Diesel prices continue climbing, leaving farmers wondering how long this will continue. Chad Smith looks for the answers.

Read Article on FB.org

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall today called on President Trump to roll back plans to import an additional 300,000 metric tons of beef into the United States. An American Farm Bureau Federation analysis shows increasing imports has had little impact on ground beef prices at the grocery store. Meanwhile, cattle prices have weakened, with ranchers experiencing losses up to $300 to $400 per head.

“America’s farmers and ranchers are renewing their call to the president to reverse course on his plan to import foreign-raised beef. While we appreciate Mr. Trump’s goal of reducing grocery costs for America’s families, increasing beef imports has not brought prices down.

“Farm Bureau economists tracked 41 locations since Labor Day and found that, on average, prices have fallen only 16 cents per pound. Most prices were unchanged. Families are still facing historically high prices and the threat of a 60% increase in imports over 90 days caused a sharp drop in the prices paid to ranchers for their cattle.

“To put it simply, the plan undercut a fragile recovery in the cattle industry while failing to benefit consumers. We urge the president to stop importing additional beef and focus on long-term solutions that support rebuilding the U.S. herd, which benefits both farmers and consumers who want home-grown beef.”

Read the Farm Bureau Intel on beef prices here.

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways

• Record imports along with the suspension of the tariff-rate quota for beef trimmings have not lowered ground beef prices for consumers. In fact, American Farm Bureau analysis reveals that since the presidential proclamation, prices remained the same as before the tariff-rate quota changed in 30 of 41 tracked grocery stores across the U.S.
• The market fundamentals that raised beef prices have not gone away. Tight cattle supplies and strong consumer demand continue to support higher consumer beef prices.
• The August presidential proclamation directs USDA and USTR to monitor whether qualifying imported beef is sold at a discount and allows the quota expansion to be reconsidered if that price relief does not materialize.

In late August, President Trump issued a proclamation to temporarily expand the tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for lean beef trimmings by 300,000 metric tons or about 661 million pounds. Beef began entering the United States under the lower tariff rate on Sept. 1, 2026. The proclamation “encourages” grocery stores to sell the beef at a 25% discount, without any retailer commitments or enforcement mechanism.

American Farm Bureau Federation tracked daily prices of 80% lean ground beef at 41 grocery stores in 22 states starting Sept. 2, the day after the proclamation went into effect. We selected a variety of chain grocery stores and independent grocers across America, in major cities to rural areas, to see how ground beef prices reacted to the additional supply of beef.

Across our sample, the average price of ground beef barely moved, going from $7.29 a pound on Sept. 2 to $7.13 a pound on Sept. 23 – a reduction of 16 cents or approximately 2%. The chart below tracks the lowest, highest and average price across all stores each day. The average line stays nearly flat for three weeks, never rising above $7.38 or falling below $7.13, even as lower-tariff beef entered the country.

Prices across the 41 stores range from $4.99 to $10.49 per pound, and the typical store charges $7.23. More than half of the stores (22 of 41) charge above $7 per pound, and four charge close to $9 or more, in Denver; Glen Head, New York; New York City and Porterville, California. No store in our sample sells 80% lean ground beef for less than $4.99 a pound, and the lowest prices are found at just three stores, in Michigan and Arizona. Whether shoppers are in a major city or a rural community, they are still paying elevated prices for ground beef.

At 30 of the 41 stores, ground beef costs exactly what it did on Sept. 2. Some stores cut prices for a short time and then went back to their Sept. 2 price. Seven stores ended the period lower, but only three reached the 25% discount the proclamation encouraged. Prices rose at stores in four cities: Des Moines and Davenport, Iowa, up 39% and 38%, respectively; East Lansing, Michigan, up 25%; and Denver, up 11%.

Removal or expansion of the TRQ on ground beef does lower the tariff-related (26.4%) price of bringing that additional imported beef into the United States. This, however, has not translated into lower grocery store prices. Retail prices are based on costs throughout the supply chain. This includes cattle prices, but also processing, transportation, labor and retail margins. In fact, according to USDA’s Economic Research Service, U.S. ranchers only receive 3.3 cents per dollar spent on food in the grocery store after accounting for their costs.

What This Means for the U.S. Cattle Industry

Policies intended to increase imports under the assumption that they will bring down prices for consumers have yet to deliver meaningful savings at the meat counter while creating uncertainty for U.S. ranchers.

USDA's latest Cattle on Feed report highlights the reality that the industry’s challenge is not insufficient imports but a shrinking domestic supply of cattle. September feedlot inventories remain relatively high at 11.16 million head, but placements have fallen sharply as fewer calves move through the beef production pipeline. The U.S. calf crop is expected to be record low at 32.5 million head, 3.8 million head smaller than its peak in 2018, tightening feeder cattle supplies and limiting future beef production.

Ground beef prices have remained historically high despite record imports, while cattle and feeder cattle futures have moved sharply lower since the proclamation. Cash cattle prices in many regions have also fallen, with some farmers and ranchers reporting prices $300 to $400 per head below levels seen just two months earlier.

The result is imports are creating excess supplies but are incapable of lowering retail prices given the many business- and supply-chain-related decisions and interactions along the supply chain that moves beef from the farmer to the dinner plate. Meanwhile, lower cattle prices are discouraging the long-term certainty needed to grow the nation’s cattle herd and restore beef supply.

Ultimately the most sustainable path toward greater beef availability and improved price stability is not larger volumes of imported beef, but expansion of the U.S. cattle herd and growth in domestic beef production.

Conclusion

The expanded import quota was believed by some to bring relief at the meat counter. After three weeks of tracking 41 grocery stores, that relief has not materialized. At 30 stores, ground beef prices are unchanged, and the average price fell just 16 cents — far short of the 25% discount encouraged by the proclamation.

Meanwhile, cattle prices have weakened and ranchers are absorbing losses of up to $300 to $400 per head. Imports may help fill short-term supply gaps, but they do not address the underlying problem of a historically small U.S. cattle herd.

The proclamation allows the quota expansion to be reconsidered if savings are not reaching consumers and there is limited relief at the meat counter. The evidence is clear; the proclamation should be rolled back, and ranchers should have the opportunity to respond to free market signals and reduced regulatory burdens to rebuild our nation’s cattle supply.

Read Article on FB.org

Originally published on the Federal Trade Commission website, this article alerts farmers to potential farm equipment sales fraud and includes important tips on avoiding these scams, as well as a secure link to report imposters.

The Federal Trade Commission is hearing about a scam targeting some of the hardest working people out there: farmers. Scammers posing as farm equipment businesses are selling (fake) equipment to farmers, who end up empty-handed. Here’s how the scam works and how to avoid it.

It starts like this: you might scroll through social media and see an ad for a tractor. It’s a good price and looks like it’s from a legit business. Or you search online and see a tractor from a business you know, and maybe even bought equipment from before. In either case, when you contact them, they send a purchase agreement and invoice. They typically ask you to send thousands of dollars — usually by wire transfer — as a deposit or full payment, and schedule a delivery date.

What happens next? The delivery never comes. It turns out this was never a legit business and was all a scam. The scammer either stops answering or makes up another excuse (e.g., there’s an issue with the delivery truck). You’re out both the money and a tractor.

How can you (or your local farmer) avoid these and other impersonation scams?

• Before you buy based on any ad, check it out. Social media companies don’t always vet ads. Do some research by searching online for the company name plus “scam” or “complaint.”
• Know that the first search results you see might be paid ads. Sometimes scammers place them: they pretend to be a real business but use their own contact info instead. Scroll past those ads to the unpaid search results to help confirm you have the right website or contact information.
• Never send money to anyone who says you can only pay by wire transfer, gift card, cryptocurrency, or payment app. Scammers prefer these methods because once they’ve collected the money, it’s almost impossible to get it back.

Spot an impersonation scam? Tell the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

View the original article on the FTC website here.

Read Article on FB.org

USDA recently moved to streamline the farm loan process, but it’s only one piece of the farm economy puzzle. Chad Smith has the details.

Read Article on FB.org

The Make America Healthy Again movement is leaving its mark on discussions around food and agriculture. Although support for MAHA has cooled a bit as the label becomes increasingly politicized, the movement’s impact is unmistakable. In fact, recent polling shows that most Americans are not immune to MAHA’s influence as it continues to shape consumer perceptions.

From an influx of discussions around how our food is grown and processed, MAHA has left many Americans concerned about, or at least questioning, what is safe and healthy for themselves and their families. These concerns matter for agriculture as more Americans are further removed from the farm and have a harder time sorting through what’s true and not true. To be clear, there are certainly opportunities for improvements in diets and how food is produced, but the volume of misinformation has never been quite so loud. The average American doesn’t have regular, if any, opportunities to engage directly with farmers or see for themselves. Thankfully, trust in farmers and ranchers remains high. How can farmers and others in agriculture jump into the discussion, build on that trust, and address growing concerns? Is it too late?

Let’s answer the latter question first: no, it is not too late. But we do need to look at the landscape to engage thoughtfully. How we engage comes down to our spheres of influence and channels for communication. According to research by the American Farm Bureau and Morning Consult, 41% of Americans get their information about food and farming from friends and family. Trust research from Edelman shows an even higher percentage of adults leaning on friends and family when it comes to their health, with 71% citing their personal circles as their most trusted source, coming in just behind medical experts and their doctors (78%). That same poll from Edelman also shows that 70% of adults believe at least one divisive health claim popularized by the MAHA movement.

The mainstream effect of MAHA reaches agriculture most noticeably on the topic of pesticide safety. American Farm Bureau and Morning Consult research shows that 7 in 10 Americans are concerned about pesticide use in agriculture. Research from Pew shows similar levels of concern with a study that cites 69% of Americans concerned about “harmful chemicals” on farmland and 78% concerned about “harmful chemicals” in their food.

Concern does not always translate to an extreme stance, but it shouldn’t be brushed aside, either. Perceptions around the safety of chemicals in agriculture cover a broad range of views and are often rooted in a desire to better understand how food is grown and how that impacts health. When you dig further into these concerns, there is an opportunity to discuss how pesticides are used safely and how these tools even contribute to some regenerative practices.

So then, how can these concerns be tackled head on? First, by listening. Every conversation looks different, but every engagement matters and starts with the same foundation: shared values. A mom who is concerned about the cost of her grocery bill may simply be looking for reassurance that non-organic produce is safe and nutritious. All farmers can share how careful they are to use just what is needed when it comes to pesticides. They can also share how they rely on years of careful independent research and review by career scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency. On the other hand, a Gen Z shopper who is concerned about soil health and environmental impacts may find it compelling to learn about how all types of agriculture, both conventional and organic, employ regenerative practices to keep farmland healthy for generations to come.

Topics like health and affordability are natural places to find common ground. And as food inflation continues to be a top concern for consumers, affordability should not be siloed off from discussions around nutrition. A recent Associated Press poll found that 8 in 10 Americans have changed their grocery shopping habits because of rising food costs. When it comes to the wellbeing of our family and friends, no one wants to put a price tag on health. But health and affordability can go hand-in-hand. Shoppers should enter the grocery store with an understanding of how their food is grown as they look to make the best choices for their families. This is another opportunity for farmers to meaningfully enter the conversation as a trusted voice.

Cost also plays an important role on the farm, but navigating financial pressures does not mean sacrificing safety. For example, protecting crops from pests and disease is critical to getting those crops from the farm to the market to provide safe, nutritious and affordable food. This is where consumers appreciate transparent conversations, even if they disagree on certain farming practices. Research consistently shows that pairing shared values with science-backed messaging increases openness with consumers who are hungry for facts from people they trust: farmers and ranchers. 

Regardless of what is trending, farmers and ranchers can assure their friends, neighbors and communities that modern agriculture isn’t about choosing between safety and affordability. Thanks to a commitment to doing the right thing, along with innovation, strict regulation, decades of research, and careful stewardship, farmers are already prioritizing both.

Read Article on FB.org

The Senate Ag Committee finally moved its farm bill through to the full Senate for a vote. Chad Smith has more on what’s next.

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways

• Diesel prices are rising as harvest begins across the country. The national average on-highway diesel price reached $6.285 per gallon, up more than $2.50 from the same week last year. Farm diesel prices are also climbing, reaching $5.45 per gallon on Sept. 4, up from $3.02 a year earlier.

• Crude oil prices have increased about 14% since the beginning of September while inventories remain low.

• Higher fuel costs are compounding on already tight budgets. Even as the grain market rallies and crop revenues are projected to improve, increased production costs continue to keep major row crops below breakeven.

Diesel prices are on the rise as harvest begins across the country, adding another cost for farmers during one of the most fuel-intensive times of the year. On Sept. 14, the national average on-highway diesel price reached $6.285 per gallon, up from $5.97 the week before and up more than $2.50 per gallon from the same week last year, an increase of nearly 70% year over year.

Diesel used for farming purposes is generally exempt from the 24.4-cent-per-gallon federal highway fuel tax, with state tax treatment varying by state. Even with that exemption, farm diesel prices have climbed sharply. The average farm diesel price reached $5.45 per gallon on Sept. 4, up from $3.02 a year earlier, an increase of about 80%.

This increase, along with rising fertilizer prices, is due to several disruptions in the global energy markets. First, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has limited a major shipping route for global oil markets. Additionally, attacks on infrastructure by Houthi rebels in the Bab al-Mandab Strait in the Red Sea, paired with limited refining capacity in Russia due to the ongoing war, continue to reduce global supplies. These major disruptions continue to push crude prices and diesel higher.

Farmers need diesel, especially during harvest season. Tractors, combines and irrigation equipment are all fueled by diesel, and once crops leave the field, it's critical to transportation throughout the agricultural supply chain. Higher diesel prices drive costs higher for farmers and throughout the supply chain as transportation gets more expensive.

This shock comes at a time when margins are already thin, and farmers are facing record-high production costs. USDA forecasts farm fuel and oil expenses at approximately $22 billion in 2026, up nearly 29%, or almost $5 billion, from 2025. Despite increased grain prices, farmers are expected to operate below breakeven once again. This could potentially carry over into the 2027 crop year as the disruptions continue.

Crude Oil Moves Above $100 a Barrel

Crude oil prices continue to rise, reaching over $100 a barrel in September. October West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures closed at $102.56 per barrel on Sept. 16, down from $105.83 the previous day. October WTI futures were $90.22 per barrel on Sept. 1, an increase of roughly 14% in just over two weeks. The increase follows prices near $70 per barrel earlier this summer.

Crude prices, however, are not solely responsible for rising diesel prices. Diesel prices also reflect refinery capacity, inventories and demand for the finished product. When supplies of refined fuel are tight, diesel prices can increase faster than crude oil and can remain elevated even when crude prices temporarily retreat.

U.S. Distillate Inventories Remain Tight

U.S. inventories provide relatively little cushion against those market disruptions. Distillate fuel inventories, which include diesel and heating oil, fell from approximately 127.2 million barrels in January to 109.4 million barrels in June, a decline of nearly 18 million barrels, or about 14%.

When stocks are high, the market has more flexibility to respond to refinery outages, transportation disruptions or stronger demand. When inventories are already tight, those same disruptions can translate into larger and faster price movements.

Current stocks are also low compared with levels during much of the past decade. U.S. distillate inventories regularly exceeded 140 million barrels during portions of the 2010s and climbed well above that level in 2020. Since then, inventories have generally remained much tighter.

U.S. Fuel Supplies Serve a Global Market

At the same time, U.S. refiners are supplying a significant amount of distillate fuel to international markets. The United States exported approximately 456 million barrels of distillate fuel in 2025, compared with about 473 million barrels in 2024. Imports totaled only about 58 million barrels in 2025. Mexico remained the largest market for U.S. distillate exports in 2025, accounting for about 17% of total exports. Other major destinations included Chile, Brazil, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

That trade reflects the structure of the U.S. refining system, particularly along the Gulf Coast where refineries are closely connected to international markets. Exports themselves are not new, but they become more important to watch when global fuel supplies tighten. Higher international prices can increase demand for U.S.-produced fuel at the same time domestic inventories are already limited.

Bottom Line

The timing of the diesel price increase is particularly challenging for agriculture. Harvest requires long hours of equipment use, and crops must then be transported from fields to elevators, processors and ports. Those fuel costs can accumulate quickly across an operation.

Farmers have also entered this period with limited room to absorb another increase in expenses. Commodity prices have struggled to keep pace with elevated production costs, making increases in diesel another hit to already tight margins. Until crude prices ease, global fuel supplies improve or U.S. inventories rebuild, diesel is likely to remain a significant source of cost uncertainty for farmers heading through harvest and into the 2027 production year.

Read Article on FB.org

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall commented today on the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry vote to advance the farm bill to the full Senate.

“We applaud members of the Senate Agriculture Committee who recognize the critical support the farm bill provides for America’s farmers and ranchers. We appreciate Chairman Boozman’s leadership in moving this legislation forward and we urge lawmakers in the House and Senate to advance a farm bill to President Trump’s desk.

“It’s been almost a decade since Congress last passed a farm bill. In the past 10 years, more than 200,000 family farms have gone out of business, as farmers grappled with a pandemic, global unrest, rising expenses and falling prices paid for the food they grow. A new, modernized farm bill will help give farmers the tools they need to survive continued and unforeseen challenges ahead.

“More than 100 farmers and ranchers descended on Washington this week to send the message that we’re counting on Congress to work together to advance a bipartisan farm bill. A strong farm bill ensures an abundant and safe food supply. It benefits every family in America, regardless of their political affiliation.”

Read Article on FB.org

Testimony of Carlyle Currier

President, Colorado Farm Bureau

U.S. House Committee on Agriculture

Wednesday, September 16, 2026

Increasing Demand and Opportunities for Homegrown Products Here and Abroad

Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and distinguished members of the House Committee on Agriculture. My name is Carlyle Currier, and I serve as the President of Colorado Farm Bureau. I am also here today representing the American Farm Bureau Federation. I want to thank you for the opportunity to join these committee proceedings and share my testimony.

I live and ranch on Colorado’s western slope, in the rural community of Plateau Valley — home to around 1,400 residents. Ranching is the lifeblood of our community, sustaining families like mine since the 1880s. Our community is home to many legacy ranches that are legally defined by the State of Colorado as Centennial Ranches — ranches that have been continuously owned and operated by the same family for more than 100 years.

Currier Ranch is one of those Centennial Ranches. My son Joel is the fifth generation on the ranch. Joel and I raise beef cattle and ship calves in the fall when they come off our U.S. Forest Service permit at around 600-700 pounds. Our beef is fed, finished, and enters the supply chain for consumers. In our program, we also retain ownership, which allows us to obtain proprietary data used to improve genetic performance. For us, improving genetic performance translates into more efficient use of our natural resources and yields a higher quality product for consumers, as well as a premium price. Like many other businesses, in ranching, return is tied to demand. The return on my investment in my own herd is forever tied to consumer demand for American beef. As an aging rancher, I often run calculations as to how tax liabilities impact today’s bottom line and tomorrow’s next generation of ownership. Fortunately, Congress fortified long-term capital investments into the beef industry by making permanent critical tax provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed last summer. Provisions like permanent estate tax exemptions and business income deductions will enable farmers to invest back into their business, encouraging herd rebuilding and empowering succession planning. Ultimately, I look forward to the day when I can hand the reins over to my son because I know he now has a better chance to succeed in producing American beef and carrying on the legacy of the four generations before him.

Ranching in the West comes with many challenges. Unpredictable weather patterns, long distances between livestock markets, and a shortage of veterinarians and processors are just a few of those challenges. I’d like to thank the committee for including necessary updates to the Livestock Forage Program, or LFP, the Livestock Indemnity Program, and vitally important animal health programs. Due to these changes, ranchers who experience a D2 or greater drought for four consecutive weeks are eligible for LFP. Before, that timeframe was eight weeks.

As we are all aware, wildfires and predation in the West are an all-too-common occurrence. Ranchers like me can now be indemnified for 100% market value of an animal lost to predation and 75% for losses from adverse weather or disease. More importantly, LIP will now cover unborn livestock losses occurring after Jan. 1, 2024.

Supply and Demand

We can discuss the programs that are there to help ranchers get through tough times, but nothing helps a cattle rancher more than strong demand, fair and free trade, and a consistent marketplace. In a May 2026 Farm Bureau Market Intel, AFBF economists said that “Americans are eating more meat than ever,” and that “beef prices continue to set records driven by strong demand and the smallest U.S. cattle herd in 75 years – a result of years of drought and elevated operating costs that have led farmers to liquidate their herds.”

According to data from USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS), the national average retail price for all-fresh beef was a record-high $9.99 per pound in April 2026, up $1.50 per pound, or about 18%, from April 2025. When it comes to beef, steaks are the king of the grill. According to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (FRED), the national average price of all uncooked beef steaks in U.S. cities was record high at $13.02 per pound in April, up 17% from $11.12 per pound last year.

Behind these higher prices, the United States is navigating the lowest cattle supply in 75 years. This smaller supply follows years of drought and elevated operating costs that have led farmers and ranchers to liquidate their herds. Disruptions tied to New World screwworm (NWS) restrictions along the southern border have further restricted the domestic cattle supply.

On the other side of the beef price equation is demand, which traditionally climbs even higher during the summer grilling months. This increased demand goes back to the COVID-19 shutdowns when beef quickly became the meat protein of choice for the majority of consumers who were now cooking at home.

USDA’s September World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report estimates that 2026 total U.S. beef consumption will be approximately 28.9 billion pounds. While that is slightly lower than earlier forecasts, it remains historically strong and well above pre-pandemic levels, highlighting the continued demand for beef from American consumers.

USDA’s September WASDE also projects total 2026 beef production is approximately 24.9 billion pounds. Despite productivity gains from improved genetics, management practices, and heavier cattle weights, domestic production continues to be constrained by historically tight cattle supplies and the lingering effects of years of drought, elevated costs, and herd liquidation.

It’s important to note that projected beef production remains roughly 4 billion pounds below expected consumption, a gap of nearly 14%. Put simply, Americans continue to consume more beef than U.S. farmers and ranchers currently produce. Closing that gap will require time, investment, and confidence from producers who are considering whether or not to retain heifers and rebuild the national cattle herd.

One way farmers and ranchers have helped fill the gap between supply and demand is by feeding cattle to higher weights. The average monthly live weight of all federally inspected cattle in March 2026 was a record-high 1,475 pounds. This follows the average monthly live weight rising every month since June 2025.

Heavier cattle mean fattier beef and a higher proportion of fat trimmings available for use in ground beef production. According to data from Oklahoma State University, ground beef makes up the largest portion of beef consumed in the United States, accounting for slightly less than 48% of all U.S. beef consumed in 2025.

Ground beef is made from a combination of fat trimmings and lean trimmings. Due to the abundance of fat trimmings from heavier domestic cattle, and the undersupply of lean trimmings, the U.S. imports lean trimmings to balance the scale. This, along with U.S. demand exceeding the domestic supply, has led to higher beef imports over the last few years. During the first quarter of 2026, the U.S. imported 562,000 metric tons valued at nearly $4.5 billion – up 18% from the same period last year and 122% from five years ago.

For beef prices to come down, ranchers have to rebuild the U.S. cattle herd, or consumer demand would have to drastically cool. Looking ahead, cattle producers still face substantial uncertainty that clouds herd rebuilding decisions. It takes about two years from the time a farmer decides to retain a heifer until she produces a calf of her own. This means if farmers begin retaining heifers now, it will be 2028 at the earliest before those heifers’ calves contribute to meaningful growth in cattle supplies.

Production Costs

We greatly appreciate American consumers unwavering demand for beef and understand the pressures families face at the grocery store because we face many of those same pressures on the ranch. The cost of feed, fuel, equipment, veterinary care, labor, and financing have all increased, and those are not expenses we can simply choose to do without.

Recent Administrative Actions on Beef Imports

I’m not alone when I say that I was caught off guard by the recent decision to waive the tariff rate quota (TRQ) on 300,000 metric tons of lean beef trimmings for 90 days. This beef will come from countries that have considerably lower production costs and animal welfare standards, and fewer regulations, which allow them to undercut cattle operations like mine.

The additional 300,000 metric tons are allocated across four specific tariff lines: fresh or chilled certified organic lean beef trimmings, fresh or chilled lean beef trimmings classified as "other," and their frozen counterparts. According to USDA’s Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS), through the first half of 2026, beef imports under these tariff lines have totaled more than $3 billion on just over 370,000 metric tons – with an average import value of nearly $8,200 per metric ton or $3.71 per pound. Importantly, by raising the TRQ for the 300,000 metric tons, the out-of-quota tariff rate of 26.4% is effectively waived. With an estimated current market value of $2.5 billion for 300,000 metric tons of beef trimmings, the waived tariff amount equates to nearly $650 million in waived tariffs for foreign-sourced beef – at the expense of hard-working American ranchers who are now selling calves at prices that are $300 to $400 below prices just two months ago.

To put it simply: the timing of this announcement could not have come at a worse time. Many ranchers are currently deciding whether to retain heifers, purchase breeding stock and begin rebuilding their herds. Those are not short-term decisions. When a rancher retains a heifer, they are choosing not to market that animal today in exchange for the possibility of future calf crops years down the road. In many cases, it takes multiple years and multiple calf sales before that investment pays for itself. If farmers and ranchers lose confidence that those investments will earn a return, they simply will not expand their herds.

Rebuilding the Herd

To better understand why cattle herd numbers matter and how they affect grocery store prices, as well as how policy decisions can affect future beef supplies, it’s helpful to understand the entire production cycle.

The process begins when a cow gives birth to a calf. For the first several months of its life, the calf remains with its mother, nursing, and grazing while receiving care from farmers. The calf is typically weaned (removed from the care of its mother) at 6 to 10 months of age, when it weighs between 500 and 700 pounds. At this stage, farmers have a big decision to make; they can either retain the calf for breeding or sell it to begin the beef production process. Approximately 70% of cattle growers have calves in the spring, which means they are marketed in the fall.

Option #1: Retain the calf for breeding purposes

By retaining the heifer (female) calf, the rancher chooses to expand their herd by way of the heifer’s future calves. In doing so, they forego any revenue they would have received from feeding that animal for beef production. Retention rates have dwindled in recent years due to ongoing drought and rising operating costs, driving ranchers to market their heifer calves for beef production rather than keep them for herd expansion.

At about 12-15 months of age, the heifer will be bred. Ranchers breed their heifers to bulls selected for a variety of genetic factors to maximize the beef production potential while also prioritizing the likelihood of a safe and healthy gestation (pregnancy) period. Once bred, it takes 283 days for a heifer to produce a calf. Once the calf is born, its mother (now considered a cow) will feed and care for it until it reaches its desired weaning weight. At that point, the rancher again decides whether to retain the calf for breeding purposes or market it for beef production. As for the cow, the rancher will typically opt to repeat the cycle, waiting about 85 days to breed her again to maintain a yearly calving interval.

A healthy, well-cared-for beef cow can typically produce calves until they are roughly 10 years old. Once the cow reaches that age, the rancher will usually sell it to a feedyard or finishing operation, where it is then sold to a meatpacker for processing.

The retention of bull (male) calves for breeding purposes is less common, as ranchers typically seek to breed their heifers and cows on bulls from other herds. However, if a rancher raises and sells breeding animals with superior genetics (known as seedstock) to other ranchers, they might choose to raise the bull calf separate from their herd, with the hopes of marketing the bull’s semen to other beef operations for breeding purposes.

Option #2: Put the calf into the beef supply chain

If the farmer decides the calf will enter the beef supply chain, it will most likely be placed in a feedlot or on pasture to grow. As the animal develops, it gains weight to around 900 pounds over the next six to eight months, depending on the animal’s weight when this step begins. At about 900 pounds and roughly 18 months of age, the animal is then typically finished in a feedlot where it receives a carefully balanced diet designed to support growth and high-quality beef. Today’s cattle are often raised to weights approaching 1,500 pounds before being marketed.

Once cattle reach the desired weight, farmers and ranchers sell them to meat processors (sometimes called packers). The beef is then graded for quality, processed into larger wholesale cuts, and shipped as boxed beef throughout the food system. From there, it moves to grocery stores, restaurants, food distributors and export markets around the world.

The final step is the one consumers see every day. Beef is cut into familiar products such as steaks and roasts and turned into ground beef for sale at grocery stores and restaurants.

Domestic Markets

I mentioned earlier about premiums, and there is no better premium than a USA label. We are thankful that the President and his Administration are continuing the voluntary Product of the USA label that was proposed and finalized under his predecessor.

This voluntary label can create increased opportunities for ranchers like me to capture additional premiums within the market. Under the 2026 standards and criteria for the voluntary label, the Trump Administration empowered Americans — producers and consumers alike — to leverage the power of the free market.

Even though consumers often face sticker shock at the grocery store, data shows price has not discouraged consumers from purchasing muscle cuts of beef. That consumer loyalty is one of the reasons ranchers have confidence in the future of our industry. In fact, demand has increased year over year. The consistently improved quality of beef correlates with an inelastic consumer demand that has been unmatched by other grocery staples. In reality, very little that is done in the public policy arena compels retailers to lower prices.

Suffice it to say, consumers both in the U.S. and around the world cannot get enough of the high-quality beef produced by American ranchers. We must continue to pursue open trade opportunities that allow us to supplement our country's demand for lean beef. Producing high-quality American beef and bolstering the market for primal cuts such as center-plate proteins, equips producers to capitalize on premier retail opportunities that are expanding like never before.

Durable regulatory and policy decisions have long been a hallmark of federal ag policy that has provided much-needed sustainability for ranchers and their rural communities. It is legislation like the farm bill that has provided the framework for farm economies and our food systems.

As both a rancher and a consumer, I certainly recognize that we must carefully balance producers’ bottom lines and the affordability of our nation’s food supply. The challenge is that cattle production operates on a biological timeline that cannot be rushed. Rebuilding the national herd requires long-term investments and confidence in a return on those investments. Rebuilding the U.S. cattle herd demands predictability just as our markets and consumers demand consistency, and reactionary policy decisions often cause unrealized turbulence rather than realized gain.

Thank you for having me here today, and I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have.

Read Article on FB.org