beef

Nov. 7 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Friday wants the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the meatpacking industry for possible price fixing and collusion.

Trump posted about the situation on Truth Social while flying to South Florida for the weekend and after he met in the White House with three Republican senators from beef-producing states, who are opposed to importing beef from Argentina.

“I have asked the DOJ to immediately begin an investigation into the meatpacking companies, who are driving up the price of beef through illicit collusion, price fixing, and price manipulation,” Trump posted.

“We will always protect our American Ranchers, and they are being blamed for what is being done by a majority of foreign-owned meatpackers, who artificially inflate prices and jeopardize the security of our Nation’s food supply.

“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. I am asking the DOJ to act expeditiously.”

A short time later, he posted: “Cattle prices have dropped substantially, the price of boxed beef has gone up — therefore, you know that something is ‘fishy.’ We will get to the bottom of it very quickly. If there is criminality, those people responsible will pay a steep price!”

After the messages, Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X: “Our investigation is underway! My Antitrust Division led by @AAGSlater has taken the lead in partnership with our friend @SecRollins at @USDA.”

Brooke Rollins is the agriculture secretary and Abigail “Gail” Slater leads the DOJ’s Antitrust Division.

The top four meatpackers control more than about 85% of the U.S. market — American companies Tyson and Cargill with JBS and National subsidiaries of Brazilian companies.

“This consolidation allows them to suppress prices paid to ranchers while keeping consumer prices high,” Farm Action said. “Importing more beef into this rigged system will not lower costs for families or restore fair markets for producers.

Three of the companies have been sued.

In October, Cargill and Tyson agreed to pay $87.5 million to settle a case alleging price fixing for beef while also denying any wrongdoing.

Earlier this year, JBS agreed to pay $83.5 million for its portion of a separate suit over alleged cattle price fixing.

Trump was taking aim on meatpacking instead of cattle raising, which has been affected by drought, smaller herds, labor shortages and lingering COVID-19 effects, Axios reported.

Trump has said overall grocery prices are going down but concedes beef costs are rising.

A CNN fact check pointed out in September that they were 1.4% higher than in January, when Trump returned to office, according to the Consumer Price Index.

There was a 0.6% increase in average grocery prices from July 2025 to August 2025, the biggest month-to-month jump in three years

Beef is up 13% in one year — the highest over most food items — according to the CPI.

Trump has attempted to increase the nation’s beef supply with increased imports.

The cattle industry and legislators, including Republicans, have opposed this move.

“President Trump’s plan to buy beef from Argentina is a betrayal of the American rancher,” Farm Action said.

“Those of us who raise cattle have finally started to see what profit looks like after facing years of high input costs and market manipulation by the meatpacking monopoly.

“After crashing the soybean market and gifting Argentina our largest export buyer, he’s now poised to do the same to the cattle market. Importing Argentinian beef would send U.S. cattle prices plummeting -and with the meatpacking industry as consolidated as it is, consumers may not see lower beef prices either. Washington should be focused on fixing our broken cattle market, not rewarding foreign competitors.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, opposes the imports.

“This isn’t the way to do it,” Thune told Semafor in October. “It’s created a lot of uncertainty in that market. So I’m hoping that the White House has gotten the message.”

Trump met with some Republican senators from beef-producing states: Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi, Tim Sheehy of Montana and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

Hyde-Smith is a Republican from Mississippi whose family raises cattle. She is opposed to the imports.

In October, he announced plans to quadruple the tariff quota for imported Argentine beef from 20,000 to 80,000 metric tons. Any imports above this new quota with no tariff would still be subject to a higher 26.4% tariff.

In October, Trump authorized $20 billion loan to Argentina’s government and another $20 billion in financing from private lenders and sovereign wealth funds. It has been described as a bailout to Argentine President Javier Milei.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Friday accused foreign-owned meat-packers of driving up the price of beef in the U.S. and asked the Department of Justice to open an investigation.

The Republican president announced the move on social media days after his party suffered losses in key elections in which the winning Democratic candidates focused relentlessly on the public’s concerns about the cost of living.

“I have asked the DOJ to immediately begin an investigation into the Meat Packing Companies who are driving up the price of Beef through Illicit Collusion, Price Fixing, and Price Manipulation,” Trump wrote in the social media post.

“We will always protect our American Ranchers, and they are being blamed for what is being done by Majority Foreign Owned Meat Packers, who artificially inflate prices, and jeopardize the security of our Nation’s food supply,” he continued.

Trump offered no proof to support his allegations.

Beef prices have soared to record levels in part after drought and years of low prices led to the smallest U.S. herd size in decades. Trump’s tariffs on Brazil, a major beef exporter, have also curbed imports.

Concentration in the meat-packing business has long been a concern for farmers and politicians on both sides of the aisle. There are four major meat-packing companies in the United States, and the largest beef company, JBS, is headquartered in Brazil. JBS USA did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.

“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,” Trump said.

Last month, Trump suggested the U.S. would buy Argentine beef to bring down stubbornly high prices for American consumers, angering U.S. cattle ranchers.

Trump’s accusations have renewed a bipartisan presidential fight against rising food prices.

Then-President Biden talked with independent farmers and ranchers about initiatives to reduce food prices by increasing competition within the meat industry. And then-Vice President Kamala Harris, whom Trump defeated last year, used her campaign to vow to crack down on food producers and major supermarkets “ price gouging.”

Superville and Karnowski write for the Associated Press. Karnowski reported from Minneapolis.

Oct. 22 (UPI) — American cattle ranchers are calling on the Trump administration to abandon plans to buy Argentine beef, as the rift between the two sides deepens.

President Donald Trump has been arguing to buy beef from the South American country as an effort to lower beef prices at U.S. grocery stores, while U.S. cattle ranchers are criticizing his plan as misguided and harmful, stating it will have little effect on grocery bills.

“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,” NCBA CEO Colin Woodall said in a statement.

“It is imperative that President Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins let the cattle markets work.”

The cost of beef in the United States has hit records this year, steadily rising since December. According to the USDA’s Economic Research Service, the cost has increased 13.9% higher in August compared to a year earlier and is predicted to increase 11.6% percent this year.

The rift between Trump and cattle ranchers opened earlier this week when Trump told reporters on Air Force One that they are considering importing beef from Argentina to get those prices down.

Argentina, led by vocal Trump ally President Javier Milei, earlier this month entered a $20 billion financial bailout agreement with the United States.

The bailout has attracted criticism from American farmers, already hurting under the weight of Trump’s tariffs. In particular, soybean growers were upset with the bailout as the United States and Argentina directly compete in the crop for the Chinese market.

The comment about buying beef from Buenos Aires prompted swift criticism from American ranchers, already frustrated that Argentina sold more than $801 million worth of beef into the U.S. market, compared to the roughly $7 million worth of American beef sold in its market.

Trump on Wednesday said U.S. cattle ranchers “don’t understand that the only reason they are doing so well” is because of his tariffs.

“If it weren’t for me, they would be doing just as they’ve done for the past 20 years — Terrible!” Trump said on his Truth Social media platform.

“It would be nice if they would understand that, but they also have to get their prices down, because the consumer is a very big factor in my thinking, also!”

Amid the controversy, the USDA on Wednesday announced a series of actions, including those to promote and protect American beef through the voluntary Country of Origin Labeling program.

However, ranchers are saying it’s not good enough.

Farm Action, a nonpartisan agricultural sector watchdog, is urging the Trump administration to make country of origin labeling mandatory and to launch investigations into the so-called Big Four meatpackers, saying they control the price of beef, not U.S. ranchers.

“Ranchers need support to rebuild their herds — that’s how we truly increase beef supply and lower prices long-term,” the watchdog said in a statement Wednesday.

“After years of drought, high input costs and selling into a rigged market, we deserve policies that strengthen rural America, not ones that reward foreign competitors and corporate monopolies.”

Wyoming’s Meriwether Farms called on Trump to immediately use his executive powers to institute mandatory country of origin labeling.

“This is not good enough,” it said of the USDA’s initiatives announced Wednesday.

BRITAIN must ramp up missile defences – like Israel’s Iron Dome – or risk its nuclear bases being obliterated in the first hours of a war with Russia.

Moscow would target RAF jets and Royal Navy nuclear submarines if it launched a surprise attack, a report by the Rusi think tank has warned.

4

4

A pre-emptive strike could “cripple” Britain’s nuclear deterrent and conventional military power – as most of the UK’s best weapons are “concentrated on just a few sites”.

The report warned a single Russian Yasen-class submarine could launch 40 cruise missiles from the Norwegian Sea with “relatively low warning”.

Yet the UK lacks both the radars to detect them “skimming over the sea” – or the weapons to shoot them down.

The report’s author Sidharth Kaushal said the immediate threat comes from sub-sonic Russian cruise missiles which can be launched from planes and submarines.

By 2035 the main risk will come from intermediate range ballistic missiles, like the Oreshnik blasted at Ukraine last year.

By 2040 the UK will need to defend against “hypersonic glide vehicles” which can travel at 20 times the speed of sound.

He also warned short range drones could be smuggled close to targets and launched from sea containers – like Ukraine’s Operation Spiders Web – or launched by Spetznaz special forces.

Kaushal said calls for a British Iron Dome were warranted by Russia’s focus on “long-range conventional precision strike” weapons.

He said: “The initial priority is the expansion of its capacity for the defence of critical military installations against what is primarily a cruise missile threat.”

The report urged Keir Starmer to buy space based sensors and long range radars that can see 3000km away, the equivalent of Lands End to Moscow.

He said “long-range precision strikes” was central to Kremlin military doctrine.

He said: “The destruction of aircraft on the ground is particularly salient. The destruction of nuclear attack submarines that carry submarine-launched cruise missiles is also described as a priority.”

Russian targets would likely the Royal Navy Bases at Devonport and Clyde and RAF Marham in Norfolk, where the nuclear capable fleet of F-35 stealth jets is based.

It comes after RAF war games showed Britain would be overwhelmed if it faced a Russian missile attack like the first night of the war in Ukraine.

Air Commodore Blythe Crawford said: “It was not a pretty picture.”

The drills suggested bases would be blown to smithereens and £100 million fighter jets could get blitzed before they could hide.

Air Cdre Crawford, who was head the RAF’s Air and Space Warfare Centre at the time, said it showed the UK “home base” was no longer safe.

4

4

The drills used a £36 million wargaming system to test the UK’s responses to “hundreds of different types of munitions” attacking from multiple different directions.

It exposed multiple vulnerabilities including a chronic shortage of airfields and a lack of hardened shelters for protect and hide jets on the ground.

The government sold off scores of airfields and watered-down the RAF’s powers to commandeer civilian runways.

The Armed Forces rely on RAF Typhoons, which scramble from RAF Lossiemouth, to shoot down incoming drones and cruise missiles.

The only British missiles that could intercept Russian ballistic missiles are based onboard the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers.

Air Cdr Crawford warned Britain had got lax by standing at the edge of Europe and “feeling as though the rest of the continent stood between us and the enemy”.

He said: “Ukraine has made us all sit up.” The government announced last week it was buying six more launchers to for its Sky Sabre air defence systems.

The weapons, used by the Royal Artillery, can shoot down targets the size of a tennis ball at two times the speed of sound.

SEOUL — President Trump announced on Wednesday that the U.S. had struck a trade deal with South Korea, which will now face a 15% tariff on its exports.

Under the deal, South Korea will invest $350 billion in key U.S. industries and purchase $100 billion worth of its liquified natural gas, Trump wrote on social media on Wednesday. He added that further investments would be announced when South Korean President Lee Jae Myung visits Washington in the next two weeks.

The new rate is a significant reduction from the 25% Trump had announced via a letter earlier this month, but still a blow to the longstanding free trade regime that had, for years, kept duties on goods from either country close to zero. Trump has long decried this arrangement as unfair to the U.S., which last year recorded a $66 billion trade deficit with South Korea.

“We are seeing that the negotiations happening in many countries since April are unfolding in a way that is very different from the principles of the WTO or FTA,” said Kim Yong-beom, a senior policy official for South Korea’s presidential office, at a press conference on Thursday. “It is regrettable.”

Kim said that South Korean negotiators had pushed for a 12.5% rate on automobiles — one of the country’s most important exports to the U.S. — but that they had been rebuffed, with Trump firm on his stance that “everybody gets 15%.”

U.S. and South Korean officials appear to be interpreting the deal — whose details are still scant — in different ways.

New cars for export on a car carrier trailer arrive at a port in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, on April 15, 2025.

(Lee Jin-man / Associated Press)

Calling it an “historic trade deal,” commerce secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media that “90% of the profits” of South Korea’s $350 billion investment would go “to the American people,” a claim that has immediately raised eyebrows in South Korea.

Trump said something similar about the $550 billion investment package included in the trade deal struck with Japan earlier this month. Japanese officials, on the other hand, have said the profits would be split proportionately, based on the amount of contribution and risk from each side.

At the press conference, Kim said that Seoul is operating under the assumption that 90% of the profits will be “re-invested” — not unilaterally claimed. He added that the specific terms still need to be laid out on a “per-project basis.”

“In a normal civilized country, who would be able to accept that we invest the money while the U.S. takes 90% of the profits?“ he asked.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has framed the $350 billion investment as a boost to South Korean shipbuilding, semiconductor and energy companies trying to make inroads into the U.S. markets.

“This agreement is the meeting of the U.S.’ interest in reviving manufacturing and our intention to make South Korea companies more competitive in the U.S. market,” he said in a social media post on Thursday. “I hope that it will strengthen industrial cooperation between South Korea and the U.S. as well as our military alliance.”

While Trump also said that “South Korea will be completely OPEN TO TRADE with the United States, and that they will accept American product including Cars and Trucks, Agriculture, etc,” Kim said that agriculture was not part of the deal and that no concessions on U.S. rice or beef — two major points of contention between Seoul and Washington — were given.

South Korea, which is the world’s top importer of American beef, currently bans beef from cattle that are older than 30 months on concerns it may introduce bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease.

Given its status as a staple crop and a critical source of farmers’ livelihoods, rice is one of the few agricultural goods heavily protected by the South Korean government. Seoul currently imposes a 5% tariff on U.S. rice up to 132,304 tons, and 513% for any excess.

“We were able to successfully defend a lot of our positions in those areas,” Kim said.

Canberra says restrictions will be lifted following a ‘rigorous science and risk-based assessment’.

Australia has announced that it will lift tough restrictions on beef imports from the United States, removing measures singled out for criticism by US President Donald Trump.

Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said the government would remove the biosecurity restrictions after a “rigorous science and risk-based assessment” found the risks were being managed on the US side.

“Australia stands for open and fair trade – our cattle industry has significantly benefitted from this,” Collins said in a statement.

Australia, which has some of the world’s toughest biosecurity measures, has until now not accepted beef from cattle raised in Canada and Mexico but slaughtered in the US.

Canberra lifted a ban on beef from cows raised and slaughtered in the US, introduced in response to an outbreak of mad cow disease, in 2019.

The move comes after Trump called out Australia’s restrictions on US beef in his April 2 “Liberation Day” announcement of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries.

“Australia bans – and they’re wonderful people and wonderful everything – but they ban American beef,” Trump said.

“They won’t take any of our beef,” Trump added.

“They don’t want it because they don’t want it to affect their farmers and you know, I don’t blame them but we’re doing the same thing right now starting at midnight tonight, I would say.”

Australia, which exports about 70 percent of its beef, is among the main suppliers of red meat to the US, but consumes little US beef.

Australia exported about 26,000 tonnes of beef and veal to the US in the first three weeks of July, according to government statistics.

Meat & Livestock Australia, a producer-owned company that supports the local beef industry, said the changes would have a minimal effect on the market.

“The potential for US beef to be imported into Australia in large volumes is minimal, given the high demand for beef in the US, the low US cattle herd, the strength of the Australian dollar, our competitive domestic supply, and most importantly Australians’ strong preference for high-quality, tasty and nutritious Australian beef,” the company said.

“In fact, demand for Australian beef in the US continues to grow. In June 2025, exports to the US rose 24 percent year-on-year, despite a 10 percent tariff introduced in April.”