The U.S. and China have a history of imposing on-and-off again tariffs.
This article explores the possible tariff levels, China’s ownership of U.S. farmland, the role of Smithfield Foods, and the broader consequences for American farmers and animal welfare.
Tariffs: How Much Could Be Imposed?
The U.S. and China have engaged in tariff battles before, notably during the 2018-2019 trade war under then-President Donald Trump.
During that period, the U.S. imposed tariffs on over $550 billion worth of Chinese goods, starting with 25% duties on $34 billion in July 2018 and escalating to additional tranches, including 10-15% tariffs on $300 billion by late 2019.
China retaliated with tariffs on over $185 billion of U.S. goods, including 25% duties on soybeans, pork, and other agricultural products, later raising some to 62% amid the African swine fever crisis.
Looking ahead, the scale of tariffs in a renewed trade war remains speculative but could be substantial. Trump, re-elected in November 2024, has proposed blanket tariffs of 60% on Chinese imports to bolster U.S. manufacturing, a policy he touted during his campaign.
In response, China’s finance ministry announced on March 4, 2025, additional tariffs of 10-15% on U.S. agricultural goods like soybeans, corn, dairy, and beef, signaling a proportional retaliation strategy.
Analysts suggest that if the U.S. imposes its 60% tariffs, China could counter with duties exceeding 50% on key U.S. exports, targeting agriculture to inflict economic and political pain, as noted by Cornell University economist Wendong Zhang.
China’s Ownership of U.S. Farmland
China’s ownership of U.S. farmland has become a focal point in trade and security discussions.
As of 2023, Chinese entities owned approximately 384,000 acres of U.S. agricultural land, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
This represents about 1% of the 40 million acres of U.S. farmland held by foreign entities, with Canada (12.8 million acres) and the Netherlands (4.9 million acres) leading the list.
China ranks 18th among foreign landowners, but its holdings have sparked concern due to their strategic implications.
The majority—over 80%—of this Chinese-owned farmland is tied to Smithfield Foods.
Which was acquired in 2013 by WH Group, a Hong Kong-based company majority-owned by Henan Shuanghui Investment & Development Co., China’s top meat producer.
Smithfield operates under several well-known brands, each focusing on specific pork products (smithfield.com):
Smithfield: The flagship brand for premium fresh and processed pork, including bacon, ham, and sausages.
Farmland: Known for bacon, sausage, and ribs, targeting value-conscious consumers.
Eckrich: Specializes in smoked sausages, deli meats, and hot dogs.
Nathan’s Famous: While primarily known for hot dogs, Smithfield produces these under a licensing agreement.
** Armour**: Offers affordable processed meats like pepperoni and lunch meats.
Gwaltney: Focuses on bacon, hot dogs, and sausages, often marketed regionally.
John Morrell: Produces hams, sausages, and deli meats with a Midwestern heritage.
Smithfield controls approximately 26% of the U.S. pork market, processing over 16 million hogs annually as of recent estimates.
The $4.7 billion deal included 146,000 acres of U.S. farmland, pushing China’s total stake to nearly $1.4 billion at the time.
Critics argue this acquisition, dubbed the largest Chinese takeover of a U.S. firm, reflects a deliberate strategy to secure food supply chains, especially pork, amid China’s growing demand and domestic production challenges.
Smithfield Foods: A Chinese-Owned Pork Giant
Smithfield Foods, based in Virginia, is indeed owned by WH Group, making it a pin in China’s U.S. agricultural footprint.
As the world’s largest pork producer, Smithfield operates 530 company-owned farms and 2,100 contracted farms across the U.S.
The 2013 acquisition raised eyebrows, with some alleging the Chinese government expedited the deal through a rapid loan from a state-backed bank, though Smithfield’s then-CEO Larry Pope insisted it was a private transaction with no Chinese management control.
The impact on U.S. farmers has been complex.
While Smithfield exports to over 40 countries, including China, its dominance has squeezed smaller producers.
During the 2018 trade war, China’s 62% tariffs on U.S. pork hit independent farmers hard, reducing exports by $27 billion from mid-2018 to 2019, per USDA estimates.
Smithfield, however, weathered the storm better, with exports to China comprising only 5-7% of its fresh pork output, according to CEO Kenneth Sullivan in 2018.
Critics argue that Smithfield’s scale and foreign ownership allowed it to pivot markets while smaller farmers, unable to absorb tariff losses, faced bankruptcy or were pushed out.
The Trump administration’s $23 billion bailout mitigated some damage, but payments to Smithfield—a Chinese-owned entity—drew opposition from figures like Senator Chuck Grassley, who questioned the fairness of taxpayer support flowing to a foreign firm.
Quality and Treatment of Animals: A Shift Under Smithfield?
Concerns about animal welfare and meat quality under Smithfield’s ownership have also surfaced.
Pre-acquisition, Smithfield was a leader in industrial pork production, known for confinement systems that prioritized efficiency.
Now, Smithfield has faced lawsuits over environmental pollution, including a 2023 report linking 21 Missouri farms to seven million gallons of waste spillage over three decades, suggesting a focus on volume over sustainability.
Animal treatment standards have not drastically shifted, as U.S. regulations still apply, but critics point to China’s lax domestic standards—where high-rise pig farms cram animals into tight, sunless spaces—as a potential long-term risk if production models align further with WH Group’s priorities.
The company’s push for Proposition 12 exemptions in California, which mandates minimum space for pigs, underscores tensions between profit and welfare.
Meanwhile, quality concerns persist among U.S. consumers wary of a Chinese-owned supply chain, though Smithfield insists its pork remains American-produced and high-quality.
Broader Implications
A renewed trade war could exacerbate these issues. Tariffs would likely slash U.S. agricultural exports further, with soybeans and pork bearing the brunt—projected losses range from $7.6 billion to $15.8 billion annually for soybeans alone under varying tariff scenarios, per the Kentucky Corn Growers Association.
China’s reduced reliance on U.S. farm goods, bolstered by imports from Brazil and Argentina since 2018, means it can retaliate with less domestic fallout, leaving U.S. farmers more vulnerable.
China’s farmland ownership, while modest compared to other nations, amplifies security fears, prompting legislative moves in states like Florida and Virginia to curb foreign land purchases.
Smithfield’s dominance continues to reshape the pork industry, potentially sidelining smaller farmers and raising questions about food sovereignty.
As tariffs loom, the interplay of trade policy, foreign ownership, and agricultural stability will test the resilience of America’s rural economy—and its dinner tables.
In conclusion, the potential trade war with China is not just about tariffs but a broader struggle over control of food resources.
With 384,000 acres of U.S. farmland and Smithfield Foods in its portfolio, China holds leverage that complicates America’s response.
Ref
https://sentientmedia.org/smithfield-foods-owns-farmland/
How Tariffs and the Trade War Hurt U.S. Agriculture
China’s Smithfield Foods Pushes the EATS Act in Congress
Leave a Reply