Trump Administration Issues Executive Order Calling for Investigations Into Food Supply Chain Industries

Overview

Recent activities undertaken by the Trump Administration suggest that it plans to more closely scrutinize the US food supply chain. For example, as we noted in our September 2025 Legal Update, in May 2025, the Administration’s “Make America Healthy Again Commission” issued a report that was highly critical of the use of ultra-processed foods in the US food supply chain. The issuance of the report was the first step in a concerted effort to more closely regulate the manufacture and sale of ultra-processed foods, as well as foods containing other disfavored ingredients. 

Now, in a recent Executive Order, President Trump directs the antitrust agencies—the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)—to conduct potentially far-reaching antitrust investigations into the entire food supply chain, covering areas such as food and beverage manufacturing and distribution, grocery stores, meat processing, seeds, fertilizers, and agricultural equipment.

The Order directs the antitrust agencies to determine whether anti-competitive behavior is causing food prices to rise or otherwise threatening America’s national or economic security interests, and it specifically calls out potential acts by “foreign-controlled corporations” for review. As such, the Order positions competition enforcement in the food sector squarely within a broader national security framework.

Under the Order, antitrust agencies are directed to take all necessary enforcement action to remedy any anti-competitive behavior. Such efforts would extend to policing conduct matters such as price fixing and information sharing, increasing the scrutiny of M&A (where the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) could also come into play), and potentially investigating already consummated transactions.

But the Order goes far beyond traditional antitrust enforcement. It specifically directs the antitrust agencies to make reports about their findings to Congress (with strict deadlines) and to propose “new regulatory approaches” to solve concerns that presumably cannot be addressed through traditional enforcement. As such, the Order is sure to spur Congressional activity, hearings, and legislation. Moreover, state Attorneys General and private plaintiffs could also seize on the Order as a basis for their own ongoing efforts targeting companies within the agriculture, food, and beverage industries.

The Executive Order

On December 6, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Addressing Security Risks from Price Fixing and Anti‑Competitive Behavior in the Food Supply Chain.” The Order directs the DOJ and the FTC to establish Food Supply Chain Security Task Forces focused on investigating anti‑competitive conduct across food supply sectors and, critically, assessing whether control by foreign entities is increasing US food prices or creating national or economic security risks.

The Order directs both agencies to “take such actions as are necessary to remedy any anti-competitive behavior that their respective agencies uncover,” including bringing enforcement actions in court. And, where DOJ uncovers evidence of criminal collusion, the Attorney General is directed to commence criminal proceedings, including grand jury investigations.

Beyond enforcement actions, the Order also directs the agencies to propose “new regulatory approaches” and requires joint briefings to congressional leadership and relevant committee chairs within 180 days and again within 365 days. These briefings may include recommended legislative actions, while preserving protections for ongoing investigations and non‑public information.

Sectors and Conduct at Elevated Risk

The Order identifies meat processing, seed, fertilizer, and equipment as susceptible to price fixing and similar anti-competitive behavior. Firms in these and adjacent markets should expect targeted attention to M&A activity, pricing communications and signaling; trade association activities; data sharing and benchmark exchanges; most‑favored‑nation and parity clauses; capacity, output, and supply allocation decisions; and exclusive or preferential dealing that may affect smaller suppliers or downstream rivals.

Emphasis on Foreign‑Controlled Companies

A defining feature of the Order is its explicit focus on conduct by foreign‑controlled corporations operating in US food supply chains. The Order frames foreign control as a potential cause for concern with respect to price increases and national and economic security concerns. That framing is likely to inform enforcement priorities, case selection, and remedies. Companies with foreign ownership or control—even indirect or minority stakes with governance rights—should expect heightened scrutiny.

Interaction with Foreign Investment and National Security Review

The Order signals intensified coordination between competition enforcement and national security objectives in the food sector. CFIUS, the interagency body that reviews foreign investments in US businesses to determine if they pose a risk to US national security, operates separately from the antitrust process. CFIUS has examined transactions involving the US food supply chain in the past, and recently passed legislation formally adds the Secretary of Agriculture to CFIUS for agriculture-related investments, and requires the USDA to refer potential purchases of US agricultural land that could be a national security risk to CFIUS. Although the Order does not specifically address CFIUS standards or reviews, it invites a de facto convergence of antitrust analysis with national security considerations in food and agriculture. As such, enhanced CFIUS scrutiny is to be expected going forward in industries touching on food supply.

Continuation of Administration’s Emphasis on Strong Antitrust Enforcement in Agriculture

The Order follows other statements and actions by the President and the Administration relating to competition concerns in agriculture. On November 7, President Trump directed DOJ to launch an investigation into the nation’s largest meat packing companies for potential collusion, price fixing, and price manipulation. Also in November, Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater (the head of the Antitrust Division), in remarks at Drake University Law School, stressed that the Trump Administration considers antitrust enforcement in agriculture to be a top priority and that she would devote all necessary resources to protecting against collusion, monopolization, and anticompetitive mergers in agricultural markets. She outlined numerous ways in which the Antitrust Division would focus on agriculture issues.

In September, the Antitrust Division and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) formalizing a partnership to protect competition in key agricultural markets such as feed, fertilizer, fuel, seed, equipment, and other essential goods. The agencies emphasized that the “partnership strengthens longstanding coordination between the agencies with a particular focus on ensuring coordination with respect to ensuring farmers and ranchers have competitive access to agricultural inputs.”

Both the FTC and DOJ are actively pursuing agriculture-related conduct cases. The Antitrust Division will soon be taking to trial a case challenging an agricultural information-sharing service, and the FTC is pursuing an action against a large tractor company for alleged anticompetitive right-to-repair policies relating to tractors and other large agricultural equipment.

Moreover, recent Congressional hearings have—on a bipartisan basis—emphasized the importance of strong antitrust enforcement in agriculture to help America’s farmers.

Key Takeaways

Companies across the food supply chain, and particularly those with any degree of foreign ownership or control, should consider the Administration’s emphasis on strong antitrust enforcement in the agricultural space. For instance:

• Firms operating in food supply markets, particularly ones already subject to consolidation concerns, should consider calibrated risk assessments relating to pricing and marketing practices, trade association participation, and involvement in information exchanges;
• Parties contemplating transactions in the food supply chain—especially for acquisitions by foreign acquirers or investors—should analyze both traditional competition issues and security‑adjacent concerns raised by foreign control;
• Firms receiving Congressional inquiries or investigative subpoenas, civil investigative demands, or other compulsory process issued by state or federal agencies should carefully assess the scope of the relevant inquiry and their responses; and
• Companies in the food supply chain should monitor—and, where necessary, engage in advocacy relating to—any “new regulatory approaches” propounded in response to the Order.

Mayer Brown’s team offers a full suite of legal services tailored to the unique needs of clients in the global food supply industries. Its Antitrust & Competition group is well versed in handing antitrust issues raised by the Order. (William Stallings, a global co-chair of Mayer Brown’s antitrust practice previously served as Chief of the Antitrust Division’s Transportation, Energy and Agriculture Section, where he had responsibility for agriculture enforcement.) Similarly, Mayer Brown’s International Trade and Public Policy & Regulatory Affairs practice groups and State Attorneys General Task Force routinely counsel food and beverage companies on all aspects of government regulatory and enforcement matters.