Economy 5 min read By Callum Montgomery
Trump’s 300,000-ton beef import plan falls far short of target
Only about a fifth of the planned lean beef imports have arrived, and retail ground beef prices remain high despite the reduced tariff rate.
President Donald Trump’s effort to bring down beef prices is falling short, with imports well behind the target he set and grocery prices barely moving. In August, Trump signed a proclamation to temporarily bring 300,000 metric tons of lean beef trimmings into the United States at a reduced tariff rate, with shipments scheduled over 90 days from September through November. As of October 19, U.S. Customs and Border Protection data show the country had imported just 59,423 metric tons, or about 20 per cent of the goal.
The gap between policy and shelf prices is stark. Bureau of Labor Statistics figures show ground beef averaged $6.79 per pound in September, down slightly from $6.92 in August but still above the $6.32 recorded a year earlier. That represents a year-on-year increase of about 7 per cent, far outpacing the 2.5 to 2.9 per cent rise in overall U.S. grocery prices. Beef has become a visible symbol of the affordability squeeze that voters are feeling ahead of the midterm elections.
Trump has singled out beef as a priority for the second half of his term and has pitched the measure as a way to help consumers while supporting the country’s cattle industry. In a post on Truth Social announcing the policy, he wrote that the deal would reduce prices for Americans while giving space for the Great American Beef Herd to grow again. Speaking last month, he said beef prices had become unacceptable to voters and argued that the party needed to win elections to protect ranchers and farmers.
Agricultural economists and farmers, however, are sceptical that the imports will deliver meaningful price cuts. Derrell Peel, a professor of agribusiness specialising in livestock at Oklahoma State University, said the assumption that more supply would lower prices overlooked the complexity of the industry. The imported product is mainly lean trimmings, which are typically blended with fattier domestic trimmings and used largely by fast food restaurants rather than grocery stores, where most consumers shop. Peel also noted that the beef industry was already able to import the lean trimmings it needed, even paying the tariffs, so removing the tariff made supply cheaper without necessarily increasing demand.
Peel added that Brazil and Argentina, which supply much of America’s imported beef, face their own shortages of cattle inventory, which limits how much additional product can be sent. Glynn Tonsor, an agricultural economics professor at Kansas State University, argued that the most direct way to lower beef prices would be to avoid intervening in the market at all, letting prices adjust. He said that if beef demand weakened, prices would eventually fall, though he acknowledged that high prices would also slow imports rather than increase them.
Demand has remained strong even as prices have climbed. Beef demand rose 5.9 per cent in the first six months of 2026 compared with the same period a year earlier. Tonsor attributed higher prices more to demand than to smaller cattle herds, which have been declining for about 60 years and are a long-standing factor in the market.
Farmers have largely opposed the policy. American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall asked Trump to roll it back in a statement last month, arguing that the imports would lower cattle prices and could cost ranchers between $300 and $400 per head. Duvall said the plan undercut a fragile recovery in the cattle industry while failing to benefit consumers. Peel said the modest scale of imports so far has limited the damage to producers, but that farmers were most troubled by government interference in a market that has traditionally favoured free trade.
Peel summed up the challenge plainly: there is no simple policy answer for a market as complex as beef. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
9
