Capital Update – For the Week Ending Dec. 19, 2025

Senate Confirms Callahan as USTR Chief Ag Negotiator, Brashears as Undersecretary for Food Safety

What happened: Dr. Julie Callahan, President Trump’s pick to be the chief agricultural negotiator in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, was confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Dr. Mindy Brashears, returning for her second term as undersecretary for food safety, was also confirmed.

Callahan currently is the assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Agricultural Affairs and Commodity Policy, overseeing USTR’s efforts to promote the interests of U.S. farmers, ranchers, and food manufacturers. In Trump’s first term, she served as a deputy assistant U.S. Trade Representative and senior director in the USTR Agriculture Office.

Brashears will oversee USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service, which is responsible for regulatory oversight of meat, poultry, and processed egg products, ensuring they are safe, wholesome, accurately labeled, and correctly packaged. Brashears has said she will prioritize finalizing a USDA rule allowing packing plants to run faster processing line speeds, a priority for NPPC. She also would serve as the chairperson of the U.N. Codex Alimentarius Commission’s Policy Committee.

NPPC’s take: NPPC strongly supports both Callahan and Brashears and looks forward to continuing to work together.

Why it matters: The chief agricultural negotiator is responsible for leading and coordinating U.S. agricultural trade negotiations and developing agricultural trade policy. The role historically has been critical to the agricultural sector and has increased in importance as the United States has sought to reduce trade barriers, open new markets, and eliminate unfair trade practices.

The undersecretary for food safety helps ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. meat and poultry supply. USDA’s FSIS conducts inspections at federally-approved meat and poultry establishments and ensures that state-approved facilities – those that sell product only within a state – have standards at least equivalent to federal standards.

Mexico Begins Dumping Investigation on U.S. Pork Imports

What happened: Mexico began an investigation on U.S. pork imported into the country, alleging unfair U.S. prices and/or government subsidies hurt Mexican pork producers.

After several Mexican pork producers and processors and trade organizations complained that imports of U.S. hams and pork shoulders increased significantly and were sold at less than fair value, pressuring domestic prices and harming profitability, Mexico’s Secretariat of Economy on Dec. 15 initiated the antidumping and countervailing duty investigation. The Ministry will consider data for dumping and alleged subsidies from 2024 and look at potential injury from Jan. 1, 2022, through 2024. The countervailing duty (anti-subsidy) investigation focuses on both federal and state level grants and payments.

Mexico will consider whether U.S. pork was “dumped” at less than normal values and/or subsidized, and whether Mexican producers and processors were injured by U.S. imports. Under World Trade Organization rules, a government can take action against a trading partner when dumping and/or subsidies cause “material” harm to a domestic industry. If Mexico decides that these requirements are met, it may impose antidumping and/or countervailing duties. Such duties normally are imposed only on a prospective basis to imports after a preliminary determination has been made, at the earliest.   

If Mexico reaches an adverse determination, U.S. producers and/or the United States can appeal through the dispute settlement mechanisms of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and/or the World Trade Organization agreements.

NPPC’s take: Mexico is a major consumer of pork, and the U.S. pork industry has decades-long partnerships with buyers there to satisfy demand for high quality, readily available pork products. NPPC has been working with experts including lawyers, economists and government affairs officials on a coordinated producer strategy. NPPC has been party to trade cases in Mexico and elsewhere in the past and will lead efforts with U.S. and Mexican government officials.

Why it matters: Mexico is the No. 1 export market for U.S. pork, importing 1.15 million metric tons of pork valued at almost $2.6 billion in 2024. Tariffs on U.S. pork products most likely would reduce exports to Mexico and hurt producers’ bottom line.

Beneficial Tax Provisions to Take Effect Jan. 1

What happened: Tax changes included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law on the Fourth of July are set to take effect Jan. 1.

The OBBBA extended several tax measures set to expire or begin phasing out at the end of this year that were part of President Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed during his first term. They include:

• Bonus depreciation, which allows 100% of the cost of qualified property to be deducted in the year it is placed into service rather than depreciated over several years, was made permanent.
• Estate tax exemption was made permanent and increased to $15 million per individual and indexed for inflation for tax year 2026. (The exemption is just under $14 million for tax year 2025.) The value of estates above the exemption amount is subject to a 40% tax when passed to an heir.
• Section 179 expensing was increased to $2.5 million. It is $1.25 million for tax year 2025; it had been set to decrease to $1 million in 2026. The provision, limited to vehicles, machinery, and equipment purchased for business use, allows the full value of qualifying assets to be deducted in the year they are purchased.
• Qualified business income deduction (Section 199A), which allows a reduction in certain business income for determining federal tax liability, was made permanent, and the deduction was increased for tax year 2026 to 23% from its current 20%.

Additionally, the bill made permanent the tax rates and brackets that were lowered and broadened, respectively, in the TCJA and increased the standard tax deduction for individuals and couples.

NPPC’s take: NPPC strongly supported making permanent tax provisions beneficial to pork producers.

Why it matters: Pork producers rely on fair and reasonable tax policy for profitability, financial stability, growth, and strategic business planning.

‘Product of USA’ Meat Labeling Rule Takes Effect Jan. 1

What happened: Beginning Jan. 1, packers and processors that want to identify meat as a product of the United States must be in compliance with a new U.S. Department of Agriculture labeling regulation, which also applies to poultry and egg products.

The rule, finalized in March 2024, lets companies label meat “Product of USA” only if the animals from which it was derived were born, raised, harvested, and processed in the United States. Meat from live animals imported into the United States for feeding, harvesting, and processing no longer will be allowed to carry that claim. Minimally processed product can use a qualified U.S.-origin claim, such as “sliced and packaged in the United States using imported pork.”

Meatpackers will not be required to label their product, but if they voluntarily use “Product of USA,” “Made in USA,” or an American flag, they must be able to provide proof of that claim. USDA will generically approve labels – no special process verification programs or additional approval steps are needed. A product with multiple ingredients can use a USA label as long as all the ingredients, except for spices and flavorings, comply with the rule’s criteria. A beef and pork sausage, for example, would have to source products from both cattle and pigs born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States to use “Product of USA.” The regulation also allows for a state or locality-based claim – “Product of Iowa,” for example – when the claim follows the rule’s criteria.

The regulation only applies to domestic U.S. meat sales; all exports must continue to follow the labeling rules of the country of destination.

NPPC’s take: NPPC has been concerned that the regulation will strain the relationships between the United States and its trading partners, particularly Canada and Mexico, both of which send significant numbers of live animals to the United States for feeding and processing.

Why it matters: While billed as voluntary, the new rule likely will have the effect of being mandatory since it creates a strong incentive for producers to prefer domestic animals to imported ones so they can use the “Product of USA” claim. That could have a detrimental impact on imports of live animals and already has prompted Canada to file a dispute over the labeling rule with the World Trade Organization.