Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How much beef is imported into the USA from other countries and is called US beef because it's packaged here
Executive summary
U.S. beef imports have surged in recent years and are projected to peak around 2025 at roughly 4.4 billion pounds (about 2 million tonnes) by USDA forecasts, with some industry sources projecting slightly higher figures (e.g., 4.77 billion lb) [1] [2]. Current USDA/FSIS labeling rules (before the 2026 change noted by some advocates) have allowed imported beef that is slaughtered, processed, or merely repackaged in the U.S. to carry voluntary “Product of USA”/“Made in USA” claims, a practice that critics say lets foreign beef be marketed as American [3] [4].
1. U.S. import volumes: record highs and peak projections
Imports climbed sharply through 2024 and into 2025 as domestic beef production tightened; USDA Economic Research Service projected imports to peak in 2025 at about 4.4 billion pounds (around two million tonnes) [1]. Independent trade and industry outlets report similar magnitudes and note monthly import volumes in mid‑2025 of roughly 150,000–185,000 metric tons per month, consistent with record import flows for the period [5] [6]. Some private trackers project slightly different numbers (for example, a projection of 4.77 billion pounds for 2025), but all sources point to historic import levels [2].
2. Where that beef comes from
Major suppliers to the U.S. have included Australia, Canada, Brazil, Mexico and others; in 2024 Australia accounted for a large share (about 24% of imported beef by one industry estimate), with Canada and Brazil also significant contributors [7] [8]. The “Other” quota category—often filled by countries without bilateral quota arrangements—has seen substantial use by exporters such as Brazil [9]. Exact country shares vary month to month and by product form (fresh/chilled, frozen, trimmings).
3. Why imports rose: lean trimmings, ground beef demand, and herd dynamics
Analysts point to a smaller U.S. cattle herd and reduced cow slaughter that tightened domestic supplies of lean grinding beef, increasing reliance on imports—especially trimmings used for ground beef—while strong consumer demand and high prices persisted [7] [10]. USDA projections tie import peaks to cyclical herd rebuilding and lower domestic production in the short term, which should reduce imports as production recovers later in the baseline horizon [1].
4. Labeling rules that let foreign product appear “American”
Under current voluntary USDA/FSIS rules described in reporting and advocacy materials, beef can be labeled “Product of USA” or “Made in USA” if it is processed in the United States—even when animals were born, raised and slaughtered abroad—or if imported meat is repackaged here [3] [4]. Investigations and industry commentators have documented packages that display “Product of USA” while small print discloses multiple origins or “processed in USA,” a practice critics call misleading [11] [12].
5. Policy debate and changes underway
There is active policy debate and regulatory movement: advocacy groups and some lawmakers push to restore mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) and to tighten “Product of USA” rules so the label means the animal was born, raised and processed in the U.S. [13] [14]. Media and government reporting show the USDA has been revisiting voluntary labeling guidance and that final rules scheduled to take effect in 2026 would narrow the conditions under which “Product of USA” can be used; Canada and industry stakeholders have also reacted to these proposed changes [15] [13].
6. Two competing perspectives
- Industry and many economists emphasize imports’ role in stabilizing ground‑beef supply and allowing higher value recovery for U.S. cattle (imports supply lean trimmings for grinding), arguing trade helps the integrated supply chain [10].
- Ranchers, some state politicians, and advocacy groups argue the labeling loophole hurts U.S. producers by allowing cheaper foreign beef to compete under “Product of USA” claims and seek mandatory COOL or stricter labeling so consumers and producers aren’t misled [16] [12].
7. What the sources do not settle
Available sources do not mention precise shares of all imported beef that end up packaged and sold with “Product of USA” labels at retail nationwide. They also do not provide a definitive, audited breakdown of how many packages carrying “Product of USA” are entirely foreign‑origin versus fully U.S. origin—reporting documents examples and regulatory rules but not a comprehensive retail audit [3] [11].
8. Practical takeaway for consumers and policymakers
If your concern is origin transparency, reporters and advocates recommend reading fine‑print origin statements and seeking products certified by voluntary programs that specify “born, raised and slaughtered in USA.” Policymakers face a tradeoff: tighter labeling to protect domestic producers and inform consumers versus trade and WTO considerations that partly shaped earlier labeling law changes [4] [17].
Sources cited in this briefing: USDA ERS import projections and USDA trade reporting [1] [6]; industry reporting and analysis on import volumes and origins [7] [2] [5]; coverage and critiques of USDA/FSIS “Product of USA” labeling and COOL history from Food & Wine, The Counter, CBC, investigative outlets and advocacy groups [3] [4] [15] [11] [13].