On December 6, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order directing a sweeping federal inquiry into alleged price-fixing and other anticompetitive conduct across the U.S. food supply chain.¹ The Order is framed explicitly as a national and economic security priority. It mobilizes the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) each to establish a task force to investigate whether anticompetitive behavior or foreign influence in key agricultural sectors is contributing to elevated food prices and supply instability. Sectors called out for particular scrutiny include meat processing, seeds, fertilizer, and agricultural equipment.  Following their investigations, both agencies are to take such actions as necessary to remedy any anticompetitive behavior that their investigations uncover.  Additionally, within six months—and again within one year—of the Order, the DOJ and FTC must brief congressional leadership on their findings and recommend legislative actions as appropriate.  

Context and Recent Actions. This Order reinforces the administration’s growing focus on competition in the food sector.  This September, the DOJ entered a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) formalizing a partnership to protect competition in key agricultural markets including feed, fertilizer, fuel, seed, equipment, and other essential goods.² Later, on November 7, 2025, President Trump publicly called for an investigation into alleged collusion among major meatpacking companies, and he also referenced concerns about foreign ownership and its impact on consumer prices and food security.³ Within hours, Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed that an investigation was underway, led by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division Gail Slater.⁴ The White House subsequently published a statement targeting “foreign-owned meatpacking cartels,” highlighting the alleged dominance of the “Big Four” processors—JBS, Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef—and claiming  that consolidation in the meatpacking sector “has slashed payments to ranchers, reduced herd sizes, driven up consumer prices, and threatened America’s food supply chain.”⁵

What to expect from the federal antitrust enforcement agencies

The Task Forces identified in the Executive Order suggest that both the Antitrust Division and the FTC will move swiftly to identify and address any perceived instances of anticompetitive conduct.

 Antitrust Division

              The Antitrust Division will respond to President Trump’s orders and move quickly to open investigations into companies in the food supply chain. In fact, Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater reposted President Trump’s statement and wrote, “Ending the week with a new assignment, thank you for your attention to this matter, sir” signaling that she viewed his statement as a clear mandate.⁶ One area of focus is likely to be merger enforcement.  We expect that the Antitrust Division will closely scrutinize potential transactions in industries for which it has traditionally had responsibility—including meat, eggs, seed, and heavy equipment that is used in the food industry. The Antitrust Division is also likely to monitor transactions that are below the Hart-Scott-Rodino thresholds and could even open investigations into consummated transactions.  Parties to such transactions in effected industries—whether consummated or proposed—should prepare early to demonstrate why their transaction will not harm competition and, where appropriate, to propose remedies.⁷

              President Trump’s statements suggest a focus on collusive conduct in the food supply chain. Given the presidential mandate, the Antitrust Division will likely leverage both its criminal and civil investigative authority to investigate potential violations of the Sherman Act. Traditionally, Antitrust Division has pursued either criminal or civil investigations into given conduct but not both.  But the Division has recently launched parallel criminal and civil investigations in several industries.⁸ The Antitrust Division may also leverage other statutes such as the Packers and Stockyards Act⁹, which regulates competition in the meatpacking industry.  Indeed, the Division recently challenged certain information sharing practices by poultry producers under both the Sherman Act and the Packers and Stockyards Act, resulting in a consent decree and corporate monitorship.¹⁰

              The Division is likely initially to target consolidated industries—such as those that President Trump flagged in his tweet,¹¹ industries that share or exchange information through either a trade association or a data aggregator,¹² or industries that use a joint pricing tool (such as an algorithm that incorporates data that industry participants supply). The Division is likely to use aggressive investigative tactics to pursue President Turmp’s goals, potentially including FBI “drop-in” interviews (unscheduled visits to those who may have knowledge of wrongdoing), consensual monitoring (wiring of industry participants to record discussions with others), or by gathering information through its new Antitrust Whistleblower Rewards Program.¹³

Federal Trade Commission

              The Executive Order will affect the Bureau of Competition’s enforcement agenda in at least three ways:

              First, the FTC is responsible for reviewing mergers in both the grocery industry, including mergers of grocery stores,¹⁴ and shelf-stable products such as snacks¹⁵ and cereal.¹⁶ The FTC also reviews transactions in industries that affect the food supply chain, such as pesticides¹⁷ and food distribution services.¹⁸ Merging parties in any of these industries should expect particularly close FTC scrutiny. Like at the Antitrust Division, parties should prepare early for robust advocacy and to propose remedies if appropriate. 

Second, Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC ACT) prohibits “[u]nfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce.”¹⁹ While the FTC has interpreted “unfair methods of competition” differently under various leadership regimes, recent regimes have seen it as reaching conduct that the Sherman or Clayton Acts may not prohibit.²⁰ Current FTC leadership has not yet opined on the precise contours of Section 5, but firms in the food industry should anticipate that the current FTC may try to push the envelope by opening investigations or bringing cases under Section 5 that might not be addressable under the Sherman or Clayton Acts. Companies in industries subject to the Executive Order should also anticipate investigations under the Robinson-Patman Act, which prohibits price discrimination in certain circumstances. Until recently, the FTC had not enforced the Robinson-Patman for several decades.  Although Chairman Ferguson dissented from the FTC’s decision to bring a Robinson-Patman case in FTC v. Southern-Glazer, he wrote that “[t]reating the Robinson-Patman Act as a nullity for decades offended the separation of powers” and opined that the Commission “ought to enforce the Act where it will serve the broad public interest, and bring only those cases we are likely to win.”²¹ Given President Trump’s mandate, the FTC will be looking aggressively to use all its enforcement tools, including the Robinson-Patman Act in the food sector.²²

Third, Section 6(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 46, authorizes the FTC to conduct studies into particular companies or industries.  The FTC often uses compulsory process to collect information in connection with such studies.  For example, during Lina Khan’s tenure, the FTC “undertook [an] examination of the grocery supply chain to better understand how pandemic-related supply chain disruptions affected competition among retailers, wholesalers, and producers, as well as the impacts on consumers and businesses.”²³ The current FTC may seek either to update this study or launch a new one into the American food supply chain. 

Implications. Businesses operating in food-related sectors should anticipate heightened antitrust scrutiny.  That both the DOJ and FTC have created dedicated task forces suggests that they will use all available tools to pursue President Trump’s dictates regarding the food industry.  Additionally, companies should anticipate a possible 6(b) study and potential legislative proposals in the coming year.