Photo by iStock/Hitra

President Trump infuriated American ranchers last week with his decision to quadruple the amount of beef that Argentina can export to the U.S. at a lower tariff rate, raising the country’s tariff quota from 20,000 metric tons to 80,000. The trade deal is part of a larger $40 billion bailout package to support President Trump’s political ally, President Javier Milei, through a currency crisis (which also helps some wealthy investors with personal ties to the Trump administration). Trump claims the surge in Argentinian beef imports will reverse rising beef prices for U.S. consumers.

Several Republican lawmakers and prominent rancher groups spoke out against Trump’s decision, calling it a betrayal of America First principles. “If the goal is addressing beef prices at the grocery store, this isn’t the way,” said Nebraska Senator Deb Fischer, in a statement. “Nebraska’s ranchers cannot afford to have the rug pulled out from under them when they’re just getting ahead or simply breaking even.” President Trump took to Truth Social to defend his decision and chide angry ranchers, saying, “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.”  

Beef prices have increased by 15% over the past 12 months due to tight supply; America’s beef cattle herd is at a historic low, following years of drought and pandemic price disruptions. Imports are also down due to both tariffs on Brazil and the screwworm-driven import ban on Mexican beef. Economists doubt that increasing imports from a smaller beef supplier such as Argentina will actually lower prices for consumers. However, the news drove the largest drop in cattle feeder futures in four years.

Ranchers worry the deal will erode what some have called their first good year in a long time. “There couldn’t be a worse time for this to happen, as many producers are getting ready to sell this year’s production,” said Bill Bullard, CEO of R-CALF, in a statement. Beyond the near-term effects on cattle markets, the Argentina deal hits a much bigger nerve for ranchers, namely, the threat of unlabeled imports and the concentrated multinational meatpackers that benefit from them.

Just four meatpackers process 85% of all U.S. beef. Ranchers charge that this lack of competition drives down cattle prices and widens the gap between what consumers pay for beef and what ranchers receive for their cattle. In 2019, R-CALF brought an antitrust suit against dominant beef packers, alleging they coordinated bids and otherwise conspired to depress cattle prices and increase their profits. JBS paid $83.5 million to settle these claims, while other packers, such as Tyson, continue to challenge the charges in court.

Ranchers also face pressure from unlabeled or mislabeled imports. Powerful beef processors such as JBS, Cargill, and Marfrig, operate in many countries and they want to be able to sell beef as a commodity, swapping their sources from around the world as it best suits them. This is why dominant beef packers have bankrolled lobbying campaigns to thwart longstanding efforts to require mandatory country-of-origin labeling on beef.

Most food carries a mandatory country-of-origin label. Congress previously required one for beef until the World Trade Organization deemed it unfair in 2015, prompting Congress to repeal mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef and pork in 2016. Bipartisan lawmakers have perennially reintroduced bills to challenge this decision. Most recently, Representatives Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) reintroduced the Country of Origin Labeling Enforcement Act.

In an apparent attempt to appease angry ranchers, the USDA released a suite of policies last week to “fortify the American beef industry.” The plan includes opening up more federal lands to grazing, tweaking some safety net programs, dispersing another round of grants for small processing plants, and temporarily reducing overtime and holiday meat inspection fees for smaller meat processors.

USDA also affirmed that it would maintain and enforce a Biden administration rule that cracks down on deceptive, voluntary “Product of U.S.A.” labels. Even though country-of-origin labels are not required, some packers voluntarily add “Product of U.S.A.” labels because American consumers are willing to pay more for domestic beef. Until recently, a loophole allowed beef that was born, raised, and slaughtered abroad to carry a “Product of U.S.A.” label if it passed through a U.S. facility. USDA’s new rule ensures that only meat from cattle born, raised, and processed in the U.S. can carry this voluntary label. USDA will enforce this rule starting January 1, 2026.

On the issue of fair markets, USDA’s plan merely reiterates current policy to publish sample cattle contracts and other beef industry data. Meanwhile, the administration is sidelining other Biden-era meatpacking regulations. USDA’s deputy secretary, Stephen Vaden, recently disparaged new rules cracking down on the controversial poultry tournament payment system and other discriminatory and deceptive tactics by meat processors. Vaden called the rules “un-American” and said their enforcement is on hold. Advocates are concerned that USDA will repeal the rules. Vaden also supported increasing line speeds in pork and poultry plants, something meatpacking workers’ unions have long opposed due to the increased likelihood of workplace injuries.