality Forum:

1. Global Economic Dynamics. The global economic landscape is dramatically shifting, which in turn is reshaping agricultural trade and challenging traditional market dynamics. The world is moving from a unipolar to a multipolar economic landscape, with a significant power shift between the U.S. and China. The rise of BRICS countries is reshaping global trade, with China’s Belt and Road Initiative creating new trade zones.

2. Agricultural Trade Environment. U.S. agricultural trade is facing significant challenges, with net imports of agricultural products reaching $54 billion. The country is becoming a high-cost producer globally, and traditional export markets are shrinking. China’s reduced agricultural imports and changing global trade dynamics are creating substantial uncertainties for U.S. farmers.

“China is irreplaceable in terms of demand,” Basse says.

“We believe China’s boom is over,” he says. “They have real problems economically in China. They’ve overspent. They’ve got real trouble. As you look at their food consumption, it’s plateauing. I don’t think China is going to be a driver of global food demand anymore.”

3. Technological and Demographic Transformation. The agricultural sector is on the cusp of a major transformation driven by technology and demographic shifts. With the average farmer age of 67.3 years, Basse says the industry is preparing for a significant ownership and operational transition.

Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, autonomous farming and robotics are expected to play a crucial role in addressing labor shortages and managing agricultural production.

“I believe we’re going to have companies like Deere send in tractors — robotically and autonomously — to farm our land,” Basse says.

4. Consumer Demand Trends. Basse says the retail price of beef has shocked the industry.

“If you would have told me last year the retail price of beef would be in the vicinity of $9.50 a pound, and we had no demand rationing, no shifting to chicken or pork, I would have told you you’re crazy,’” he explains. “This new generation today likes protein. They like their vegetables. They do not like their starches. The snack food industry is in a bad spot. And Make America Healthy Again is going to help cattlemen.”

The demand for beef continues to increase while disposable personal income continues to increase.

“People are making money and they’re consuming it versus saving it,” Basse explains. “I think that’s important to understand. This thing called ‘chicken fatigue’ is real — we can’t eat chicken all the time. When is the beef market going to peak? I can’t model it. I can’t tell you.”

His outlook for protein producers is optimistic: “If you’re a protein producer, the next two or three years look really good.”

However, he cautions the market is complex and unpredictable.

“This is a new world,” Basse concludes. “Someday, will there be a point where we do hit a level that causes some reduction in demand? I suspect it, but I can’t tell you where it is.”

Why Aren't High Beef Prices Causing Sticker Shock With Consumers?

Wed, 23 Jul 2025 17:28:06 GMT

Gound beef prices across the U.S. continue to reach new highs. Retail prices for ground beef hit its highest level in history in June climbing above $6 per pound, while steaks were up 8% at $11.49 per pound.

(Bureau of Labor Statistics )

“The record high retail beef price reported by the most recent Consumer Price Index (CPI) has prompted a lot of calls about why prices are record high and whether there is any relief in sight,” says David Anderson, Texas A&M Extension economist for livestock and food product marketing. “While we often write about the great cattle prices for producers who are selling, there is a flip side, and that is consumers who are buying beef.”

Anderson explains reduced slaughter and beef production, especially in the second quarter of the year, cut supplies just as grilling season heated up for seasonal beef demand. The combination led to a spike in wholesale prices and retail beef prices.

Don Close, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, says: “What we have seen so far is consumers have been incredibly loyal to protein collectively, but they have been especially loyal to beef, and beef is actually continuing to gain market there, even at the current prices at the expense of the other protein.”

Wages Are Keeping Pace With Beef Prices

Close says when he correlates the monthly all fresh beef price to hourly wages he found they are in lock step.

“Yes, beef prices have escalated, but beef prices have not risen any faster than the improvement in overall hourly wage,” he explains. “So from the consumer’s perspective, their share of their paycheck committed to beef is essentially the same as it’s been on a comparative basis for years.”

(Don Close, Terrain )

Other contributing factors to beef demand include consumers’ craze for protein and the impact of GLP-1 diets on protein consumption.

Scott Varilek, Kooima Kooima Varilek, says: “I think beef demand has just proven time and time again — hey, consumers want it. It’s a great healthy protein, and I think it’s got a lot of good traction here over the last year of being a good quality source of food.”

High Quality Attracts Consumer Spending

Plus, with 82% to 84% of the beef produced grading Choice or better, the high quality of beef is pushing demand.

“I don’t see any weakness really in the consumers or their spending habits,” says Mike Minor, professional ag marketing. “We actually are eating more Prime meat today than Choice for the first time ever. So, people like their expensive meat still.”

How Long Will High Cattle and Beef Prices Last?

Last week USDA reported average fed cash cattle prices hit the second-highest level in history at $237.78, up 57¢ from the average the prior week.

The high cattle and beef prices continue to be driven by tight cattle numbers, the Mexican boarder closing due to New World screwworm and looming import challenges.

Yet, Close says the role of strong demand can’t be ignored and is likely to continue.

“I think it’s certainly through 2026 and really more realistic somewhere deep into 2027,” he adds.

Anderson explains normal seasonal production and demand would suggest prices falling from recent highs. Evidence from the wholesale beef market over the last couple of weeks indicates lower prices.

“Seasonal price patterns would suggest that there is a chance for a little bit of relief from record high beef prices,” Anderson says. “But, only if we compare to the peak price this summer. Wholesale beef prices are already declining.”

He adds there is a time lag from lower wholesale prices showing up at retail, but lower wholesale prices combined with normal seasonality of various cut prices should lead to the expectation of falling prices in the coming months.

“But, it’s not likely that prices will decline below year-ago levels,” Anderson emphasizes.

Inventory Reports Release on July 25

Close says more will be known about supply levels after the USDA Cattle on Feed and Cattle Inventory reports on Friday.

“While market analysts expect lower placements, marketings and cattle in feedyards than a year ago, the really interesting number will be the number of heifers on feed on July 1,” Anderson summarizes. “The heifers on feed will provide some insight into heifer retention. Also, look for placements in Texas due to the ban on Mexican feeder cattle. The lack of spayed heifers coming from Mexico is important in evaluating the number of heifers on feed.”

Your Next Read: What Americans Won’t Give Up in 2025: Spending Priorities Revealed

U.S. Immigration Officials Raid Meat Production Plant in Omaha, Dozens Detained

Wed, 11 Jun 2025 12:07:01 GMT

An immigration raid on Tuesday at a meat production plant in Omaha, Nebraska was the “largest worksite enforcement operation” in the state during the Trump presidency, the Homeland Security Department said.

U.S. Congressman Don Bacon told local media 75-80 people were detained.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid happened at a plant of Glenn Valley Foods. The food packaging company said it was surprised by the raid and had followed the rules regarding immigration status.

Chad Hartmann, president of Glenn Valley Foods in Omaha, said the plant that was raided used E-Verify, a federal database used for checking employees’ immigration status. He told Reuters that when he said this to a federal agent, the agent responded “the system is broken” and urged him to contact his local congressional representative.

ICE officers have been intensifying efforts in recent weeks to deliver on U.S. President Donald Trump’s promise of record-level deportations. The White House has demanded the agency sharply increase arrests of migrants in the U.S. illegally, sources have told Reuters.

Tensions boiled over in Los Angeles over the weekend when protesters took to the streets after ICE arrested migrants at Home Depot stores, a garment factory and a warehouse, according to migrant advocates.

Local police in Omaha said they were informed by immigration officials about the raid in advance while the company said it got no notice about the operation ahead of time.

Hartmann said federal agents had a warrant that said they had identified 107 people who they believed were using fraudulent documents.

“This was the largest worksite enforcement operation in Nebraska under the Trump Administration,” the Homeland Security Department said on X, adding no law enforcement official was hurt.

While carrying out an enforcement operation in Omaha, Nebraska an illegal alien from Honduras threated federal officers and agents with a box cutter.

These are the type of threats and assaults our brave law enforcement face every day as they put their lives on the line to… https://t.co/K6427agqlS
— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) June 11, 2025

ICE said a criminal investigation was ongoing into what immigration officials called a large-scale employment of immigrants who are present in the U.S. illegally.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and federal law enforcement partners, executed a federal search warrant at Glenn Valley Foods, today, based on an ongoing criminal investigation into the large-scale employment of aliens without authorization to work in the United States,” an ICE spokesperson told an ABC News affiliate.

More than half of all meatpacking workers in the U.S. are immigrants, according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a think tank.

Rights advocates, including the ACLU of Nebraska, condemned the raid.

(Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington and Kristina Cooke in San Francisco; Editing by Michael Perry)

Exclusive Op-Ed: American Farmers and Ranchers Win With U.K. Trade Deal

Fri, 09 May 2025 17:22:15 GMT

By Brooke L. Rollins, 33rd Secretary of Agriculture

President Trump has done it again. Yesterday’s historic trade deal with the United Kingdom, announced on the 80th anniversary of Victory Day for World War II, is a major victory for American producers, consumers, and, above all, American farmers and ranchers.

What became an imbalanced trade relationship between us and the U.K. did not develop by accident. Before yesterday’s deal, the weakened position of American farmers emerged through a combination of three factors:

The average tariff imposed on American agricultural producers by the U.K. has been 9.2% while our average tariff has been 5%.
The U.K. imposed other non-tariff barriers that limited American access to British markets such as limited quota limits, geographical indicators, irregular inspections, and arbitrary health, animal welfare, or environmental concerns not backed by science or data.
The previous administration did our farmers and ranchers no favors by refusing to institute a new deal with any country, including the U.K.

Yesterday’s announcement reverses course and gives American farmers a fair shot at competing in British markets, creating a $5 billion opportunity for new exports for U.S. stakeholders, including U.S. farmers, ranchers, and producers.

While our team finalizes the trade deal, we are working hard to eliminate U.K. tariffs from all agricultural products. The deal secures a decrease from 19% to 0% in the U.K.’s ethanol tariff, offering an opportunity for corn farmers in states such as Iowa and Nebraska to further expand this important, second-largest market for U.S. ethanol. British energy users will likewise benefit from additional homegrown biofuel produced here in the U.S. This week’s trade deal offers our corn and ethanol producers the opportunity to export $700 million in product to a market that was previously closed to them.

Cattle ranchers also have cause for celebration. Beef produced by American ranchers in states like Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas is the best in the world, and British consumers will now have access to a product that is the envy of the world. This trade deal creates the opportunity for our cattle ranchers to export millions more, which will end up in the pockets of American ranchers who saw a global trade surplus in beef during President Trump’s first term crash to a deficit under the previous administration.

Our rice farmers in states such as Arkansas and Louisiana will also see increased production because of this deal. Consumers in the U.K., which does not grow rice, will now have access to nutritious rice grown in American fields, creating a market potential of $100 million with free access.

We at USDA will not let this moment pass without energetic promotion of our products to British markets. My team and I are traveling to the U.K. next week to share the bounty of American agriculture to a market that is now open to our products. The trade deal announced yesterday commits our two countries to work together to enhance agricultural market access, closes loopholes, and fast-tracks customs procedures for U.S. exports.

The U.K. is the sixth-largest economy in the world and the fourth-largest to which we export. This week’s trade deal is a momentous step forward in our relationship with the U.K. and for the American agricultural industry. During my trip next week, I will stand ready to collaborate with our counterparts in the U.K. and ensure British consumers know American farmers and ranchers are open for business.

Connecting Cattle Producers and Beef Wholesalers Through Supply Chain Management

Wed, 23 Apr 2025 18:59:55 GMT

For producers or groups of producers wanting to sell directly into wholesale beef channels, three big issues have created challenges to the marketplace: scale, balancing the carcass and logistics.

“If you have a steakhouse that has to buy hundreds of ribeyes every single week, it’s probably pretty hard to find many producers who are going to be able to fulfill that procurement spec weekly,” says Farmshare CEO Henry Arrowood. “No. 2 is balancing of the carcass — you might find a restaurant that wants to buy all your primes, but what are you doing with the rest of that carcass? And No. 3 is the logistics — how do I actually get the animal to the processing facility, secure a slot, secure the cut order, then get that product out into the hands of the buyer? That is exactly what our platform does.”

Arrowood shared on a recent AgriTalk episode about how the system provides a way for wholesale buyers to connect with smaller producers who can offer local, differentiated and value-added products.

“If a set of producers match the parameters of what the bid of the buy side is looking for, we start to show them these opportunities that they can participate in,” Arrowood says. “We show them the price point at which the customer is looking to purchase. We show them the target product and volume that they’re looking for, and then we aggregate that supply into an order and route it to one of our processing facilities for manufacturing.”

Finding a market for the entire carcass has remained a challenge to the smaller, regional producers who want to sell meat. Until now.

“Big packers have become these efficiency machines where they’ve been able to create all these different market opportunities to balance the carcass and create, good returns across the entire animal. That doesn’t exist on a small scale,” Arrowood says. “It’s really hard for any given producer to go out and create similar opportunities for the entirety of their carcass. That is what we’re doing.”

By using artificial intelligence, Arrowood says the company creates pricing models and yield distribution models to price optimize the entire animal for the end producer. If one buyer claims the ribeyes, the system figures out additional buyers for the strips, tenderloins, ground beef, etc., he says.

“It’s our responsibility to create a diversified set of customers on the buy side that we can move this product to, school systems, hospitals, really good targets for us in terms of moving that ground product,” Arrowood explains. “There’s a lot of restaurant groups that are looking for a different product than they might be able to get through the institutional food service companies. So, that’s where we’re moving some of that prime product.”

The idea for Farmshare came to Arrowood when he experienced the challenges in the beef supply chain firsthand.

“During the pandemic, I left San Francisco and moved out to a cattle ranch in Montana, and that’s where I am right now. And it didn’t take me long, when I got to this seventh-generation cow-calf operation, to realize there were some pretty deep inefficiencies in the supply chain and that of every dollar that I or any other city slicker was spending on meat in the grocery store, only 14 cents was making its way back to a producer’s pocket.”

As a tech pro, Arrowood began imagining what could be done to create more streamlined distribution that would give fair financials back to the end producer and help independent processors.

“I think that technology serves a very unique and interesting opportunity to rethink the way in which meat travels throughout the value chain, and the money that ultimately gets back into the hands the people who do the work,” Arrowood says.

Farmshare works with processors in more than 25 states across the country and is ready to expand its reach.

“We like to think of ourselves as bringing modern tooling to the independent processor,” Arrowood says. “For maybe the first time, we’ve built a set of tools for the independent processor that help to increase efficiency and maximize the throughput of their plant and ultimately drive them towards doing greater capacity within their facility.”

By automating and streamlining several manual processes and complexities that exist for processors today, Arrowood says the system can mitigate the amount of phone calls, paper pushing and filing that an independent locker has to go through in order to successfully manage their business.

“Our customers are saving five to seven hours per day on all the administrative sort of burden and complexity of their business,” he says.

He says packers have a lot of efficiencies, technology and staff to help them future proof their businesses.

“What we’re doing is building that as a shared resource and shared set of infrastructures that we can then sort of co-op out into the ecosystem for the independent processor,” Arrowood says.

This management system creates opportunities for efficiency throughout the supply chain while keeping the marketing between the buyer and the seller. Within the Farmshare system, the animal does not change ownership to the processor and the restaurant connects directly with a group of independent processors.

“We’re facilitating the transaction between those two parties,” Arrowood says. “We’ve used this network of independent processors as the manufacturing layer to actually turn that animal into a consumable product.”

Your next read: Considerations for Feeding Cattle Through Drought

Meat Institute Urges USTR to Remove Trade Barriers and Expand Market Access

Wed, 12 Mar 2025 20:29:11 GMT

The Meat Institute has urged the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to eliminate non-tariff trade barriers and expand market access for U.S. meat and poultry products. In comments submitted to USTR Jamieson Greer, the Meat Institute highlighted concerns over unfair trade practices that hinder industry growth. Meat Institute President and CEO Julie Anna Potts emphasized the Trump administration’s opportunity to advance U.S. leadership in global trade, noting that policies promoting open markets and reduced trade barriers benefit American workers and the economy. Key industry concerns include:

China’s failure to meet Phase 1 trade commitments and retaliatory tariffs on U.S. meat.
Regulatory obstacles limiting beef and pork exports to Taiwan.
Trade barriers restricting access to growing Southeast Asian markets.
Ongoing restrictions under the U.S./Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS).
EU and UK policies that limit U.S. meat and poultry exports.
Rising establishment registration requirements affecting global market access.

The Meat Institute underscored the economic significance of the meat and poultry sector, which generates $227.9 billion annually and supports over 532,000 jobs.
More policy news from Pro Farmer.

2024 U.S. Meat Exports Created 59¢ in Value for Corn, $1.46 for Soybeans

Wed, 05 Mar 2025 21:56:22 GMT

Pork exports smashed records last year and beef export value climbed 5% from 2023. With robust red meat exports to finish 2024, a new study by the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) shows the economic impact that had on corn and soybean demand.

The study, which was conducted by the Juday Group, was unveiled during the live taping of U.S. Farm Report during Commodity Classic this week. The shows 30% of the pork produced in the U.S. is exported today. And exporting more than 14% of U.S. beef production is consumed outside the U.S. Exporting corn through U.S. beef and pork generated the following demand:

Beef and pork exports accounted for 525.1 million bushels of U.S. corn usage, which equated to a market value of $2.24 billion (at an average 2024 corn price of $4.27 per bushel).
Beef and pork exports accounted for 3.04 million tons of DDGS usage, equating to $525 million (at an average 2024 price of $172.56 per ton).
Beef and pork exports contributed an estimated total economic impact of 14%, or $0.59, of bushel value at an average price of $4.27 per bushel in 2024.
Pork exports accounted for 100.7 million bushels of U.S. soybean usage, which equated to a market value of $1.12 billion (at an average 2024 soybean price of $11.11 per bushel).
Pork exports contributed an estimated total economic impact of 13.2% of bushel value, or $1.46, at an average price of $11.11 per bushel in 2024.

“We send a lot of corn and soybeans out through us beef and pork and when you look at that, every hog that we export outside the United States, that’s 10 bushels of corn,” says John Hinners, Senior Vice President, Industry Relations, U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF). “The Dave Juday study shows the impact of that is 59 cents on a bushel of corn in 2024 on that impact and then $1.46 on a bushel of soybeans. So it has significant impact.”

Corn demand generated from meat exports.

(U.S. Meat Export Federation)

Hinners says bottom-line is the corn and soybean industry are critical in U.S. Meat Export Federations’ efforts to grow global demand for U.S. red meat.

“World demand for protein has never been better. And when you think about what we do as an organization, we’re trying to build profit opportunities in the agriculture business, not specifically one sector or another, but just red meat in total,” he says. “And it has an impact on everything we do in agriculture, whether that’s the corn grower, the soybean grower, and so forth.”

Soybean demand generated from meat exports in 2024.

(U.S. Meat Export Federation)

Hinners says the U.S. isn’t exporting the high-quality cuts of meat, like ribeyes or New York steaks. Most of those cuts are consumed here at home. What the U.S. does export, and provides value, is the cuts and parts of an animal that aren’t preferred by U.S. consumers.

“When you think about what we send outside of the United States, it’s not the ribeye steaks and New York strips. It’s the beef liver, it’s the tripe on that animal. It’s the pork tails, the feet, the snout. A lot of these good protein items are garnished and really welcome in different countries,” says Hinners. “We’re trying to add value to these items that we don’t traditionally consume here in the United States. And it’s great protein.

(U.S. Meat Export Federation)

Exploring the Tariff Impact on Red Meat Exports
According to the USMEF, total U.S. red meat exports in 2024 was $19.1 billion. Mexico, China and Canada add up to 8.4 billion of the total, about 40%. USMEF president and CEO Dan Halstrom told Farm Journal’s Clinton Griffiths the impact remains unknown as it remains a ‘fluid situation.’

“I think the important thing to remember is that just because there’s tariff doesn’t mean the trade stops,” says Halstrom. “What it does do is it opens the doors of some of our competitors. Use Mexico as example. If we have a retaliatory duty on our products, beef or pork, we are competing against Brazilian product, for example, coming into Mexico. So that’s a very big focus that we have. They were a competitor before this when we were all zero -duty, and it’ll even be more so with a duty.”

Halstrom says it’s key to think longer term about the situation and what it could mean for export potential in the future.

“I personally think that the Trump administration, one, had our back in agriculture. I don’t think there’s any reason to think that they won’t again, but it will be a bumpy ride.”

During the previous Trump administration, the president renegotiated the free trade agreement between Mexico and Canada, which is known as the U.S., Mexico, Canada agreement (USMCA).

“We were on schedule for a review of USMC anyway in 2026, so there is an effort I think to move it up quicker, which might actually work to our advantage. We’ll have to wait and see,” Halstrom says. “This is sort of the concern when you start putting bilateral, unilateral duties on countries that you are kind of outside the confines of the free trade agreement structure. But like I said, it’s a very fluid situation. I do think the other thing that we have that’s definitely in our favor is that demand for our products globally is record breaking. I mean, it’s as good as I’ve ever seen it in 40-plus years. We have a very unique product. We’ve got to kind of keep that in mind because that’s a big leverage point.”

USDA Says Farm-level Egg Prices Could Jump Another 45.2% in 2025 Due to Avian Flu

Fri, 24 Jan 2025 19:51:30 GMT

The January 2025 Food Price Outlook released Friday shows while food price inflation has slowed overall, key sectors like eggs and beef remain volatile due to supply chain and input cost pressures.

Egg prices saw the biggest spike, according to USDA’s data, up 37% year-over-year. But the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows the price of Grade A eggs in December was up 93% since January 2024. And when you look ahead, USDA expects outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza to continue to cause egg prices to climb.

When it comes to USDA’s specific outlook released Friday, the agency uses recent trends in food prices based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) and Producer Price Index (PPI) data through December 2024.

Key Highlights of the report include:

Overall inflation trends:
- Food prices increased by 2.5% year-over-year as of December 2024
- Food-at-home prices rising by 1.8% and food-away-from-home prices increasing by 3.6%.
2025 forecasts:
- Food prices expected to rise by 2.2%, slower than the historical average.
- Food-at-home prices predicted to grow by 1.3%, while food-away-from-home prices are forecast to increase by 3.6%.
Insights Within Categories:
- Egg prices saw a sharp rise of 36.8% year-over-year in December 2024, with 2025 prices projected to climb by 20.3% amid ongoing supply constraints.
- Beef and veal prices are expected to increase modestly by 1.5% in 2025, following a 4.9% rise in 2024.
- Pork and fats/oils prices are forecast to decline in 2025, with decreases of 0.8% and 1.6%, respectively.
- Fresh fruit prices are anticipated to rise by 0.7%, while dairy product prices are expected to increase by 1.3%.

Producer Price Insights:

The PPI, which tracks wholesale prices, suggests continued volatility in farm-level and wholesale markets, with significant fluctuations predicted for eggs, milk, and fruits due to factors such as extreme weather and disease outbreaks. Farm-level egg prices are expected to see a sharp increase of 45.2% in 2025, with a wide prediction interval reflecting uncertainty.

Overall, while food price growth is expected to moderate compared to recent years, specific categories remain susceptible to sudden price shifts driven by global and domestic factors.

What’s the Deal with Egg Prices?

Sticker shock with eggs stared shoppers in the face to end 2024. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the increase is even more staggering. They show the average cost of a dozen Grade A large eggs was $4.15 in December, up from $3.65 in November and $2.15 in January 2024.

According to livestock economists at Texas A&M University, the widespread outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, or HPAI, continue to be the culprit, driving egg prices to record highs across the U.S. Commercial laying flocks have been hit especially hard.

“There is seasonality to egg prices based on demand, but the cutting of supplies, in this case by disease, has driven prices higher,” says David Anderson, Ph.D., AgriLife Extension economist and professor in the Texas A&M Department of Agricultural Economics . “I wouldn’t be surprised to see them go higher in the next report, but there is price volatility when you consider the supply and demand factors in play.”

USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service reports since first detected in 2022, 1,410 flocks have been impacted, including 637 commercial operations. As a result, 134.7 million birds have been culled.

Georgia Hit for First Time By Avian Flu

Just last week, the largest poultry producing state in the nation reported its first case of avian flu. The Georgia Department of Agriculture confirming the virus at a farm in Elbert County. In reaction, the Georgia Depart of Agriculture says all poultry exhibitions, swaps, meets and sales have been suspended as a precaution. The Department says cleanup is currently underway and nearby operations are under quarantine.

According to Greg Archer, Ph.D., AgriLife Extension poultry specialist and associate professor in the Texas A&M Department of Poultry Science , one reason the HPAI is spreading so quickly is because of environmental conditions. According to Archer, the disease prefers temperatures below 90 degrees.

“Farmers take biosecurity seriously because they’ve been dealing with the threat for years,” he said. “The big question this time is the strain mutations and how outbreaks in poultry facilities are occurring.

Archer also says migratory birds have historically been the main carrier of the disease. The pathogen will enter the poultry house through migratory bird feces on the bottom of the show or by a truck of vehicle that transports materials or feed between farms.

The Time It Takes to Rebuild

Once a flock is hit, the operation culls the animals, and replacing lost birds takes times. According to Archer, it can take 20 or more weeks for birds to develop from incubated eggs to pullets to production-ready laying hens.

In some cases, entire farms are wiped out. Archer says farmers bring those farms back online in phases to stagger their production by new and older birds.

As they do so, the eggs produced by younger and older birds are typically smaller while hens in their prime lay large to jumbo eggs.

And the key in building back the supply of eggs in the U.S., according to Archer, is rebuilding the flocks impacted by avian flu.

The other recent wild card, is recent transmission patterns in new animals, including dairy cows and pigs.

Consumer Demand and the Unknown

Now the question is how much consumers are willing to pay, and if it will impact demand?

“Producers will be expanding their flocks to produce more eggs to meet demand and capitalize on the high prices, while consumers might cut back,” says Anderson. “That combination aligning with fewer instances of avian influenza as the weather warms up would likely put downward pressure on prices. There is a natural ebb and flow to egg prices from seasonal supply and demand, and HPAI has just added volatility to the market.”

GOP Lawmakers Want Answers from USDA Over Pure Prairie's Bankruptcy

Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:33:08 GMT

Republican lawmakers have called on USDA to provide explanations regarding the oversight of Pure Prairie Poultry, Inc., which filed for bankruptcy shortly after receiving substantial USDA funding. The situation has raised concerns about the department’s management of grants and loans, as well as its impact on farmers and the poultry industry.

A group of Senators, including Sen. Jonie Ernst (R-Iowa), sent a letter to USDA this week.

As AgDay reported on Tuesday, the Iowa Department of Agriculture euthanized roughly 1.33 million chickens.
That’s after Pure Prairie Poultry said in late September that due to its bankruptcy, it could no longer afford to buy feed for its flock living on 14 Iowa farms. It’s estimated the process cost USDA $2 million.

The company also contracted with farmers in Wisconsin and Minnesota who were also affected.

Company Received $45 Million from USDA

Ernst says Pure Prairie Poultry was only in business for a few short years, and in that time, she says the company received $45 million dollars in grants and loans from USDA .

Nearly $7 million of that was from USDA’s Meat and Poultry Processing Expansion program.
The company also received a $38.7-million loan from USDA’s Food Supply Chain Guaranteed Loan Program , which is part of President Biden’s “ Build Back Better ” plan.

According to a White House Fact Sheet , this was tied to the Biden-Harris administration’s plan to promote competition in the American economy and “create a fairer, more resilient, and more dynamic economy.”

The $45 million was used by Pure Prairie Poultry to help expand and renovate a shuttered processing plant in Charles City, Iowa. USDA issued a press release in July of 2024 to celebrate the investments.

Lawmakers’ Demands

According to the lawmakers’ letter, which is demanding accountability and answers, close to 2-million chickens were “left without feed or any processing option.”

The letter requests explanations on several key points:

The oversight process for loan and grant guarantees
USDA’s awareness of Pure Prairie Poultry’s financial situation
Steps taken to assist affected growers and state agriculture departments
Efforts to salvage the Charles City plant

In the letter, lawmakers said, “Over the past two years, USDA has provided $223 million in loan guarantees and grants to 30 meat and poultry processing companies. A press release from the USDA celebrated this funding as part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s ‘commitment to strengthen critical food supply chain infrastructure to create more thriving communities for the American people.’ Unfortunately, this investment has instead resulted in the loss of income, jobs, and poultry across three states.”

“Pure Prairie Poultry’s abrupt closure shows the importance of proper vetting and oversight at USDA to ensure the agency’s multi-million dollar grants and loans are actually helping producers, rather than being flushed down the drain and harming entire rural communities in the process,” Ernst says. “Encouraging the growth of meat processing and strengthening our supply chain is a cause I can support, but this lack of accountable spending hurts our farmers, livestock, and taxpayers.”

USDA Defends Grants an Programs

A USDA spokesperson defended the department’s programs, saying they have worked to “rebuild and create new markets for U.S. farmers” after challenges posed by trade wars and the Covid-19 pandemic.

The spokesperson also urged lawmakers to focus on passing the overdue farm bill: “Rather than trying to score political points, those members of Congress should work with USDA to reopen the facility and pass a new Farm Bill, which is now two years late.”

More Background on Pure Prairie Poultry

More than 1 million birds had to be culled in Iowa due to the company’s inability to care for them.
Contracted farmers in Wisconsin and Minnesota were also affected.
According to the lawmakers’ letter, approximately 2 million chickens were “left without feed or any processing option.”

The lawmakers have requested USDA respond to their questions by Nov. 8.

Your Next Read: Senator Stabenow “Holds The Keys” to the Farm Bill Getting Done in 2024

Draft Dietary Guidelines for 2025-2030 ‘Alarming’ and ‘Disappointing’ for Meat Industry

Wed, 23 Oct 2024 20:27:59 GMT

The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) is responsible for reviewing current nutrition science and providing recommendations for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which are updated every five years. The draft report for the 2025-2030 guidelines emphasizes several key dietary recommendations:

· The committee recommends increasing the intake of fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grains, nuts and seafood. These foods are associated with numerous health benefits, including reduced risk of chronic diseases such as heart disease and diabetes.

· The draft guidelines suggest limiting the consumption of red and processed meats, refined grains, foods high in saturated fats and salty snacks. These dietary components are linked to negative health outcomes when consumed in excess.

The committee’s approach involves systematic reviews and food pattern modeling to assess the relationship between diet and health across different life stages. Additionally, a focus on health equity ensures that the guidelines are relevant to diverse populations, considering factors like socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, and culture.

Julie Anna Potts, the president and CEO of the Meat Institute, expressed concerns about the draft recommendations. She described these recommendations as “alarming” and “disappointing,” arguing they contradict some of the Committee’s other findings regarding nutritional deficiencies. Potts’ criticism likely stems from the guidelines’ emphasis on reducing the consumption of red and processed meats, which she believes could lead to nutritional gaps if not properly addressed. The Meat Institute has historically advocated for the role of meat in a balanced diet, emphasizing its nutritional benefits. Potts’ comments reflect a broader industry concern that reducing meat consumption could overlook the importance of meat as a source of essential nutrients, such as protein, iron and B vitamins. The guidelines’ focus on plant-based foods and limiting red meat may be seen by industry representatives as potentially neglecting these nutritional aspects.

Read the latest Pro Farmer news and market analysis.