Could Trump Unleash a Little-Discussed Tool to Lower Beef Prices?
White House authority to modify the “Other Country Quota” on beef imports may give the president a powerful — and largely ignored — lever to ease U.S. beef inflation, but if taken would bring negative cattle industry reaction and economic and political consequences
A quiet but consequential debate is emerging among trade experts and livestock analysts: Does the president have the executive authority to change the tariff-rate quota (TRQ) on beef imports known as the “Other Country Quota” (OCQ)?
If the answer is yes, the implications are enormous. It would mean that President Donald Trump holds a largely unexamined mechanism capable of rapidly lowering U.S. beef prices, especially ground beef, at a time when cattle inventories remain at their smallest since the Eisenhower era and retail prices continue to squeeze consumers.
This tool — the OCQ — sits at the center of U.S. beef import policy, yet it rarely makes headlines. And the possibility that the White House could modify it unilaterally has sparked a fresh conversation about how far presidential tariff powers extend under WTO commitments, the Uruguay Round, and long-standing proclamation authority.
What Is the “Other Country Quota”?
The U.S. administers several country-specific beef quotas, such as those allocated to Australia, New Zealand, and Uruguay. But all other supplying nations fall under a catch-all category: “Other Countries.”
This OCQ:
• Covers roughly 65,000 metric tons at a low in-quota tariff.
• Fills almost immediately each year (often on Jan. 2).
• Then triggers a 26.4% out-of-quota tariff, which sharply restricts additional imports.
In practice, the OCQ mainly affects Brazil, Nicaragua, and Paraguay, whose beef — particularly lean trimmings used to make ground beef — becomes far more expensive once the quota is full.
The result: a structural barrier that keeps large volumes of competitively priced foreign lean beef out of the U.S. market during the months when domestic cattle supplies are tight.
Could the President Change the Quota by Executive Action?
Surprisingly, yes — there is a strong legal argument that the president can.
The OCQ originates from:
• Presidential proclamations implementing the Uruguay Round Agreements,
• Delegated authority under the Agricultural Adjustment Act, and
• U.S. tariff-schedule modifications permitted under Section 111(b) of the URAA and related statutes.
Changes to TRQs — including beef — have historically been made via presidential proclamation, not congressional legislation. Presidents have repeatedly modified tariff-rate quotas in other sectors (steel, aluminum, solar, dairy) using these very authorities.
Several additional statutes offer backup pathways:
•IEEPA (used for broad tariff powers during “national emergencies”)
•Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974
• Section 122 (temporary tariff adjustments)
• USMCA Section 103 authority for modifying tariffs on non-USMCA countries
While raising tariffs above WTO limits would be prohibited, lowering them remains entirely permissible.
This is what makes the OCQ such an intriguing — and politically explosive — lever.
The Argentina Precedent: A Sign of Presidential Power
In 2018–2019, the Trump administration restored and reshaped Argentina’s beef access to the U.S. using executive authority alone, confirming that:
- The White House views TRQs as squarely within presidential modification authority.
- A proclamation is sufficient to alter quotas and tariff treatment.
Argentina is not part of the OCQ, but the mechanism Trump used — a proclamation amending the tariff schedule — could apply directly to the Other Country Quota.
| What changed for Argentine beef in 2025• The administration announced it would quadruple the tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for Argentine beef: increasing the amount of beef eligible for the lower tariff before higher duties apply.• Specifically, the quota was raised from 20,000 metric tons to 80,000 metric tons. • • The White House also eliminated the 10% “reciprocal tariff” previously applied to Argentine beef imports under a 2025 framework trade agreement.• As part of broader trade-diplomacy with Argentina (among other countries), the 2025 agreement simplified market access: the deal includes beef and pork among products for which non-tariff and trade-barrier reforms were negotiated.Thus, the combination of a much larger quota and removal of an import tariff is intended to facilitate a substantial increase in Argentine beef entering the U.S. market at lower duty levels.The Argentina action in 2025 was to raise the quota, NOT to reduce the tariff. What changed was simply: a much bigger bucket of beef allowed into the U.S. at the low tariff rate. So, the Argentina move was about increasing the size of the preferential access, rather than altering the tariff structure.The “Other Country” (OCQ) beef category is different:1. Raising the quota. This would increase the amount of beef eligible for low tariff before the 26.4% tariff kicks in.2. Reducing the tariff. This would mean lowering the 26.4% out-of-quota tariff itself — allowing unlimited beef at lower cost.Both levers exist on paper, but they involve different legal tools and different levels of controversy.The real debate is over whether the president can reduce the tariff, not raise the quota. Here’s why:Raising quotas is more legally constrained Most TRQs were locked in under Uruguay Round WTO commitments To raise a quota beyond what the U.S. legally bound in its WTO schedule, the U.S. would need:• A WTO modification/renegotiation process or • A new bilateral agreement with compensation to other exporters.This makes quota increases legally sensitive — doable only under special circumstances.Argentina’s quota increase was possible because:• It was a country-specific TRQ, • It was not a WTO-bound ceiling, • And the U.S. was re-normalizing trade relations with Argentina post-BSE.The OCQ is different: it is WTO-bound and not easily increased without negotiations.Tariff reductions, however, are squarely within presidential authority Lowering the 26.4% out-of-quota tariff is:• WTO-consistent (tariffs can go lower; they just can’t exceed the bound rate).• Administratively adjustable by presidential proclamation, the same mechanism used in 2018–2019 for tariff modifications across steel, solar, Argentina beef access, etc.• Supported by fallback authorities (IEEPA, Section 301, Section 122). This is why tariff reduction is being debated as a realistic executive lever. If Trump wanted to:• He could issue a proclamation tomorrow cutting the OCQ’s out-of-quota tariff from 26.4% to something like 5% or even zero — all without touching the quota volume.• That move would flood the U.S. with lean beef and put immediate downward pressure on ground-beef prices. Bottom Line✔ The 2025 Argentina action = Quota increase, not tariff change.✔ The real untapped “bullet” on OQ beef = Tariff reduction, not quota expansion.✔ Legally, a president is much more able to lower tariffs than to raise quota volumes bound under the WTO.What we don’t yet know definitively (or remains disputed)• While the administration announced the quota jump to 80,000 metric tons, some statements suggest the change “is not part of the framework agreement” between the U.S. and Argentina — meaning timing or final implementation details might remain unsettled in regulatory/legal terms.• The higher “out-of-quota” duty (once the 80,000 t is filled) remains in place — meaning imports beyond that limit would still face steep tariffs.• Critics — especially from the domestic cattle sector — warn the move could undercut U.S. ranchers and may not translate into big price drops for consumers.Why it Matters• The expanded quota + tariff elimination creates a rapid pathway for far more Argentine beef to flow into the U.S. — including lean trims often used in ground beef manufacturing. That could help relieve pressure from tight domestic cattle supply and bring down retail beef prices.• At the same time, increased imports threaten to undercut domestic producers — especially if demand shifts to cheaper foreign beef, eroding prices for U.S. cattle ranchers. That’s why many ranchers and lawmakers are strongly opposed.• The move illustrates how presidential/administration trade levers (quotas, tariffs) — not just domestic agriculture policy — can have major ripple effects on food prices and industry structure. |
In short, the Argentina action demonstrated that a president willing to adjust beef quotas can do so without going through Congress.
Why This Power Matters Now: Beef Prices and Domestic Supply
With the U.S. cattle herd at multi-decade lows, packing-plant disruptions, and persistent ground-beef inflation, the White House is under growing pressure to deliver affordability wins ahead of 2026.
Modifying the OCQ is the fastest route available to dramatically increase supply, particularly of lean beef used for burgers.
A presidential proclamation lowering the 26.4% out-of-quota tariff would:
•Rapidly open the door to additional imports from Brazil, Nicaragua, Paraguay
• Provide a low-cost supply shock for processors
• Ease retail ground-beef prices within weeks
• Reduce pressure on cattle feeders facing volatile markets
From a consumer-impact perspective, this would be more immediate than:
• Expanding domestic slaughter capacity
• Accelerating herd-rebuilding programs
• Adjusting crop-insurance or LRP tools
• Reworking cattle-marketing rules
Yet almost no one in mainstream ag policy circles is discussing this option.
Why the Debate Is Emerging Now
Two forces are converging:
1. Renewed scrutiny of presidential tariff powers
The use of IEEPA, Section 301, and proclamation authority since 2018–2020 dramatically expanded the practical boundaries of executive trade action. Trade lawyers are now revisiting what may still be on the table.
2. Concerns about beef inflation colliding with tight supply
The White House’s political team is intensely focused on visible price reductions. Beef remains the most high-profile, emotionally resonant grocery item for many American households.
A move on the OCQ would score a clear, immediate win — even if politically controversial among cattle producers.
Why Cattle Groups Are Nervous About the Idea
Organizations like NCBA and USCA oppose expanding beef imports because:
• Domestic herd contraction continues or is stable.
• Feedlots already face margin pressure.
• Additional imports could suppress cutter/cow prices.
Any executive action on the OCQ would ignite a political battle between:
• Consumer-price advocates, and
•Domestic cattle groups fearing a new wave of Brazilian or Nicaraguan beef.
A Policy Lever Sitting in the Holster
If the president indeed has the authority to modify the Other Country Quota — and the legal case is stronger than many assume — then the White House is holding an overlooked but potent instrument to lower beef prices.
It is a tool the administration has not publicly discussed, despite:
• Its speed of impact
• Its political visibility
• And its minimal legislative obstacles
But a cattle industry contact notes this:
•When accounting for inflation, beef is not too high. Right where it needs to be relative to the nutritional value/protein.
•Concerns about foot and mouth disease/safety will likely be raised.
•This will likely do more harm to American cattle producers than it will help American consumers. A 10-cent reduction in hamburger is likely not going to move the needle for consumer choices. A $50/cwt drop in cattle prices could drive producers out of business if they don’t have the right risk management strategy in place.
A cattle analyst said: “If they go that route, I hope USDA is saving a huge amount of money for a CPAP-style payment for cattle producers. Regardless, I suspect it would do lasting damage to Trump’s image in the countryside. There would also be an enormous irony in the tariff president being the one to actually take them below WTO levels to the detriment of U.S. producers.”
Whether this becomes part of Trump’s 2026 economic strategy remains to be seen. But the debate is now underway — and the OCQ may be one of the most consequential, under-the-radar trade levers of the year. But the two caveats noted above signal this is an action Trump will not likely take and if he does, there would be major political and economic consequences.
