Antitrust Radar
Competition Research BriefsAR-RB-2026-01

Beef Meatpacking Buyer Power

Why an 85% procurement CR4 is not the same as an industry HHI

By Antitrust Radar Research TeamResearch briefJul 19, 2026Version 1.0 · Current edition

Central finding

USDA Economic Research Service reports that the four largest beef packers handled 36 percent of U.S. steer and heifer purchases in 1980, 81 percent in 1995, and 85 percent by 2019.

Descriptive concentration measures do not by themselves establish competitive harm, unlawful conduct, or a causal effect.

3
sources
3
CR4 anchors
85%
latest buyer CR4

Publication accountability

Recorded source access / review
. This is not an independent review date.
Authorship and responsibility
Antitrust Radar Research Team. Inspect individual roles and disclosure gaps.
Evidence overview

Bounded buyer-power evidence

The national CR4 opens a regional research question; it does not answer it.

Buyer-power dossier

Inspect definition, anchors, and HHI gate

Open route

Census industry screen

Audit the separate revenue denominator

Open route

USDA source dossier

Audit custody, method, and publication

Open route
Sources, citations, and policy proposals

Public action docket

What government can require next

3 asks

ForUSDA, DOJ, Congress, state agriculture officials, and cattle-market researchers

  1. 01
    Publish regional procurement-share tables

    Release individual packer purchase shares by stable procurement geography and year, with denominators, common-control links, disclosure rules, and revision histories kept explicit.

  2. 02
    Build a public capacity and transaction history

    Connect plants, owners, capacity, entry, exit, acquisitions, divestitures, and identifier changes so researchers can distinguish structural change from reporting change.

  3. 03
    Evaluate producer and buyer-side outcomes

    Study bids, cattle prices, transportation options, quality terms, entry, capacity utilization, and wholesale spreads inside defensible procurement markets without treating the national CR4 as a causal result.

Evidence still needed

Individual packer purchase sharesStable regional procurement geographiesPlant ownership, capacity, entry, exit, and transaction histories
Open advocacy brief

Reader packet

Reusable

Canonical citation

Antitrust Radar Research Team. (2026, July 19). Beef Meatpacking Buyer Power: Why an 85% procurement CR4 is not the same as an industry HHI. Competition Research Briefs, AR-RB-2026-01 (Version 1.0). Antitrust Radar. https://antitrustradar.org/reports/meatpacking-buyer-power

JSONCSV
BibTeXRIS

Briefing packetcite, audit, actBuyer CR4 JSON3 exact USDA anchorsBuyer CR4 CSVaggregate rows / no interpolationUSDA source dossiercustody, method, publicationCensus industry screenstrict 2017-2022 NAICS pairBuyer-power dossierdefinition, history, evidence gateAction briefregional disclosure askMethodologydenominators and limits

Source basis

USDA ERS historical national CR4 for steer and heifer purchases, paired with separately bounded 2017 and 2022 Economic Census revenue concentration rows for NAICS 311611.

3

Source records

3

Buyer CR4 anchors

2

agency report, public dataset

Source types

5

Evidence asks

Read the briefing

Evidence index

Claim to public action

Published Jul 19, 2026 · sources through Jul 19, 2026 · version 1.0 · Current edition

Read / Briefing claim

Start with the authored claim and its analytical boundary.

Start with the buyer-side CR4 path, the separate Census revenue screen, and the denominator boundary.

Interpretation boundaryRead the finding with the report's declared market, geography, vintage, and limitations.
Read the analysis
Competition Research Brief / AR-RB-2026-01

Buyer power rose before the public record became firm-complete.

Read the USDA buyer-side CR4 path beside the related Census industry screen without merging their firms, denominators, or geographic meaning.

National buyer CR4
36% to 85%
1980-2019
Published change
+49 pp
Three direct USDA anchors
Census revenue HHI
1,174.8 to 1,250.7
Separate industry screen
Firm-level buyer HHI
Withheld
Individual packer shares absent

Buyer-side concentration history

Four packers handled 85% of reported steer and heifer purchases by 2019.

Fixed 0-100% share scale

USDA ERS / national aggregate

Share handled by the four largest beef packers

No interpolated years
National buyer-side beef-packer CR4 at three published USDA anchorsThe four largest beef packers handled 36 percent of reported steer and heifer purchases in 1980, 81 percent in 1995, and 85 percent in 2019.0%20%40%60%80%100%36%198081%199585%2019National buyer-side beef-packer CR4 at three published USDA anchorsThe four largest beef packers handled 36 percent of reported steer and heifer purchases in 1980, 81 percent in 1995, and 85 percent in 2019.0%50%100%36%198081%199585%2019
Each point is directly reported by USDA. Connecting lines aid reading; they do not claim observations for intervening years.

Related industry screen

The Census revenue comparison moved modestly on both published measures.

Strict same-code / same-label pair
Revenue concentration

HHI

+75.9
20171,174.8
20221,250.7
0Fixed industry HHI scale2,500
Four-firm revenue share

CR4

+2.6 pp
201763.4%
202266%
0%Fixed revenue-share scale100%

Denominator boundary

Two useful systems answer two different questions.

Never combined into one score
01 / Buyer-side aggregate

USDA national procurement CR4

Numerator
Purchases handled by the four largest beef packers
Denominator
Reported U.S. steer and heifer purchases
Supports
A national structural trend and buyer-power research
Cannot establish
Individual shares, HHI, or regional producer options
Linked contextnot interchangeable evidence
02 / Seller-side industry screen

Census national revenue concentration

Numerator
Revenue attributed to employer firms in NAICS 311611
Denominator
National industry revenue in the Census universe
Supports
A same-industry statistical screen across two vintages
Cannot establish
A legal cattle procurement market or buyer conduct

Public evidence gate

Publish firm-level buyer HHI only when regional evidence can carry it.

The buyer series compares three directly published USDA national CR4 anchors. The industry screen compares a strict same-code, same-label Census pair for NAICS 311611. No annual values are interpolated, and the two denominators remain separate.

Published now

Three source-reported national buyer-side CR4 anchors A strict 2017-2022 same-NAICS Census revenue comparison Official source custody and explicit non-comparability rules

Required next

Individual packer purchase shares under documented common control Reproducible regional cattle procurement market definitions Plant capacity, procurement distance, contracts, prices, and entry evidence
HHI decisionWithheld

Aggregate CR4 and industry revenue screens do not reveal the regional firm distribution needed for buyer-side HHI.

Open the public evidence ask

Executive summary

USDA Economic Research Service reports that the four largest beef packers handled 36 percent of U.S. steer and heifer purchases in 1980, 81 percent in 1995, and 85 percent by 2019. That national buyer-side CR4 documents a major structural shift, but it does not reveal individual packer shares or the regional procurement choices facing a particular rancher. The related 2022 Economic Census screen for NAICS 311611, Animal (except poultry) slaughtering, reports revenue HHI 1,250.7 and CR4 66.0, compared with HHI 1,174.8 and CR4 63.4 in 2017. The Census revenue screen and USDA procurement CR4 use different denominators and answer different questions, so Antitrust Radar keeps them linked but never combines them into one score. Stronger public evidence would publish individual packer purchase shares and reproducible regional procurement tables while retaining capacity, entry, cost, cattle-price, and wholesale-spread context.

36% to 85%

national buyer-side CR4

+49 percentage points across three directly reported USDA anchors; no intervening years are inferred.

USDA Economic Research Service

1,174.8 to 1,250.7

NAICS 311611 revenue HHI

The strict same-code Census comparison increased 75.9 points from 2017 to 2022.

U.S. Economic Census

63.4% to 66%

NAICS 311611 revenue CR4

The industry revenue CR4 rose 2.6 percentage points; it is not the USDA buyer-side procurement CR4.

Separate Census denominator

Withheld

firm-level buyer HHI

Individual packer shares and reproducible regional procurement boundaries are still required before HHI can be published.

Public evidence rule

Research map

What this briefing connects

  • Buyer-side concentration
  • Historical shift
  • Related industry screen
  • Why the metrics differ
  • Public data agenda

Source basis

USDA ERS historical national CR4 for steer and heifer purchases, paired with separately bounded 2017 and 2022 Economic Census revenue concentration rows for NAICS 311611.

Related markets

U.S. steer and heifer purchases by beef packers

Food and agriculture · 2019

Browse market

Methodology and limits matter

The USDA series is a national buyer-side aggregate CR4 for steer and heifer purchases. It does not publish individual packer shares or define the regional procurement choices facing a particular producer. The Economic Census row is a separate national revenue screen for NAICS 311611. The two systems may be read together as research context, but they cannot be combined into one HHI, market definition, or finding of competitive harm.

Source basis

USDA ERS historical national CR4 for steer and heifer purchases, paired with separately bounded 2017 and 2022 Economic Census revenue concentration rows for NAICS 311611.

Source register

3 cited public records

01 / 3
agency report2024

Source 01

Concentration in U.S. Meatpacking Industry and How It Affects Competition and Cattle Prices

U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service

MacDonald, James M., Concentration in U.S. Meatpacking Industry and How It Affects Competition and Cattle Prices, U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, January 25 2024.

Official USDA analysis of historical buyer concentration plant scale cattle prices capacity and entry in U.S. meatpacking.

Accessed
Jul 19, 2026
Custody
Public federal government analysis

Related reports

The U.S. Competition Landscape

Research actions

Audit USDA sourceInspect Census screenBrowse buyer-power dossier
Public action memoFoundation

What public institutions should do next

Buyer-side meatpacking oversight needs regional procurement evidence, individual packer shares, and market-outcome research before a national aggregate CR4 can support conclusions about a particular cattle market.

Audience

USDA, DOJ, Congress, state agriculture officials, and cattle-market researchers

1Publish regional procurement-share tablesRelease individual packer purchase shares by stable procurement geography and year, with denominators, common-control links, disclosure rules, and revision histories kept explicit.
2Build a public capacity and transaction historyConnect plants, owners, capacity, entry, exit, acquisitions, divestitures, and identifier changes so researchers can distinguish structural change from reporting change.
3Evaluate producer and buyer-side outcomesStudy bids, cattle prices, transportation options, quality terms, entry, capacity utilization, and wholesale spreads inside defensible procurement markets without treating the national CR4 as a causal result.
Evidence needed
Individual packer purchase sharesStable regional procurement geographiesPlant ownership, capacity, entry, exit, and transaction historiesBid, cattle-price, transportation, quality, and wholesale-spread outcomesCommon-control and revision crosswalks
Connect to advocacy playbooks

Policy claims are framed as public-interest asks, not legal conclusions. Each ask should be read with the report’s source basis and limitations.