PB92-205087 USDA/FAER-2H JAPANE;SE PRESE;NCE IN U. S. AGRICBUSINE;SS.•jFORE}GN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC REPT.> /H.C. BOLLING ECONOMIC RESEARCH ..'. SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC. AGRICULTURE AND TRADE ANALYSIS DIY•.. JUN 92 49P

PB92-20S087

Japanese Presence in u.s. Agricbusiness

(u.s.) Economic Research Service, Washington, DC

I I PB92-205081 :.r"'" ....

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 0lJoh, tccvrw'~ OM8 No. 0704·0188 : •• :~., tor tnl~ -;cllectlcn of "a'!'H~(lr9 InrCtr."iJtlc" I~ ~\tmMt~d to r 1 Jne .=-! -:-)Irlr.g t:'e d ltd ::IlIe • ge I naur ;Jcr r~~ct:ne. I'j~~ded. and corr~IC':I,n9 Irclt,;diti.; ::-e U••• !, fcr iclj~-:.tlcn Of In!:'-!:'cn. dnd re'lIt.''f'IInC} tt'l~ collection re'''~\'lIn-J Instru.:ucra. h"..!-"~"':I".; Includ:nc; sU9ge)tlon~ 01 lr.tOtr."JUcn, S~nd ~. s:::;; =-'ta: \C'urc~~. l tor recu-:lnq thl~ ,':r:"I,ilent\ r~idr=ln9 Od.';... ' • - •• , ...... burden. to W,Hhengtcn !hl\ burc~n 1 • -­ ...... H~acocJrt'!r\ ~S:':--iHC Cr In. ,,, ... • ..."1. Jrd to t""! ~er\jlcf!'\. (\'('2{:orJ:e ;(ret Js::ect ot t!'l11 Office 0)1 M,ll1d.;'!ment dra 3ud;e!. or Infotnuucn Oce,,,;lc-\ ,j"C P~pt'r'Nc:, .'\-:CUU:IO" Pr~Ject ;~=--:::\. 111 5 J':!'t:~t\cn ~ (OlC4.Q ~3SJ"o"I'Ht"lr;[~n. :C ; ... 503 PB92-205087 12. REPORT DATE J'v"c.. 13. REPORT TYPE AND OATES COVER:D Mev 1992 4. TilLE FOl:ei£.n MID 5U3TITLE A!!ric.ultural .RC..flIJomj c 5. FUNDING NUMc::RS :eD:~t I The Japanese Presence in U.S. Agribusiness 1 6. AUTHOR(S)

H. Christine Bolling

! 7. PERfOR,'.Il.'iC: I O!\G,l.~IIZATION NAME(5) MID ADDRESS(E5) .I I Agriculture and Trade 8. PfRFORc,lING O"GM:IZ..!\ TIOil Analysis Division RE?O?T NUr.lEER I Economic Research Service, I USDA j I 1301 New York Ave. , NH I 1 Hashington, DC 20005-4788 I I FAER-244 I l______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~._------~-~~~~~~~~~~~~._--__;! ; 9. SPONSOR,~C:! MONITORING j AGE:-ICY NAME(S) AND A.DDRESS(E5) 10. SPONSCi\I,'iG" ~,im"iCRI:-;G I,G::NCY RE?CRT IWMoo" 1 I 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

DISTR"U i12,. TID" I AVAIlABIUTY STAT[ME NT 112'. D,,,,raUTID N COO, I I I ABSTRACi l~~~~------~-~--~113. i,\faximum 200 words)

I Japanese investment companies the late have come to the united 1980's to purchase, among states since and agribusinesses. other things, agricultural ! By 1990, Japanese land I agriculture and agribusiness investment in u.S. puts was well over $3 billion. this investment into perspective This report this recent phenomenon and evaluates the impact on the U. s. economy. of investments are important While Japanese for certain farm particular markets such as commodities or holdings beef, citrus, and wine grapes, comprise less than 1 percent Japanese farmland and agribusiness. of total investment in u.s.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUM9cR OF PAGES : U.S. agribusiness, Japan, 52 foreign investment, farmland \ 15. PRICE CODE 17. SECURliY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY OF REPORT CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY OF THIS CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATIOII PAGE OF ABSTRACT OF ASS TRACT _. ~,_.~ Unclass. ," _.",,~~=-,::..:.._____ Unclass. -L_..;:.:.:.;:::;.:;:..:-.:~______Unclass. 1___...::.:;.:.;:.:::.;;;~....:.._;....,..,~. --__-I.....,.. ___-:-....,..__-:-_-:--:-~ The Japanese Presence in U.S. Agribusiness. By H. Christine Bolling, Agriculture and Trade Analysis Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Foreign Agricultural Economic Report No. 244.

Abstract

Japanese investment companies have come to the United States since the late 1980's to purchase, among other things, agricultural land and agribusinesses. By 1990, Japanese investment in U.S. agriculture and agribusiness was well over S3 billion. This report puts this investment into perspective and evaluates the impact of this recent phenomenon on the U.S. economy. While Japanese investments are important for certain farm commodities or particular markcL~ such as beef, citrus, and wine grapes, Japanese hold­ ings constitute less than I percent of tOlal investment in U.S. farmland and agribusiness.

Keywords: U.S. agribusiness, Japan, foreign investment, farmland

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges the helpful reviews of J. Peter DeBraal, WiIliam Coyle, 1. Larry Deaton, Ken Forsythe, Michael Lopez, Jerry Sharples, Alan Webb, and Hiroshi Yamauchi. Special thanks go to Michael Lopez, Ketkco Dolan, and J. Larry Deaton for their technical expertise in desktop publishing, and to Tom McDonald and Dale Simms, editors.

Use of company names in this report is for idemification only and does not constitute en­ dorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Washington, DC 20005-4788 June 1992 Contents

Definition of Terms ...... iii

Summary ...... iv

IntroductIon ......

The Theoretical Basis for Foreign Investment ...... Japanese Investment in the United States ...... 2 Japanese Investment in U.S. Agricultural Land ...... 3 Japanese Investment in U.S. Agribusiness ...... 4

Market Concentration ...... 6

Japanese Investment in Perspective ...... 6

Other In;;titlltional Arrangements ...... 9

An A;;;;e;;Slllent of U.S. Gall1S from Japanese Investment ...... 9

Conclusions...... 10

Refelences ...... 10 Arpendix I: The Theoretical Argument for Forei'!:;ll Direct fnvestment . 11

Appendix 2: The Efre.::ts of Intercountry Mobility of Capital ...... " 12

ii Definition of Terms

Foreign direct investment (FDI) is the invesunent by a company, group, or individual in new facilities, in existing enterprises, in a share of existing enterprises, or in land and natuml resources, located within another country.

Foreign direct investment is defined by the U.S. Department of Commerce as an invest­ ment of 10 percent or more in an enterprise. An investment of this amount usually repre­ sents an attempt by the investor to gain some degree of innuence or control over the decisionmaking of an enterprise.

Portfolio investment indicates an invesunent of less than 10 percent It is considered to oc motivated by the potential return on investment, and not by the desire to innuence the manag('ment of the enterprise.

Other terms frequently used in discussions of FDI include: greenfield, which indicates the establishment of a new enterprise; and mergers and acquisitioll';, which are invest­ ments in already established businesses.

Agribusiness is defined here to include al,Tficulture, the food and beverage industry, agri­ cultural chemicals and machinery, wholesale agricultural products, retail grocery stores, and restaurants. The U.S. Deparunent of Commerce Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes were used as a definitional guide. Agricultural land is defined by Economic Research Service publications to includc cultivated land, pastureland, forestland, and land that had occn in agriculturai use during the previous 5 years.

Kenretsu is a Japanesc system of industrial organization, characterized by cross-share­ holding and intercompany networks. The term pertains to conglomenlLe business organi­ zations.

iii Summary

Japanese investmenr in U.S. agricullure and agribusiness is a phenomenon !.hat began in the late 1980's and is continuing into !.he 1990's. The accumulate.d value of Japanese in­ vestments in !.hese areas is now over $3 billion. Japan ranks four!.h among !.he foreign owners cf U.S. agricultural land and agribu!liness in tenns of value. Investments have been rnade in cattle ranches and livestock slaughterhouses, citrus groves and o!.her or­ chards, vineyards, bottled water companies, food processing and beverage compaines, bakeries, fisheries, grain storage facilities, restaumnts, convenience foodstores, and gro­ cery stores.

This report determines !.he types of Japanese investment in U.S. agriCUlture and agribusi­ ness, puIS that investment into perspective in !.he context of !.he U.S. economy, and deter­ mines the reasons for !.he investment during !.he late 1980's.

Some investments occurred because Japanese entrepreneurs had excess funds to invest. The rapid appreciation of the yen until 1989 and the devaluation of U.S. farm properties during the farm crisis of !.he mid-1980's combined to make U.S. farmland a good deal. In addition, international agreements that are liberalizing Japanese imports of beef and cit­ rus, like !.he 1988 U.S.-Japan Beef and Citrus Understanding, have presented Japanese in­ vestors, as well as American bc~f and citrus growers, with opportunities to invest profitably in response to an expanding market.

The investment also fits in wi!.h Japan's situation as an affluent country that is a net food importer and !.hat sets high standards for !.he food it imports and consumes.

Japan's share of investment. in U.S. farmland and agribusiness is small compared with that of o!.her countries. The shares of farmland and agribusinesses as a portion of total Japanese direct foreign investment in !.he United States are also small. Japanese invest­ ments are, however, a significant market force in some locations and industries.

iv The Japanese Presence in U.S. Agribusiness

H. Christine Bolling

Introduction The Theoretical Basis for Foreign Investment

The new wave of Japanese investment in the United States Conventional macroeconomic wisdom, stemming from na­ since the late 1980's has been a popular subject in the tionru income accounting, demonstrates how a country press, as Japanese investment companies have come to the whose domestic investment exceeds domestic saving ulti­ United States to purchase, among other things, agricultural mately has a current account deficit L'lat is financed by for­ land and agribusinesses. The Kagome, Kirin Brewing, Mit­ eign capital inflows. On the other hand, if a country has sui Foods, Mitsubishi, Naigai Beef, Nissin Foods, Suntory, domestic saving exceeding domestic investment, it ulti­ and Toyo Suisan Kaisha companies, though not exactly mately has a current account surplus that permits eapital U.S. household words, are already well-established Japa­ outflows (app. 1). The savings/investment gap represents nese companies with large U.S. subsidiaries in the food many factors such as individual and social choices to save processing business. Japanese investment in U.S. agribusi­ or consume and how these choices relate to productivity ness and farmland has an accumulated value of well over and international competitiveness, market access, and other S3 billion. complex economic factors (21).1

The more conspicuous investments include ownership and A great deal of published work exists on the army of possi­ leasing of a 77 ,OOO-acre ranch in Montana, joint ownership ble gains and losses thal foreign capital inflows might bring of a 2S,OOO-acre citrus grove in Florida, and full ownership to host countries (1, 2. 3. 13). According to the classic para­ of a 1,OOO-acre prune orchard in California, as well as own­ digm, a firm maximizes profits and produces one product erShip of the third largest bottled water company in the with two inputs (capital and labor), using a given technol­ country, the second largest vinegar company, several ogy. An optirnallevel of production is reached when the multimillion-dollar food processing plants, a company con­ value of the marginal product for labor equals the price of trolling 60 percent of the Hawaiian bread-baking industry, labor and the value of the marginal product for capital several California wineries, more than 60 percent of the equals the price of capital (that is, the interest mle) (9, p. Alaskan fish-processing industry, majority interest in a ma­ 80). The demand for labor is a function of the price of the jor U.S. convenience store chain (7-Eleven), and feed addi­ product produced, the price of labor, and the price of tive and grain storage businesses. capital. Likewise, the demand for capital is a function of the price of the product, the price of labor, and the price of Foreign direct investment (FDf) contributes to the growth capital. of employment and income in the host country. U.S. policy hac; generally been to welcome foreign direct investment. When capital is free to flow among countries, it will seck As the amount of foreign direct investment from all coun­ the highest returns, as measured by the value of its mar­ tries has grown, however, some economists have expressed ginal product. In the international arena, the argument ex­ concern about the growing dependence of the United States tends as follows for the host and capital-exporting on foreign direct investment in nearly every sector of the countries. economy. Given the publicity devoted to Japan's nonagri­ cultural investments, it is important to clarify what invest­ Foreign direct investment occurs because the productivity ments have actually been made in U.S. agricUlture, the of capital is greater in the host country than in the capital­ reasons for these investments, and their relevance to U.S. exporting country (7. 22). Foreign direct investment : I! agricul ture. changes the relative supplies of labor and capital in both

lltalicizcd numbers in parentheses refer to sources in the References. the capital-exporting country and the host country. In the host country, foreign direct investment makes capital more concern. Scherer suggests that the vigor of competition is abundant and the interest rate falls. This increases the capi­ related to the number of firms in the relevant industry (17, tal-labor ratio, causing the returns to labor and, thus, p. 56). The degrcc of inequality of size of the firms can wages, to rise. In the capital-exporting countly, emigration also matter. Inequality is often measured as the percentage of capital has the opposite effect on capital and labor. In of the total industrial sales (or capacity, employment, value short, foreign direct investment changes relative prices and added, or physical output) contributed by the largest firm or the distributbn of income in both countries. by the few largest finns. Another measure is the degree of market power that a firm or group of firms may have in a Product markets arc also affected in both countries. In the local or regional market, mther than the national market host COUlltry, the output of capital-intensive products rises (17, pp. 56-58). as the interest rate falls. The reverse occurs in the capital­ exporting country (app. 2). On balance, there is a net gain to the gross national products of both countries, which Japanese Investment in the United States takes the form of additional wage income in the host coun­ try and additional capital income in the capital-exporting We chose Japan as the focus of this study because of the re­ countly. This is the crux of the economic argument for for­ cent increase in Japan's direct investment in all sectors in eign direct investment and its benefit to both the host and the United States. Japan surpassed the United Kingdom in capital-exporting Countries. annual direct investments in the United States in 1990, and is second to the United Kingdom in accumulated direct in­ Free movement of resources is beneficial to the world econ­ vestment here. This study, however, pertains only to Japa­ omy (12). When capital is attracted from one COuntry to an­ nese investments in agriculture and agribusiness. other by a higher rate of return, it flows from areas where it is relatively abundant and cheap to areas in which it is rela­ The macroeconomic climate al1ected Japanese investment tively scarce and expensive, until returns to capital arc in U.S. agribusiness. Japan had excess savings to invest equalized the world over. This flow raises total output; the abroad and it had a trade surplus. Likewise, the United addition to output investment brings about in the host Coun­ States had a tmde deficit and excess demand for foreign in­ try exceeds the diminution to output in the donor countly. vestment. Japan accumulated huge trade and current ac­ count surpluses during the 1980's, so that Japanese firms Economic theory predicts that foreign investments help the and individuals had money to invest abroad. The climate host country's balance of payments, both through the in­ was also right for increased foreign investment in the flow of capital and through the export of products produced United States, which underwent a period of high private in the new plants. As income in the host country rises, sav­ consumption and Government spending, forgoing savings ings also rise, and the entire economy grows more rapidly. tllat were required (0 fuel investment in U.S. capital goods. U.S. consumption of imports like foreign cars and electron­ However, other economists arc less enthusiastic, citing a ics was high, creating a large trade deficit, Particularly wi!.'t nonfree market where tariffs, quotas, and other market-dis­ Japan. In a climate of high returns on capital in an environ­ torting mechanisms arc in place. Here, foreign direct in­ ment that required capital, the door was opened for foreign vestment is not so unambiguously beneficial to the host investment. country (6). To the extent that such market distortions mise the profits of foreign-owned firms, the gains to foreign pro­ During the late 1980's, Japancse investors also shifted the ducers represent a net cost to the citizens of the host coun­ types of investment in the United States from portfolio in­ try. The national cost of the tariff is the consumer cost less vestmcnt to real estate and overseas manufacturing. In any government revenue. Hence, in any industry where for­ 1989, Japanese investmclll in U.S. stocks and bonds was eign firms control a substantial part of production, the redis­ $22 blEion, down sharply from the $55 billion invested in tribution effects toward or away from these firms will be a 1986. By comparison, direct investment in the United more important issue for national welfare than the effi­ States in 1989 was also $22 billion, up from the $6 billion ciency gains or losses with which economists arc usually invested in 1986. preoccupied. From a global perspective, gains to foreign­ owned firms represent an international redistribution of in­ According to the Japan External Tmde Organization come rather than a net loss. · } (JETRO), the appreciated value of the yen spurred foreign ! investment by Japanese manufacturers. The higher valued Another concern is the market power that multinational cor­ yen weakened the price competitiveness of some Japanese I porations exert through foreign direct investment. Indus­ I exports, resulting in the establishment of manufacturing fa­ i trial organization theory analyzes the issue of whether cilities outside Japan. Movement to offshore manufactur­ foreign firms indeed arc of sufficient market force to be of ing sharply reduced production costs. During this time of vast trade surpluses, the Japanese faced increasing trade

2 barriers. Establishing manufacturing plants in the major consumers who enjoy specialties like sake and ramen noo­ consuming countries reduced hostility toward Japanese dles. In 1989,60 percent of the 1..58 million gallons of products. sake sold in the United States was brewed by Japanese­ owned companies in the United States with 80 percent of it During the late 1980's, Japanese real estate appreciated being used in restaurants. Investment in large-scale ramen very rapidly, while U.S. farmland prices were falling. Japa­ noodle production began in the early 1970's for the ethnic nese land values rose to prices 3 to 30 times higher than Japanese market, but the product has become a favorite of comparable U.S. property, making U.S. real estate an espe­ U.S. consumers, creating a multimillion-dollar industry in cially good deal in terms of yen. the United States. One company that produces ramen noo­ dles has 20 percent of the U.S. dried soup market. Industrial organization also accounts for foreign direct in­ vesunent. Many firms have a global strategy that stems U.S. import quotas for products like Collon fabrics also cre­ from advantages in vertical integration. Japanese and other ated a climate for Japanese investment. In a two-way trade, foreign firms appear to invest in the United States mainly the United States exported COllon to Japan, which in tum to exploit their perceived advantages in management and exported fabric or clothing back to the United Slates. Now technology. American firms have invested abroad for simi­ many Japanese companies avoid U.S. quotas by running lar reasons. Horizontal integration of services such as bank­ cotton mills in the United States. ing, transportation, and communications is facilitated for Japanese investors through their keiretsu system of cross­ shareholding and intercompany networks. Japanese Investment in U.S. Agricultural Land Industry-specific developments such as the signing of the 1988 U.S.-Japan Beef and Citrus Understanding also At the beginning of 1980, Japanese investment in U.S. agri­ opened the Japanese import markt!t to these products. This cultural land was only 25,000 acres, valued at $54 million. induced Japanese companies to invest in ranches, feedlots, In a decade, Japanese investment increased 10 539,000 and meat-processing plants in the United States. Japanese acres, valued at slightly more than S 1 billion. Most of the investors have purchased large cattle ranches in Montana, increase occurred in 1981, 1985, and 1987-90 (table 1). Colorado, California, Nebraska, and Kansas, and feedlots and beef-processing plants in California and Washington. The distribution of Japanese investment in agricultural land Japanese investors also have joined with U.S. cattle ranch­ has been uneven among Slates, with Hawaii and California ers in joint ventures in at least nine States. These direct in­ leading when ranked by the value of these investments. volvements in enterprises located in the United States These and other Western States have been the site of most supplement sales contracts made with U.S. companies to Japanese land investment, mostly because they are closer to export beef to Japan. U.s. companies, conversely, have es­ Japan than other States are and because of business ties that tablished subsidiaries or special marketing channels for have developed over decades (table 2). Pastureland, mther their products in Japan. than cropland, has constituted the largest acreage of Japa­ nese investment, and forestland is the largest joint Japanese­ The increased affluence and sophistication of Japanese con­ U.S. investment (table 3). Certain counties, especially sumers also influenced consumer demand. Western-type suited for cattle ranches and forestry, stand out as invest­ ment sites (fig. 1, app. table 1). products like beef and prepared foods have made their way into the Japanese diet. Japanese production capacity for beef, for example, could not fill the increased demand. Much of the Japanese-owned land is in primary producing area': noted for their high-quality products. Sonoma and Direct involvement in the production process allows Japa­ Napa Counties, California, and some counties in Washing­ nese investors to tailor products to their tastes. For exam­ ton are noted for their high-quality wine grapes. Parcels ple, Japanese prefer highly marbled beef that can be purchased primarily for beef range from Montana to Kan­ obtained only from certain breeds of callIe and certain sas, the major cattle ranges of the United States. Acreage types of feed rations. By establishing operations in the in Colusa County, California, is riceland. Indian River United States, Japanese companies can get the products County, Florida, and Riverside County, California, arc noted for their citrus groves. they want without having to build new facilities. Also, they can contract to have cattle custom-fed without having to invest in feedlots. Japanese investors purchased agricultural land in North Carolina, Georgia, KentUCky, and Ohio for industrial sites. Japanese investment in the U.S. food industry satisfies the The acreage in Maine is forestland, while the acreage in Japanese ethnic market in the United States as well as U.S. New Mexico is mining property. Investors used the land purchased in Hawaii for building resorts and golf courses.

3 Table 1--Japanese and U.S.lJapanese purchases of U.S. agricultural land by yearl . Table 2-- Japanese agric!Jlturallandholdings in the United States by State, value, and areal Year Acres J,000 dollars State Value of Area of farmland State 1967 farmland -. 60 76 1968 Million 0 0 1969 dollars 0 0 Acres 1970 Hawaii 0 0 465 Maine 180,000 1971 California 0 0 102 New Mexico 107,000 1972 Virginia 192 394 70 Hawaii 78,000 1973 P..xida 954 9,122 62 Colorado 38,000 1974 Ohio 4,201 6,864 40 Montana 27,000 1975 Oregon 169 507 37 Rorida 26,000 1976 Georgia 7,062 17,935 31 California 19,000 1977 South Carolina 1,355 760 31 Ohio 9,000 1978 Washington 3,604 6,980 26 South Carolina 8,000 1979 Colorado 5,411 10,834 18 Oregon 4,000 1980 631 826 1981 109,613 22,697 lInciudes forestland and land used for agriculture up to 5 YClirs previous 1982 1,743 10,097 to purchase. Some purchase prices reflect land used as industrial sites and 1983 golf Courses. 1,121 1,941 Source: (4). 1984 1,214 8,003 1985 937 23,214 1986 2,099 4,650 1987 Table 3--Japanr.se investment in the United States by 22,809 93,147 type of agricultural land, 1990 1988 94,085 289,578 1989 262,397 478,101 1990 (preliminary) Land use Joint Japanese-U.S. 19,223 87,809 lapaneseinvestment Cwnulative total investment 538,880 1,073,535 Acres Percent Acres Percent 1Purchases net of sales as of 1990. Investment here is defined as Cropland 21,576 12 30,463 ownership of 10 percent or more in an enterprise. 8 Pasturehmd 132,969 Source: (4). 77 93,681 26 Forestland 1,975 202,178 55 Other agri­ culture 13,299 8 27,704 8 Other nc·nag­ Japanese Investment in U.S. Agribusiness riculture 4,768 2 10,317 3 Total 173,578 100 364,293 100 Japanese firms have invested in other areas of agribusiness besides agricultural land. A few large Japanese companies Source: (4). established themselves during the 1970's; Nissin Foods in­ vested in ramen noodle production and several companies invested in Alaskan fisheries. But Japanese investment in U.S. agribusiness took off during the late 1980's, increas­ while fishery processors are concentrated in Alaska, grain­ ing from S381 million in 1980 to S1.9 billion in 1990, ac­ trading companies in Oregon, wineries in Napa Valley, Cali­ cording to the U.S. Department of Commerce. fornia, cotton mills in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, and beef slaughterhouses in the West and Mid­ The recent expansion has brought Japanese investment to west. The beef industry has become an example of vertical nearly every State. The Japanese presence is especially integration, with cattle being raised on Japanese-owned prominent in the food manufacturing sector (table 4), with ranches or feedlots and slaughtered in Japanese-owned companies in the United States often being representatives packing plants. When transported by sea, 50 percent of the or affiliates of large Japanese firms (app. table 2). U.S. beef is shipped on Japanese lines.

Japanese restaurants and food processing concerns are con­ The 1988 U.S.-Japan Beef and Citrus Understanding also centrated in California, Hawaii, New York, and New Jersey, spawned a trend of vertical integration in the citrus juice in­ dustry. Purchases of citrus groves and apple orchards were

4 Figure I--Japanese investment in U.S. farmland, by acreage and county

Acreage in county

D 0-100 D 101-500 D 501-1,000

...."'­ -~ ~ ~ ~

~ 100,001-200,000

~ ~

.'''' -4.,0 •.J~

Ul Table 4-Japanese direct investment in the United States in agriculture.related sectors Category 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Million tkJl/ars Food and kindred products manufacturlilg 158 281 393 641 662 Grain and bakery products N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Grain mill products N.A. N.A. N.A. 48 N.A. Bakeries N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Beverages N.A. N.A. 101 170 Other 161 124 241 291 471 501 Meat products 1 3 9 N.A. N.A. Dairy products 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. Preserved fruits, vegetables 0 0 1 N.A. N.A. Other foods 123 174 172 300 317 Other manufacturing: Agricultural chemicals 0 7 N.A. 3 Farm machinery -2 0 0 0 0 Textile products 0 31 182 262 260 198 Textiles 29 N.A. 166 167 Apparel 136 2 N.A. 96 93 62 Food wholesaling: Farm products, wholesale 368 232 145 146 284 Groceries, wholesale 50 45 31 158 142 Food retailing: Foodstores, and eating/drinking places 222 N.A. 56 43 472

Agriculture (crops, livestock, services) N.A. 4 36 100 123

N.A. = Not available because data are protected by U.S. Department of Commerce for the purpose of not revealing groups of companies. investments by individuals or small Source: (8).

accompanied by purchases of fruit-packing and juice­ In some cases, these companies are parts of processing facilities Japanese con­ in California, Oregon, Washington, glomerates. Mitsubishi, Marubeni, Mitsui, and Florida. and Sumitomo companies, known for their keiretsu organizations, all have a stake in U.S. agribusinesses and food processing con­ cerns. Mitsubishi, for example, has interests in at least 15 Market Concentration U.S. agribusinesses-ranging from vineyards to vegetable oil processing. The mere presence offoreign companies in U.S. agribusi­ ness is not as much a concern as their degree of concentra­ tion, and concentration becomes a concern only when those Japanese Investment in Perspective companies call influence the price in the market by acting as monopolists or oligopolists. Japanese investment is While U.S. newspapers have reported an upsurge of Japa­ spread over a broad spectrum ofproducts, and is concen­ nese investment in the United States, one must put in per­ trated in only a few industries: bottled water, beverages (in­ spectiveilie size and extent ofJapanese investments in U.S. cluding fruit juices), beef, instant ramen noodles and other agriculture and agribusiness. Several aggregate measures ethnic foods, and seafood. In some cases, this concentra­ illustrate the small percentage oftotal tion investment that origi­ is limited to a particular region (table 5), but it is diffi­ nates from Japan. 'cult to prove that these companies influence the prices in their respective markets.

6 Table 5--Degree of market concentration for selected Japanese enterprises

Enterprise Market concentration

Bakeries Small percentage except in Hawaii, where one company produces 60 percent of the bread. Beef Japanese ownership or joint ownership of atlea~t 9 large cattle ranches, 9 feedlots, ,,"ld 21 meatpackers. Small part of the total but specialized trade in highly finished top-grade beef representing 15-20 percent of U.S. beef exports to Japan, with considerable vertical integration. Over half the U.S. b:cf exports are shipped on Japanese-owned vessels. Beverages One bottled water company is the largest in the United States, with 6 percent of the total market. Also regional Pepsi and Coca-Cola bottling planL~, and several fruit juice processing plants. Biochemicals Small presence but considerable interest in feed additives, particularly lysine. Biotechnology Small interest. Dairies Small interest. Eggs Small, but concentrated in Virginia and Pennsylvania. One very large company in California. Fann equipment One major Japanese company. However, nearly all under-40 horsepower tractors [Ire made by Japanese companies and marketed under names of major U.S. tractor firms. Feed grain storage Concentrated on west coast and gulf ports, with some elevators in producing areas. Total ~apacity of nearly 2 million tons, less than I percent of the nearly 250 million tons of U.S. grain storage. Two large grain storage companies, one with 33 grain elevators. TIle 30 Japanese trading companies with branch offices in Portland, OR, handle 70 to 80 pereent of all grain exported from Oregon. Fertilizer Small interest. Food processing One company has 20 percent of the U.S. dried soup market, and several Japanese companies produce noodle products. One company is the secor.d largest producer of vinegar in the United States, while another is Hawaii's largest maker of sausages. U.S. soysau.·e production is dominated by Japanese companies. One company accounts for 20 pereent of the U.S prune exports to Japan. Food retailing Largely ethnic, except recent acquisition of 7-Eleven stores. Many ethnic restaurants, with recent expansion into fast foods and other types of restaurants and convenience store chains. Food wholesaling Small percentage of total, also largely ethnic. Rice mills One in California, with riceland. Seafood Over 80 percent of Alaska fisheries. Seed companies Small percentage of total. Textiles Small percentage of total. Vegetable oils Small percentage of total, but concentration in cottonsecd oil in Texas and rapeseed oil in Oregon. Wineries Small percentage of total. Emerging industry in sa1(e.

• According to the U.S. Deparunent of Commerce, plus anoLher $10 billion invested in U.S. agricul­ Lhe stock of Japan's direct investment in all eco­ turalland. According to Lhe Department of Com­ nomic secLOrs of the United States was $83 billion merce and USDA's Economic Research Service, Japa­ in 1990, about one-fifth of Lhe total $404 billion of nese investors own less Lhan a tenth of Lhe foreign­ FDI from all countries (tabk 6). According to Japa­ owned agribusinesses (fig. 2) and about a tenth of nese statistics, Lhe stock of Japanese investment in Lhe foreign-owned agricultural land (fig. 3). Japan Lhe United States was $104 billion as o~ March ranks seventh in foreign ownership of U.S. agricul­ 1990 (14). turalland in terms of acreage and fourth in terms of value, suggesting that Japanese invesunents have • Reflecting the small direct role Lhat agriculLure been in more expensive land. Japan is Lhe fourth plays in either economy, Japanese investment in largest investor in U.S. agribusiness (table 7). U.S. agriculLuralland and agribusiness was about $3 billion, according to Lhe U.S. Department of • According to the USDA's Economic Research Serv­ Commerce. The stock of total foreign invesunent in ice, Japanese investors own 3.7 percent of Lhe for­ U.S. agribusiness from all sources is $32 billion, eign-owned U.S. farmland in terms of acreage and

7 Table 6··Foreign investment in U.S. agribusiness by all countries and Japlln

Category 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Million dol/ars All countries: All industries 220,414 263,394 314,754 Food industry 373,763 403,735 12.147 15,506 16,458 24,054 22,875 Other Ilgriousinesses 10.056 6,975 10,173 9,256 Total food and agribusinesses 9,286 22.203 22,481 26,631 AgricuItura11and 33,310 32,161 7.824 8,221 9,034 9,950 10,340 Japan: All industries 26,824 34,421 51,126 Food industry 67,319 83,498 158 281 393 Other agribusinesses 1 641 662 671 470 530 710 1,217 Total food and agribusinesses 829 751 923 1,351 1,879 Agricultura11and 213 218 507 985 • mm'~i______~.______1,073 ___

tlnclude agriculiural chemicals, fann machinery, textile products, wholesale farm products and groceries, foodstores and eating places, and agriculture. Source: (J 9).

Figure 2: Foreign direct investment in U.S. agribusiness Figure 3: Foreign direct investment in U.S. farmland

B1llion dollars 35,------______-. Billion dollars 12,------______-,

30 10

8 20

6 15

10 4

5 2

o 1986 1987 1988 o 1989 1990 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Year Year

• Total ~Japan _Total ~Japan

8 Table 7--Ranking of foreign O\merships of U.S. agricultural land and agribusinesses, 1990

Landarca Land value Agribusiness value Million acres Million dollars Million dollars Canada 3.91 Canada 1,451 United Kingdom 11,

Source: (4).

10 percent according to value at the time ofsale (4). sive contmcts to mise cattle and pack beef for Japanese su­ Japanese invcsunent is less than I rcrcent of total pennarkels and wholesalers. U.S. rarmland in tenns of vallJ~ and acreage, and is concentrated in the Western S'~lles. An Assessment of U.S. Gains from Japanese • The United Kingdom is the largest overall foreign Investment investor in the United States and the largest foreign investor in U.S. agribusiness, particularly in the Based on accepted theory for U.S. food industry. Some other Western European foreign investment, the gains in the United States as the host country companies have been giants in the U.S. food indus­ should come from increased employment and growth try for a long time. By 1990, accumulated Euro­ in GNP, coupled willi some losses in returns on pean Community invesunent in U.S. agribusiness capitaito domestic investors. Theoretically, the analysis should was S27 billion. Canada is the largest investor in offer inferences about the U.S. farmland. welfare (costs and benefits) ofJapanese investment in the United States, but the data are inconclusive. • Balanced against the foreign presence in U.S. The most easily documented gains are the gains agribusiness is the U.S. presence in other countries' in employ­ ment. Some foreign direct investments arc and will agribusiness. In 1990, U.S. invesunent in agribusi­ be a boon to the U.S. agricultural economy. In facl, in some ness ofother countries amounted to S34 billion, in­ cases, they have created new jobs and additional wealth. cluding S1.9 billion in Japan and S12.3 billion in According to the U.S. Department ofCommerce, the European Community. U.S. invesunent in agri­ affiliates ofJapanese companies employed less than 1 percent business abroad has also increased in recent years. of the labor force in their sectors in ]989: 10,000 persons in the food and bevemgc industries, 6,100 in textile products, 4,000 in wholesale trade, 24,000 in Other Institutional Arrangements restaurants, and 3,600 in agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. In these compa!..:.• employment increased by 35 percent from 1988 to 19 9. U.S. agricultural tmde with Japan is influenced by Japanese Some of this increase represents growth due to the creation invesunent. In 1988, S7 billion worth of farm products and of new finns, but a portion represents the growth ofem­ groceries were shipped from the United Stales by affiliates ployment in already existing companies that ofJapanese companies. were trans­ Direct invesunent is only one of ferred to Japanese ownership. the institutional arrangements that facilitate agricultural trade between the United States and Japan. Japanese compa­ Losses in returns to capital 10 domestic investors are more nies' consignments with major U.S. companies for pur­ difficullto quantify. Foreign direct investment has brought chases ofgrape, apple, and orange juice and one company's in new industries, such as the en.erging Japanese sake in­ purchase ofexclusive rights to market a major U.S. com­ dustry in California. The development of the ramen noodle pany's canned and frozen foods in Asia are among the ar­ industry in southern California has added to employment as mngements that have developed in recent years. Others well as to the diversity of foods available to U.S. consum­ include one Japanese supcnnarket chain's ongoing business ers. U.S. consumers also gained from increased efficien­ relationship with a major U.S. produce company, and exclu­ cies in the production ofsome food products. Ramen

9 noodles, however, compete with other dried soup products. In other segments of the U.S. agricultural economy, the con­ Conclusions sequences may also be mixed. Japanese investment is an emerging concen! in U.S. agri­ The Japanese rice market, now almost entirely protected business, mosuy because of its recent rapid growth. In the from imports, may eventually open up iO U.S. rice. But aggregate U.S. agricultural economy, Japanese investment that rice could come from farms and mills that are U.S.­ shows up as a small part of the total, since foreign direct in­ Japanese ventures rather than wholly U.S.-owned opera­ vestment is a small part of total invesunent in the United tions, especially if only a small window to the Japanese States. Nevertheless, U.S. businesses that arc wholly Japa­ market is opened. nese-owned or partially owned by Japanese interests have the potential to be a market force in some sectors of agri­ The 1988 U.S.-Japan Beef and Ciuus Understanding pro­ business. Some food-processing and beverage industries, vided the Opportunity for expansion of Japanese imports of as well as the U.S. export beef industry, appear to have had beef. The U.S. companies EXCEL, IBP, and Conagra are the largest Japanese markel. presence at the end of 1990. the major exporters of beef to Japan, and are associated with large Japanese imponers in Ule lIade. In this highly The specific effects of foreign direct investment on U.S. ag­ segmented industry, unless domestic U.S. becf producers ribusiness must be a'lsessed by industry, to dctermine how are pan of a joim vemure, they may be unable to participate !he gains in income arc being divided between U.S.

The cOllon-milling industry is somewhat different in that 5. Gorman, William, and Hiroshi Mori. "Competitive Posi­ Japanese companies came to the United States to avoid the tion of Australian Grain-Fed Beef in the Japanese Market," quota in place for fabrics and clothing exported from Japan Pacific Rim Agriculture and Trade Report: Situation and (and other countries) to the United States. While several of Out/ook Series. RS-90-2, Econ. Res. Serv., U.S. Dept. Agr., these mills replaced other U.S. mills, they continucd the July 1990, p.42. employment in UIC cOllon-milling industry. Other new, more modern mills arc highly mechanized and employ only 6. Graham, Edward, and Paul Krugman. Foreign Direct In­ a few people in the production process. vestment in the United States. Institute for International Economics, Wa<;hington, DC, 1989.

IO 7. Grennes, Thomas. Inlernalional Economics. Prentice­ 21. Yamauchi, Hiroshi, Hiroshi Kakazu, and Rodney K.B. Hall, Inc., Englewood ClilTs, NJ, 1989. Young. U.S.-Japan Trade in a Pacific Rim COr.lexl. Col­ lege of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, Univer­ 8. Handy, Charles. "Globalization in Food Marketing: Mul­ sity of Hawaii Research Series 057, Honolulu, 1988. tinational Ownership Linkages: Strategies 10 Access Inter­ national Markets." Unpublit;hed material, U.S. Dept. Agr., 22. Yarbrough, Beth V., and Robert M. Yarbrough. 'rhe Econ. Res. Serv., 1990. World Economy: Trade and Finance. The Dryden PreSS, Chicago, IL, 1988. 9. Henderson, James M., and Richard E. Quandt. Microe­ conomic Theory, A Malhemalical Approach. Third Edition. McGraw Hill, New York, 1980. Appendix 1: The Theoretical Argument for 10. Japan Economic Institute. Japan's Expanding U.S. Foreign Dir~t Investment Manufacluring Presence. Washington, DC, 1989. The necessity for foreign investment is illustrated by the 11. Japan External Trade Organization. /989-90 Direclory: standard theoretical argument from national income ac­ Japanese Affiliated Companies in USA and Canada. counting. A concise statement of the argument is presented Tokyo, 1988. in (2 I) and this section is extmcted from that publication.

12. Kreinin, Mordechai E.lmernalional Economics: A Pol­For an open economy, national income accounting shows the following identity: icy Approach. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, NY, 1987. Y = Cp + fp + Cg + Ig + X + M (1) 13. MacDougal, G.D.A. "The Benefits and Costs of Private Where Y=GNP Investment from Abroad: A Theoretical Approach," Eco­ nomic Record, Vol. 36, pp. 13-35. 1960. Cp = private consumption 14. MacKnight, Susan. Japan's Expanding U.S. Manufac­ luring Presence, /988 Update. Japan Economic Institute, Ip = private investment Washington, DC, Oct. 1989. Cg = government consumption 15. Rivera-Batiz, F.L., and L.A. Rivera-Batiz. "Effects of Direct Foreign Investments," Journal ofDevelopmenl Eco­Ig = government investment nomics, Vol. 34, pp. 295-307. Elsevier Science Publis~ers B. V., North-Holland, 1990. X = exports of goods and services

16. Tolchin, Martin, and Susan Tolchin. Buying inlo Amer­M = imports of goods and services. ica: /low Foreign Money is Changing lhe Face ofOur Na­ lion. Time Books, New York, 1988. Rearranging equation I, aggregate supply, Y + M, is equal to aggregate demand, Cp + Ip + Cg+ Ig + X. Eqllation I 17. Scherer, EM.lnduslrial Markel SlruClure and Eco­can be reworked to include taxes: nomic Performance. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA,1980. Y - T - Cp - Ip + T - Cg - Ig = X - M (2)

18. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic where T = taxes, or government revenues, including net do­ Analysis. Foreign Direcllnveslment in the United Stales, mestic government revenues plus net domestic government transfers. Operations ofU.S. Affiliates ofForeign Companies, Pre­ liminary /988 Estimates. Aug. 1990. Let Y - T - Cp = Sp, where Sp is private saving, and T - Cg 19. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic = Sg, where Sg is government saving. Then: Analysis. Survey ofCurrent Business. Vol. 70, No.8, and earlier issues. Sp - Ip + Sg - Ig = X - M (3)

20. U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Equation 3 shows that the sum of the saving-investment Administration. Foreign Direci/nvesimeni in the United gaps in the private and government. sectors equals net ex­ Slates, 1987 Transaclions. Washington, DC, Dec. 1988. ports of goods and services. Government expenditure,

II whether for consumption or investment, frequently exceeds government revenue, resul[ing in deficit spending. The United States had lrdde deficits throughout the 1980's because of a low private savings rate combined with large In geneml, government deficits are represented by ncgative Fedeml deficits. The lrdde deficits were financed by large govcrnmcnt saving, and if such dcficits are financed by bor­ inflows of foreign capital. ro~ving from the private sector, the share of domestic sav­ ing available to the private sector is reduced. Japan in the late 1980's had a high savings rate in relation to domestic investment, which led to large trade surpluses Let S = Sp + Sg be domestic saving, and I = Ip + Ig be do­ and corresponding outflows of capital. Much of this capi­ mestic investment Then: tal was iilvestcJ in the Unil.ed States.

S-I=X-M (4) Appendix 2: The Effects of Intercountry S - I is the [otal saving-investmcnt gap for the economy. It Mobility of Capital is thc diffcrcnce betwecn [olal domcstic (private plus gov­ ernment) invcstmcnt and total domestic saving. If imports The aggregate effects of a capital flow between two Coun­ are greater than exports, then savings must be less than in­ tries wilh a single output and two factors, capital and labor, vcstment Since net exports of goods and services, X _ M, 1m! shown in appendix figure I. The marginal product of arc the same as the currcn! account balance, CA (assuming, capital is ploUed for a given technology and a given slock for Simplicity, that nctlr.msfcr payments are zero), then: of labor for the host country and for the capiUII-exponing S-I=X-M=CA counlly. The capital-exporting Country B is shown all a (5) mirror image of the host Country A, so that the horizontal axis represents the total qmllltity of capital available to all Equation 5 says that when saving exceeds investment, the industries in both COuntries. The vertical axes measure the current aCCOUnt balance must be a surplus. Com'ersely, if rental mte of capital (the interest nile) in each country. The investment exceed$. saving, the current account balance must be a deficit. area under the marginal product line for Country A repre­ sents the total output associated with a given quantity of capital, when labor and technology arc held constant. Be­ Every current account transaction has a corresponding and fore foreign investment OCcurs, the initial supply of capital equivalent-valued financial counterpart. An import of a in the host country is O"M and the initial interest mte is R2. good or service is an export of a financial claim of equiva­ The total capital income is O"R2BM. The remaining area lent value. By the same token, an export of a good or serv­ under the marginal product of capital curve R2AB is total ice decreases financial liabilities to foreigners. Thus, the labor income. The sum of these two areas, O"ABM = current account balance equals the net change in foreigners' 0"R2BM + R2AB, represents the gross national product asscts and liabilities or net capital movements, except with opposite signs. An analogous situation exists in the capital-exporting Coun­ try. Before capital is tmnsferred across countries, the initial Let KA = net capital movements, which means the capital interest mte is Ro and the total capital income is OBRoEM flows required to finance the current account. Then to in­ and labor income is RoEK. -Gross national product is clUde the capital account, equation 5 can be wriuen as: OBKEM. Since the interest rate is initially higher in the host country, there is an incentive for capital to move from S - I =X - M = CA = -KA (6) the capital-exporting country to the host country.

Equation 6 indicates that excess domestic investment over If there are no restrictions on the flow of capital betwecn domestic saving, or a current account is financed by dl..~ficit, the two countries, capital will flow out of the capital-export_ foreign capital inflows. The opposite is true for a current ing Country and into the host country until a new equilib­ account surplus; excess domestic saving over investment is rium is reached at interest mte RI in both countries. The exported as capital outflows to finance current account defi­ quantity of capita/that brings about this equilibrium is MN. cits in other countries. The capital outflows may take the For the host country, capital income changes from form of foreign direct investment, portfolio investment, 0"R2BM to OAR,CN. Domestic income from the new for­ loans, and transfer payments. The choice between foreign eign investment increases by MBCN and the income of the direct investment and other loans and portfolio investment domestic capital owners falls from OAR2BM to OAR, OM. depends on the relative risks and returns to alternative in­ v('~tments. Income to domestic labor increases from R2AB to RlAC.

12 Pan of the growth in labor income is a transfer from the de­ cline in income from domestic owners of capilal try, increases from OBRoEM to OBRI DM so that the net gain to capital owners in the capital-cxporting country is (RIR2BD), but BCD is u net gain 10 domestic labor and a net increase in the host country's gross nalional product. RoR I DE. Income 10 domestic labor in the capital-exponing country declines from KERo to KCR I. The area CfRoR I is The capital-exporting country is affected in the opposite an income transfer from domestic labor to domesic capital way. As MN capital is moved from Country B to Country owners, and the area CEF is an income transfer from do­ A, the supply of capital in the capital-exporting country de­ mestic labor to capital owners investing abroad. The area clines from <>aM to OBN. The falling supply of capilal of CDE represents a net gain to the gross national product of the capital-cxporting country. causes the inl{!rest rale in Country B to rise from Ro 10 RI. Capital income, including income invesled in the hosl coun-

Appendix figure I: Effects of intercoulltry lIlohility of capital

Host '~OLJntry COPitol exporting 'ntere-t rate country interest rate A

K

R, ~------!-~~------~ R,

l~______~__~______~__~ 0" H tv! N G D.

DlIiont i ty of cap j ta I

Country A (host) Country B (foreign investor)

Marginal product of "apital AG Capital inflow KH MN Incr~ase (decline) in GDP MN MBCN Income from FDI MNCE MOCN Gains (Ioss~s) to dOIl1~sti" work"" BCD + R,R,BD Transf~rs from dom~sti.; CEF + RoR,CF capital to labor R,R,BD Incr"ase in GNP RoR,CF BCD CDE

I{

13 Appendix tahle I--Acr~lge of Japanese-uwned agricultum! land hy county, 1990

County and State Cropland Pasture Forest Other Non­ agriculture

Acres Arizona: Maricopa 1,023

California: Colusa 1,622 74 Fresno 16 71 92 KI:rn 5,8-17 316 491 Los Angeles 72 ~Iontere)' 40 Napa 10 128 14 232 Orange 89 15 Placer 10 Riversidc 170 223 158 San Bcrnardinll 260 60 San Luis Obispo 10 Santa Clara Sonoma 13 121 6 179 Tehama 7,1l5 Tulare 311 Ventura 134 1,013

Colorado; Alamosa 26,146 Crowley 243 Pueblo 145 34 Routt 233 Saguache 9,223 Summit 205 50 Yuma 1,080 200 Florida: Brevard 231 60 Indian Rivcr 15,667 7,926 1,062 Palm Beaeh 45 280 Polk 28

Georgia: Brooks 88 69 22 4 Colquitt 1,740 Coweta Early 19 171 216 Floyd Franklin 64 34 Fulton 26 689 Gwinnctt

Continucd­

',1'-:,' •• ' -- ~ "~'''-''''''''' • -.

Appendix ulble l--Acreage or Japanese-owned agricultural land by county, 1990--Continued

County and State Cropland Pasture Forest Other Non­ agriculturc

Henry Acres Jackson 90 21 Polk 104 Rockdale 127 220 64 23 Worth 420

Hawaii: Hawaii 3,137 24,025 1,670 22,711 987 Honolulu 986 Kauai 1,109 3,180 57 2,411 4,001 605 Maui 33 3,847 1,140 7,867 556 Illinois: Champaign 229 Cook 44 Du Page 4 Lake 5 9 La Salle 64 Marshall 11 Morgan Oglc 26 50 Piatt 719 2 Scott 458 Woodford 499

Indiana: Clinton Hancock 12 Jackson 117 69 Jay 37 Madison 34 15 Portcr 28

Iowa: Boone 67 11 Pagc 77

Kansas: Kiowa 400 3,150 Republic 160 Rice 80

Kentucky: Greenup Marion 155 Oldham 10 1,241 150 21 Continued­

15 - ~

Appendix table I--Acreage of Japanese-owned agricuUuralland by county, 1990--Continued

County and Slate Cropland Pasture Forest Other Non­ agriculture

Acres Scott 481 Shelby 40 1,483 Warren 30 13 Woodford 300

Louisiana: Sl. lames Parish 291 243 Maine: Somerset 180,109

Maryland: Cecil 11 7 Frederick 2,520 90 457 144 200 Michigan: Hillsdale 213 18 31 Lapeer 26 25 Livingston 20 120 Washt.:naw 255 138 Missouri: Audrain 119 63 Mississippi 30

Montana: Beaverhead 3,000 24,832

Nebraska: Lancaster 173 54 Lincoln 133 3,546 Scotts Bluff 352 Nevada: Humboldt 800 Nye 150 250 New Mexico: Grant 90,953 Luna 16,335

New York: Wyoming 25 4 North Carolina: Burke 40 Continued­ Appendix table l--Acreage of Japanese-owned agricultural land by county, 1990--Continued

County and State Cropland Pasture Forest Other Non­ agriculture

Acres Durham 18 25 31 Franklin 68 30 New Hanover 718 14 Pender 660 3 Ohio: Allen 53 Butler 380 105 45 2,486 Champaign 50 17 Clark 26 25 Clinton 90 Fayette 54 38 Franklin 57 Hancock 20 Highland 75 10 6 9 Logan 850 674 209 Lucas 313 24 Madison 60 60 Montgomery 10 10 Ross 1,046 42 Scioto 324 Shelby 581 86 Union 1,098 886 214 Warren 114 50 731 Oregon: Clackamas 106 180 2,758 454 Deschutes 468 Douglas 600 98 Josephine 1 4 36 3 6 Lane 180 Marion 12 Washington 487 79 South Carolina: Anderson 14 30 45 Berkeley 5,460 131 547 Dorchester 810 Greenwood 151 Horry 1,050 Newberry 7 Orangeburg 67 29 Spartanburg 482 70 South Dakota: Yankton 19 Continued­

17 Appendix table l--Acreage of Japanese-owned agricultural land by county, 1990--Continued County and State Cropland Pasture Forest Other Non­ agriculture

Tennessee: Acres Shelby Warren 177 50 17 2 9 Texas: 17 Bowie Collin 124 8 6 Dallam 88 4 Gillespie 512 60 56 Haskell 416 104 100 Maverick 26 Mitchell 42 Moore 49 Walker 125 48 Vermont: Bennington Windham 434 1,000 Virginia: Essex Fauquier 180 40 Loudoun 163 Roanoke 275 1,702 57 Washington: Clallam 197 Clark 41 Cowlitz 417 244 Klickitat 279 Lewis 121 Thurston 240 Whatcom 551 Yakima 1,194 15 Wisconsin: Bayfield Douglas 12 10 Walworth 58 100 40 40 Total 92 52,039 226,650 204,103 41,003 Source: (4). 15,085

18 ;~ ...... o;'" ilI,~~'~on::-.:..~:~~..\'t::::;"::~7!:-_:-_

Appendix table 2--I'artially ur whully Japanese-(lmll~dcUlllp11l1ies in the lJllitl'(l States

Company Plant location Par~ntcompany N~w or Product line Year Other economic

acquir~d information

Bakeries:

Bunmddo of Honolulu, HI Bunm~idoConf~ction~ry N~w Bakery products 1965 10 employees Hawaii, Ltd. Company, Ltd.

Daiichuya-Lov~'s Honolulu. HI First Bakery Co. Ltd. Acquir~d Bakery products 1981 300 employees; Bakery Inc. (99.5 %) $24 million addition (1990) 135 loaves of bread; and 360,000 rolls/day

Diamond Food Corp. Honolulu, HI Takaki Bakery Co. Acquired Bakery products 1977 N.A. Foster City, CA

Dorcas Bakery Fort Le~,NJ Seiyu International New Bakery products N.A. N.A.

., Ikeda Bakery Los Angel~s,CA Ikeda Bakery New Bakery pruducts N.A. N.A. 1\ if Kimuraya Bakery Hunolulu, HI Okayama Kimuraya, Ltd. New Bakery products 1974 30 employees of Hawaii

Orange Bakery Inc. Irvine, CA Rheon Automatic N~w Bal(ery products 1979 145 employees Huntersville, NC Machinery Co. Ltd.

N~w Pasco Corp. of Torrance. CA Shikishima Baking Bakery products 1984 40 employ~es America Co. Ltd.

Saint Germain Honolulu, HI Tokyu Foods, Inc. N~w Bakery products 1977 52 employees America, Inc. Ltd. (60%) Tokyu Department Store Co. Ltd. (40%)

Continued­

,....

10 ~. " 1-..) 0 Appendix table 2--I'artially or whully Jllpanese-owlled cOlllplu:ies ill Ihe United States--Contillued

Company Planl location Pnrl!nt compiU1Y N~w or Product line Year Other economic acquired information

T and T Food Los Angeles. CA T:tkaki Bakery KK New Bakery products 1990 $300,000 (50%) monthly sales

Beef:

Colonial Beef Philadelphia. PA Naig:ti Chikusan Ltd. New Beef i987 200 employees Company (50%)

Fremont Beef Company Fremont, NE Stamina Foods (55%) N~w Beef, beef 1990 43 employees t...lambeni Corporation variety meats

Tengu Company Los Angeles, CA Nichirei Corporalion Acquired B~efand beefjerky 1990 Purchased for $16 million U.S.- Nippon Los Angeles, CA Nippon Meal Packers, Acquired Beef, hams, Meat Packers, Inc. 1977 90 employees Inc. and sausages

Vi~nnaBeef Los Angeles, CA Yonekyu Corp. Acquired B~ef,hams, 1990 Purchased for and sausages 53.2 million; processes 440 tons

m~at/month;15 employees Washington Beef, Inc. Ellensburg, W A Farmland Trading Co. Acquired Beef 1988 45 employees Toppenish, W A Yakima, WA

Beverages:

Adohr Dairies Santa Ana, CA Pokka Corp. Acquir~d Soft drinks 1990 Purchased for 55.6 million

Almar Service Los Angeles, CA Daiohs. Ltd. Acquired Coffee service 1990 N.A.

Continued-­ ~""'-","f~_~

Appendix table 2--Partially or whoUy Jap;U1ese-owlIed companies ill tbe United States-Continued

Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Ycar Othercconomic acquired information

American Soy Salene, MI Kawosho Products, Acquired Soy bcvcrages 1986 14 cmploycc.; Products Inc. Corporation (25 %) 3,600 tons soymilklycar Marusan-Ai Co., Ltd. (25%) Eden Foods Inc. (25%)

Belmont Springs Belmont, ME Suntory, Ltd. Acquired BoUled spring 1990 Water Company Purchased for $36 watcr million; with Polar Water, salcs of $135 million Capy International, Century City, CA Calpis Co. Ltd. New Beveragcs N.A. Inc. N.A.

Coca-Cola Middletown, CN Kirin Brewing Co. Acquired Soft drinks 1979 u.S. salcs of $300 Bouling Co. Bangor, ME million of Northcrn Lewiston, ME New England Machias, ME Presque Isle, ME South Portland, ME Lowell, ME Berlin, NH Clarement, NH Laconia, NH Londonderry, NH Somerworth, NH Barre, VT Burlington, VT

Crystal Water Fort Lauderdale, FL Suntory Ltd. Acquired Bottled water 1987 150 employees Company Fort Myers, FL Orlando, FL

Continucd-

,...N \t .: 1--.) 1--.) AllllI!lUlix i:lble 2--I'artiall)' !lr "hully .IallaIlCSl~UWIIl'dcUIIIIJallil'S ill the l:lIitl'(l Statt.'S--Culltilllll'(l

C

Mi~ul.uCoffee Co. Ltd. (JOt!, ) Ito-En USA. Inc. Hnnolulu. HI Itn-En. Ltd. Acquired Oolong tea and In7 60 employees lillit juice 1990 Kentwood Spring New Orleans. LA Water Co. Suntnry Corp. Acquired Bouled WUler and 19115 350 employees isotonic beverages Pepcom Industries Garden City, NY Sunlnry Lid. AC

Polar Water Co. Beltsville. MD Sunh1ry Ltd. Acquired Columbus. OH Bottled water 19K7 200 employees Youngstown, OH Beuver Falls. PA Wheeling. WV

Secretary Coff~~ Los Ang~l~s,CA Dni(lh~Ltd. S~rviceCo. Acquired Cofr~eselvicl! 1990 PlIrchas~dfor S8 million

Continued­ ~'>t.;",,= __ :;,,;

Appt:lldix table 2--I'artiaUy or wholly Ja,"IIII!Se-owuw cOlUpallil!S in the United Slall!S--Conlilluw

Company Plant location Par~ntcompllny N~w or Product line Year Olh~r~conomic acquir~d intormation

Talawanda Springs Colleg~ Corn~r. Suntory Lid. Acquired B()III~dwater OH 19R7 40 ~mpl()yees

10·K Co. N.A. Suntor) Lid. Acquired He.11h drink 1989 N.A. YH Green Food Oxnard. CA Japan Pharmllcclllical Products, Inc. New Soft drinks 1990 Devdopl11ent Company. Plant cost S I!I.3 million and Ltd. S20 million annual sales

lJiochelllicaL~:

Agrochemical San Francisco, Ki~maiChin Indo International New Impor1lexport N.A. CA Ihara Chemical N A. chemicals Alpha Biochemical Richland, WA Kanega/ilchi Chemical New Corporation Bind~rfor feedl 1982 Industry Corporation 20 employees and food starches from purchased for S3.5 million potatoes American Peptide Santa Clara, CA Itoham Foods. Inc. New Peptides 1988 4 employe~s Bio Kyowa, Inc. Cap~Girardeau, KyolVa Hakko Kogyo Co.. New Lysine 1984 MO subsidiary of Marubcni 74 employees and Corporation purchas~dfor S50 million

Bioproducts Stockton. CA Mitsui and Co.. Ltd. Acquired 'ncorporated Aurora. MO Pet food flavorings 1986 80 employees and WlIrrcnton, OR purchased for S5.3 million

Diamond Shamrock KY Mitsui and Co., Ltd. Acquired Animal Nutrition AR Feed additives 1981 Purchased for S 15 million Division CA

Continued-­

N W t-.J

~ Appendix lable 2--Partially or whClII)' .Ia,l;ml!!\l!-uw·nOO companies ill Ihe Unitl'd Stales--CoiJlrnued Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Year acquired Other economic information

Duphar Nutri:ion. Waukegan. IL Inc. Daiichi New Feed additives N.A. N.A. Eisai USA Torrance, CA Eisai Ltd. New Feed ~dditives Heanland Lysine 1989 N.A. Eddyville. IA Ajinol11oto Co.. Inc. New Lysine (50~J 19K6 50 empioyees OrsSumitomo Chemical Co. 1989 N.A.

Continued­ ~~:u,-."4"~

Appendix table 2--PartiaUy or whoUy Japauele-Owned compaWei ill the United Slatel-Colltinued Company Plant location Parent ~ompany New Or Product line Year Other economic acquired infon:-.alion

lIiOledlllol...,.:

Calgcne Davis, CA Kinn Breweries Co" Acquired Seed potato (30%) 1990 Purchucd for $l.S million and biotechnology Grenada Bioscience $3.4 million annual .. lei Dallas, TX Nisho IWli Corp.lnc. Acquired Biotechnology Itoham Foods 1990 N.A. Jusco Co, LId. Fujirija Co. Ltd. Dairies:

Foremost Dairies Honolulu, HI House Foods Industrial Acquired Milk and dairy Hawaii, Ltd. 1987 17S employees; products Fa procNctioa: purchaaed for SIS.S million

Colcs Egg Fann Ben Mountain, V A Is~America Inc. New Poultry and eggs (Mitsui Corp.) 1981 N.A. Croton Egg Fanns, Croton,OH Ohio Ise Kabushiki- Kaisha New Egg production Toyame (Mitsui Corp.) N.A. N.A. Egg City, Inc. Moorpark, CA Okura and Co. Acquired Egg production 1990 Purchased for $6 million lac America Newberry,SC Ise Kaboshiki-Kaisha New Toyame Egg production N.A. N.A. Jersey Coalt Lakewood, NJ Egg Producers Ise Kaboshiki-Kaisha New Cecilton, MD Egg production N.A. Assn. (Seaboard Fanns) N.A. Lancaster. PA

Continued--

N VI ~ Appendix table 2-Pllrtildly or wholly .Iapalles~CI\ml'dcompanies in the Unitl'd States-Cllntinul'd Company Plalll local;on Parelll company New Or Pro<.iuCIline Y~ar acquired Oth~reconomic infornlalion

Shenn-Dutch Harrisonhurg. V A Foods Inc. Ise America Inc. New Egg dislribulion N.A. N.A. Fano equipmmt:

Auburn Consolidated Auburn, NY Industries, Inc. Kuhola lid. (49%) Acquired Landscaping 1976 100 employ~es Firestone Tire and and f.,rnl equipmenl Des Moines, IA Rubber Co. Bridgeslone CO'll. Acquired Farm Iraclor lires 1988 100 employees Kubota Traclor Corp. Complon, CA Kuhol:l Traclor Suwane.:, GA N.:w Corp. Farm Iraclors 1984 N.A. Nissho-Iwai Southfield, MI American Corp. Nissho-Iwai New Co. Ltd. Milk cool:!rs and 1966 N.A. parts Feed grain storage and trading:

AGREX Kansas City, MO Mitsubishi Corp. Overland Park. KS New Grain trading 1979 N.A. Elm Creek. NE 1983 Norfolk, NE Superior, N E CIGRA Chicago,lL C. Itoh and Co. Portland, OR New Ltd. Grain trading 1982 N.A. Columbia Grain Portland, OR Marubeni Corp. Great Falls, MN New Grain trading 1990 12 million bushel and slorage COOIOlidated Grain and storage capacity St. Louis, MO Barge C.ltoh Acquired Grain storage Zen·Noh 1990 35.4 million bushel storage capacity

ContiO!led­

, ! Appmdix table 2--I'llrtially or wholly .lallllJl~e-t1WIII.'dcOllljlllJlil!S ill Ihe lJllill.'d Slall!S--COlllilllled

Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Year Other economic acqlllred information

GlilfCoast DenisllIl,IA lvlitsui and Co. NA Grain slllrage N.A. N.A. Grain, Inc. LId.

Kasho USA Los Angd(:s, CA Knsho Co. LId. N.A. Grain trading 1960 N.A. San Franci.co, C A

Granplex Inc. St. Louis, MO Nichimen Corp. N.A. Grain trading N.A. N.A. Portland, OR

Marub~niAmerica Corp. St. Louis, MO Marubeni Corp. New Grain trading 1971 N.A. Portland, OR

Mitsubishi Portland, OR Mitsuhishi Corp. New Grain trading N.A. N.A. International Corp.

Mitsui Grain Chicago,IL Mitsui COlll. New Grain trading 19K3 N.A. Corporation Portland, OR

Nichimen America, Portland, OR Nichimcn CO.,l. New Grain trnding N.A. N.A. Inc,

Nissho Iwai America Portland, OR Nissho-Iwai Corp. New Grain trading N.A. N.A.

Shintoa Inh:rnational Los Angeles, CA Shinton Kneki New Grain trading 1963 N.A. Inc. New York, NY Kaish" LId.

St. 10hn's Grain Memphis, TN Mitsui and CII. Acquired Grain truding N.A. N.A.

Sumitomo Corp. Portland, OR Sumitomo and Co. New Grain trading N.A. N.A. of America

Toshoku America, Inc. San Francisw, CA Toshoku Ltd. New Grain trading 1956 N.A.

Toulon Feed and Toulon,IL Toyomenka Co. Acquired Grain trading N.A. N.A. Grain Co. Ltd. Continucd--

N -...J ~ Appendix table 2-Partially or whoUy Japal1ese-ownl'd companies in the Unitl'd States--Continul'd Company Plam location Parent company New or Product line Y~ar acquir~d Other economic information

United Grain Corp. Portland, OR of Oregon Mitsui Grain Co. Acquir~d Grain trading N.A. N.A. Zen-Nob Grain Corp. Metairie, LA Z~n-N()h Acquired Zen-Nob Unicorp. Grain trading 1979 Seattle, WA N.A. of America Zen-Noh New Grain trading 1985 $25 million capital investment; $100 million annual sales; originally purchased Fertilizers: for S90 million

18 Chemical Co. Mobile, AL Mitsubishi Kasei Corp. New Slow release (35%) 1985 25 cmploye~s Mitsubishi Corp. (15%) nitrogen fertilizer Virginia Chemical (50%) Food processing:

Advanced Concept Corp. Gardena, CA Chuyo Bussan Corp. New Processed food, 1990 N.A. Airin Inc. meat, and fish Honolulu, HI Mitsui and Co., Ltd. New Ajinomoto USA Processed food 1990 N.A. Los Angeles, CA Ajinom",v ~o. New Amino acids, frozen 1956 $25 million Akiyama Taukemono foods, and seasonings facility Gardena, CA California, Inc. Akuyama Tsukemono KK New Japanese pickles 1983 10 employees American Foods San Francisco, CA Corp. Nakano Vinegar Co. Ram:ho Cucamonga, CA Acquired Vinegar, Cooking 1981 85 employeel oil and lIuces Continued­ 'i:f

AplJelldix table 2--I'lIl1ially or \\'11011)' .Iallall~e-o\\,lIedCOIIIJIIUt.i~ill tbe United Stat~--Colltillued

Company Plam location Parent company New or Product line Year Other economic acquired information

Amsnacks. Inc. Stockton. CA Chuokken Sembei Inc. New Rice crackers 1980 40 employees Ariake Foods. Inc. Harri,onhurg. VA Ariake Food New Chicken-based 1989 25 employees and Material Co. Ltd. sl!as(mings $6.5 million facility Beechnut California San J",e. CA Morinaga Milk Industry Acquired Corporation BlIby food 1977 200 employees Company. Ltd. (20%)

Calbee America. Inc. Bucna Park. CA Calhee Foods Ltd. New Snack foods 19l!5 N.A. (fokyo)

Camino Real Foods Lancaster. PA Nissin Food Products Acquired Mexican-style 1989 S20 million annual sales Co. frozen dinners Cornnuts Oakland. CA Pokka Corp. Acquired Snack foods 1985 N.A. Empress Foods Southgate, CA JAFCO Ltd. (40%) New Inc. Rice cakes 1985 50 employees Mitsui and Co. (40%) Airin Co. Ltd. (20%)

Enway Inc. Clnckamas, OR Restaurant Skylark, New Frozen foods 1982 10 employees Co. Ltd. (51 %)

Fuji Foods, Inc. Browns Summit, NC Fuji Foods Corp. New Soup mixes and 1983 16 employees and (Seibu Grollp) flavorings $6.5 million facility

Georgia Pro Foods, Savannah, GA Nitto Food New Inc. Frozen dinners 1988 55 employees Products, Ltd. (45 %) Nozaki and Co. Ltd. (45 %) R & H Enterprises, Inc. (10%)

Granpack Foods, Inc. Portland, OR Katokichi Co. Ltd. New Frozen foods 1990 $13.9 million facility Green Foods Corp. CA Green Foods Corp. Acquired Food processing 1987 Purchased for $11 million Continucd­

N 10 ~. ,! i:5 AIIIJ4!ndix tabl··· 2--l'artially nr whnlly .Jallanese-nwnl'tl cnlllilanies in the Unitl'tl States--Cnntinul'tl

Company Plant location Par~ntcompany N~w or Product line Year Other ~conomic acquired information

Gr~nadaFoods Co. Houston. TX Nishuwai COlll. Acquir~d Frozen foods 1990 N.A. Itoham Foods Juseo Co. Fujija Co. Hapi Foods. Inc. Los Ang~les.CA Kikkomml Corp. Nt!w Fortune cooki~s 1977 17 employees T. Has~gawa. USA. L:lwndale. CA T. Has~gawaCn. Ltd. New Inc. Food flavoring 1979 13 employees

Henningsen Foods White Plains. NY Q.P. Corp. Acquired Inc. 3 plants in Mayonnaise 1990 Controlling intere.st Nebraska purchased for $12 million

House Foods and Los Angeles, CA House Foods Industry Yamauchi Inc. Acquired Tofu and related 1983 Co. (50%) 70 employees products Indian Summer, Inc. Evansville, IN Nakano Vinegar Co. Acquired Belding, MI Vinegar and 1987 120 employees; New Crossville, TN apple juice original plant purchased for $25 million; new plant $4 million; capacity of 7.9 million gallons vinegar and 1.6 billion gallons apple cider Instant Noodle Lunch N.A. Toyo Suisan Kaisha, Co. Acquired Instant noodles 1989 With Marnchan Noodle Co., V.S. sales of $490 million Indiana Packers Co. D~lphi,IN Mitsubishi (45 %) New Pork products 1990 Innovative Pork 1.2 million head/year Concepts, subsidiary of slaughtering capacity Central Soya

Ito Cariani Sausage San Francisco, CA Itoham Foods, Inc. Acquired Co., Inc. Pork products 1974 30 employees Continued-­ r):;.~~;>':..--:·",,;t~.....~~A":l""

Appendix Illble 2--I'artiaUy or whully JaJllUiese-owllro COIIIJllUliesill the UI;ilro Slales--Colllilluro

Company Plant location Par~ntcumpany N~w or Product line Year Other economic

acquir~d information

Kagome Co. USA Los Banos. CA Kagome Co. Ltd. N~w Tomato processing 1990 U.S. sales of $75 million

Brisban~,CA

Kahuka Agricultural Honolulu, HI Mitsui and Co. N~\V Tropical fruits and 1990 N.A. Co.. Hawaii. Ltd. pureed juices

Kikkoman Foods. Inc. Walworth. WI Kikkuman COIl'. N"w Soy, teriyaki, 1973 95 employe". sukiyaki, and tempura

Lotte, USA Battle Creek, MI Lotte Co.. Ltd. New Chewing gum and 1979 100 employees candy

Lyndonville Vinegar. Lyndonville, NY Lotte Co. Ltd. Acquired Vinegar 1986 105 employees Inc. Sodus, NY

MC Snack Co. Yakima, WA Mitsubishi Corp. New Apple chips 1987 30 employees

Mar-lchan Inc. Irvine, CA Toyo Suisan Kaisha, New Instant noodles 1985 60 employees Ltd. and wonton soup

Maruchan, Virginia Richmond, V A Toyo Suisan Kaisha, New Instant noodle soup 1990 100 employees Ltd.

~arukanVinegar USA Paramount, CA Marukan Vinegar Co .. New Vinegar 1985 7 employees Ltd.

MECOR, Inc. Johnstown, PA M~ijiSika Kaisha, New Food/feed additives 1990 15 employees Ltd.

Mitsubishi Foods Ponce, PR Mitsubishi Corp. Acquired Canned fish and 1981 850 employees fruits

Continueo-

YJ .....

i·~1 :.\ ~ Appendix table 2--Partially or wholly .Jaillmese-owned companies iu the Uuited States--CoUlillued Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line acquired Year Other economic information MEl Diversified Co. San Francisco, CA Ezaki Glico Co. Acquired Confections 1989 Purchased for $58 million; Nature's Favorite 4 plants and sales network; N.A. $ 107 million annual sales Mitsubishi Corp. Nissin Foods New Apple snacks 1987 USA Gardena, CA N.A. Nisstln Food Products Lancaster, PA New Co. Ltd. (80%) Instant noodles 1972 360 employees and Ajinomoto Co. Inc. (10%) and soup $600 million annual sales Mitsubishi (10%) Nitakaya USA, Inc. Los Angeles, CA Nitnkaya Co. Ltd. Acquired Q and B, Inc. lnpanese pickles Irwindale, CA 1983 20 employees QP COrporation New (99%) Mayonnaise 1982 Rakuyo Ken USA 45 employees Inc. Honolulu, HI Rakuyo Shokuhln New Oriental dumplings 1981 Redondo, Inc. 5 employees Honolulu, HI Nippon Meat Packers, Acquired Inc. Hams and sausages 1989 Sakura Noodles Inc. 50 employees and Los Angeles, CA purchased for $6.9 million Yachan Department New Store Instant noodles 1979 San 1 International 12 employees Inc. Richmond, VA San lirishi lozo Co., New Ltd. Soy sauce 1987 Sanyo Foods, Incorporated 30 employees Garden Grove, CA Sanyo Foods Company, Ltd New Sand B International Corporation Instant noodles Torrance, CA 1979 45 employees Sand B Shokuhin Company, New Shoei Food Co. Seasoning mixes Yuba City, CA 1975 7 employees Shoei Foods Corp. New Prune processing 1990 $2.7 million facility; 50 employees

Continued_

!h

;l~ Appendix table 2--PartialIy or whoUy Japanese-owned companies i.1Ithe United States--Continued

Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Vear Other economic acquired information

Stauffer-Meiji York, PA Stauffer Co. (25 %) New Biscuit Co. Biscuits, chocolate, 1985 100 employees Meijii COfll. (75 %) and cracker snacks SUnhuskers Foods, Inc. Lincoln. NE Nichirei COfll. (83 %) Acquired Poultry processing 1984 50 employees Union Inc. Costa Mesa. CA Union Trading Co., New Instant noodles 1976 250 employees Wakunaga of America Mission Viejo. CA Wakunaga Ltd. New Pharmaceutical Co. Garlic supplement 1982 100 employees

Wilsey Foods, Incorporated City of Industry, CA Mitsui and Company, Ltd. Acquired Oakland, CA Edible vegetable 1989 600 employees; Atlanta, GA mayonnaise, purchased tor $55 million Salem. OR chocolate sauce, Forth W0I1h, TX popcorn. barbecue sauce !<'ood retailing:

Daido International Fort Lee, NJ Nippon Daido Tokyo Inc. New Grocery stores N.A. N.A.

Food Value Stores Los Ange!es, CA Wada Family New Grocery stores N.A. N.A. Regent Marushen Inc. Honolulu. HI Aoi - Marushen Co. New Grocery stores N.A. N.A. Southland Corp. Dallas, TX Ito - Yokado Co. Ltd. Acquired Convenience stores 1990 N.A. 7-Eleven Ltd. Honolulu. HI 7-Eleven Japan, Ltd. Acquired Convenience stores 1990 N.A. Food wholesaling (including import-export companies):

B & B Fisheries Inc. Kodiak, AK Taiyo Fisheries, Acquired Fish wholesaling N.A. Inc. N.A.

Continued­

w i w j I ~ Appendix table 2--Partially or wholly Jap:U1ese-owned comp:mies in the United States--Contillued

Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Year Other economic acquired information

Cal-Land Foods, Inc. Los Angeles, CA Ryowa Corp. USA N.A. Food and wine 1973 N.A. wholesaling

Harrison Pierce Stanford, CT Toyonmenka Co. Acquired Sea food imports and Co. 1980 N.A.

Island King of Honolulu, HI Senka Co. Ltd. N.A. Hawaii Wholesale and 1963 N.A. distribution fruits Kwik SCIV Foods, Southgate, CA Fuji Trading Co. Acquired Inc. Wholesale food 1990 Purchased for $2 million

Nippon Sui san Co. New York, NY Nippon Suisan New Food wholesaler N.A. N.A. Ltd. Kaisha, Ltd.

Nomura and Co. USA Burlingame, CA Normura and Co. New Rice import/export N.A. N.A. Miyako Oriental Fort Lee, NJ Yamajirushi N.A. Food, Inc. Importerl 1969 N.A. Jyozo KK distributor soybean paste

Niama International N.A. Nissho Iwai Corp. New Seafood wholesaler 1990 N.A.

Shirakiku Food Honolulu, HI Yamajirishi New Food wholesaling N.A. N.A. TyozoKK

Pesticides:

Helena Chemical Co. West Helena, AR Marubeni Corp. Acquired ~esticides, 1987 ISO employees (25%) herbicides

Continued-­

,"", Appendix table 2-I'artially or wholly J

Company Plant location P:lrent company New or Product line Year Other economic acquired information

Restaur

Asakuma Co. Ltd. Los Ange! :s, CA Asakume Ltd. New Japanese style 1990 12 restaurants restaurants

DGH Food Services Los Angeles, CA Kyotara Co., Ltd. Acquired Arhy's franchise 1990 16 Amy's franchises restaurants and purchased for 55.8 million Dosanko Foods Inc. Long Island City, Hokkoko Shoji KK New Japanese style 1990 N.A. NY Mitsubishi Corp. restaurants Nissan Milling Flour K.K.

Duruma Los Angeles, CA Takasaki Bento New Japanese noodle 1990 2 restaurants and restaurants $4 million annual sales

Fazori's Restaurants Lexington, KY Duskin Co., Ltd. Acquired Italian 1990 S3 million annual sales restaurants

Hanan American Corp. N.A. Kigyu Corp. New Restaurants 1990 N.A.

Hatsuhara NY, Inc. New York, NY Transcontinental Acquired Restaurants 1990 N.A. Restaurant Co.

Japan Food USA New York, NY Tokyo Kugyo Co. New Restaurants 1989 N.A.

Juraku Restaurants PA. NJ Chllngo Kato New Restaurants 1987 N.A.

Kakiyasu Honten New York, NY Kyotaru Co.. Ltd. Acquired Restaurants 1987 S2.1 million facility

Kiki KY Nissho Iwai Corp. Acquired Restaurants 1987 N.A.

Lowes Enterprises Los Angeles, CA Kyotaru Co.. Ltd. Acquired Restaurants 1990 22 restaurants and Inc. purchased for S2.6 million

Continlled-

Vol VI >IiQ'l'~,-~",

~

01 Appendix table Z--Partially or wboUy Japanese-owned compaoi~ill tbe Uuited Slat~--Contiuned

Company Plant location Parent company N~wor Product line Year Other economic acquired information

Mishima Foods Gardena, CA Mishima Foods Co. New Japanese noodle 1990 Restaurant restauranls New Tokyo Hawaii Honolulu. HI Restaurant Co. New Tokyo Ltd. New R~stauranl 1988 Restaurant

Paragon Steak Houses Los AlIg~les.CA Kyotaru Co., Lid. Acquir~d Steakhouses 1990 54 restaurants and purchased for S86 million Ranch House Restaurant Ilonolulu. HI Nishimura Family Acquired R~slaurant 19117 Purchased for S I million Regent Marush~n,Inc. Honolulu. HI Aoi-Marushen Co. Acquired R~stauranl N.A. N.A. Reslaurant Associates New York. NY Industries, Inc. KyOiaru Co .. Ltd. Acquircd Reslaurants 1990 Purchased for $16 million, responsibility for S89 million debt, and 5215 million sales Restaurant Suntory Honolulu. HI Sunlory Co. Lid. Ac,!uired Restaurant 1990 N.A. Rothchild Restaurant Honolulu, HI Nishimura Family Acquired ;~ Reslaurant 1987 Purchased for S I million Sushi Iwai Dearhorn. MI Sumilomo Corp. Acquired Reslaurants and others 1987 N.A.

TK Ent~rprises Los Angeles. CA TK Emerprises Acquired Restaurants Co. Ltd. 1990 N.A. Rice mills:

Williams Rice Williams. CA Milling Co. Kasho Co.(16%) Acquired Rice mill 1986 Purchased for S200,000

Continued-­ ,\",It'IIi1ix lahll! 2--I':1I1i:.lly or \\holly .IaJl:ml~~owlIl~1cOIII,J;mit!S in Iht! lllill~1SI:I!l~--CollliIlUl~1

Compnny Plant location Par~nt,ompan) New or Prl.,dUCI line Year Other economic acquired information

""':II.)!III:

Alaskot KI.\diak. AK Man.hel1l COlllOr;lt.on Acquired hozen fi~h 1979 300 employees

S~;ti·\l",b.ln.:.

Alyesh:. S~ali,,)lI Dutch Ii:.r!>"r. AK ~Inn.heniCOll'olntion New Sunmi 1986 250 employees T:.i),o Fisher) Co.. Ltd W:.rds en\'\! P:ock.ng Co

AlIlericnn Nkhirei F.k. WA Ni:hirei C0'l,or:.t.lln New Imit:otion 19XX 7 employees Foods Cor]1oration frozen crab

Bering Scot Fisheries Mouth or Yuk('n. AK Mal1lhcni CO'l'oratll'n AC4uired Frozen fish 1972 40 employees

Inc. Everell. WA (2S~,)

Dutch H:II hor Dutch lIarbo.', AK Nippon Sui:.an New Fro!.en fish 1976 200 emJllo)ee~ Se:.fllods Company, Redmond. WA Kaisha. Ltd. Incol]1orated (25%)

Great Land Se:ofnods, Duteh Harhor. AK Nippon Suisan NC\\f S'rimi 19S6 13() employees Inc. (division of Kaisha. Ltd. Unisea)

JAC Cre31ive Foods Los Angeles. C A Suzuh.ro Co. Ltd. New Surimi 19KI N.A,

John Handy Co. Crislield. MD Tai)'o Oil Co.• Ltd. I\c,!uired Fresh amI frozen 19KX 24() employees Baton Rouge. LA soft shell crabs and crayfish

Kasho USA. Inc. Seallie. \VA Kasho Co. Ltd. Ac,!uired Fishery products N.A. N,A.

Kenai Salmon Seallie. \VA M:Ol1lheni Corp. Ac,!uired Fishery products N.A. N.A. Packing Co.

Conlinucd··

-lI...l I.J 00 Apllt.'lldi:( table 2--I':1I"1i:lll)' ur ,,"hully ./:IIJaIlI!'\t!-U,,"lIttl comp:lllil'S ill the Ullited States--Colltilllled

Company Plant location Parent company Nl!wor Product line Y~ar Other economic acquin.:d information ,f Kibun Corpomtion Raleigh. NC Kihun Corp. Ltd. of North Carolina New Frlll.cn imitation 1983 50 employ~~sand crab products purchas~dfor ~7 million Kibun Corporation Redmond. WA Washingtnn Kibun Corp. Ltd. I"cw of Frozen imitation 1983 50 employees crab products Kodiac King Crab. Seallle, WA Marubeni Corp. New Inc. Crab products N.A. Washington Fish N.A.

Maripac International, Saddlebrook, NJ Inc. Mitsui and Co.. Ltd. New Frozen /ish 1978 N.A.

Neptune Packing Mayaguez. PR Corp. Mitsui and Co.• Ltd. Acquired Canned /ish 1974 650 employees

North Pacific Cordova. AI( Processors. Inc. Marubeni Corp. New Kenai, AI( Canned and 1974 450 employees Kodiak, AK frozen /ish

Northern Seafood. Anchorage, AK Inc. Hohsui Corp, New Frozen /ish 1979 200 employees it

Ocean Farms Kona, HI Okabe Corp. of Hawaii Ae'luired Fishery products (10%) 1990 SII million facility Pacific Fisheries, Inc. Anchorage. AK Hokkaido Gogyu Kosha Acquired Frozen /ish Co. 1979 90 employees Peter Pan Sea foods Dillingham, AK Nichiro Gyogyo Kaisha. Acquired Frozen /ish King Covc. AK Ltd. 1979 120 employees Port Moller. AK

Pribilof Island St. Paul, AK Processors. Inc. Osaka Jitsugyo Co. Ltd. Acquired Frozen crabs 1988 200 employees

Continued-­ ~ ~.;J;;,-=-~"-:.::.'~-;"'-

AppI.'I1dix IIlble l.-I'artially or wbolly .lallalll!Sl!-OWlltd comp;uut::oi ill tbe U.uttd Stlltl!S-COlltilllltd

Company Plant location Parent company N~w or Product lin~ Year Other economic acquired information

Sea Watch Milliml. DE Nichird Corp. A~quired Clam chowder and 198R 500 employees Il1lernational. Ltd. Eash)JI. MD fro7."n fish ()y~ter.VA

Sea Blends food Co. SeallJe. WA Niehro Gyogyo Kai,lt:I. In.: A~'lllircd Frozen imitation 1986 SOemployees fish

S-K Seafoods Pin.:y Point. MD Sanyo Kokusaku AC'luired Ed processing 1979 N.A. Pulp and A'luaproducts Inc.

Sugiyo USA, Inc. Scallle, WA Nichird Corp. (20%) New fro7.en imitation 1987 60 employees Berelson Co. (20~.) crab Nichirci Co. (60%)

Togiak Fisherie~,Inc. Togiak. AK Marub.:ni, Inc. Acquired frozen fish 1972 100 employees

Transaqua International K3silof. AK Tomen Corporation Acquired frozen fish 1989 125 employees

Transocean Products. Bellingham, W A Taiyo fishery Co. New Frozen imitation 1985 85 employees Inc. Ltd. (50%) crab Steuart Investment Co. (50%)

Uni!k!a, Inc. Dutch Udrbor, AK Nippon Suisan Kaisha Ne"' Frozen fish 1975 300 employees Redm~n.WA Ltd. (99%)

Western Alaska S~allle,WA Taiyo Fishery Co. Ltd. New Frozen fish 1963 100 employees Fisheries, Inc.

Seed comp!Uliei:

American Takii Salinas, CA Takii and Co. New Seed company N.A. N.A. Inc. Continued­

\.oJ \D ;5 Appendix table Z--I'artially or wholly Japallese-oWIlOO companies ill the United Stales--Clllltinued Company Plant location Parent company Newnr Product line Year acquired Other economic information

Sakata S~~dCo. Yuma. AZ Sakata Se~dCo. Morgan Hill. CA N~w Seed company 1987 Purchased for $3.5 million Textiles:

China Grove China Grove. NC T~.~tiles,Inc. Kondo Colton Spinning G:15tonia. NC Acquired Culton yarn and Company LId. 1998 820 employees KnndJU Spinning colton blend yam Co. Titlon. GA Kanebu Ltd. (71.4%) New S:ln Francisco, CA Colton blend yarn 1989 150 employees Kumho Industries, Ltd, New York, NY Kurabo Industries, Ltd. New Colton yarn and Nisshimbo CA. Inc. 1975 N.A. Fresno. CA f:lhrics Nisshimho Industri~s, New Colton yarn and Inc. (75 If) 1989 170 emplOyees and OMI Georgia, Inc. fahrics Columhu5, GA S54 million faeili:y Oni Kenshi Co.. Ltd. Acquired Rosewood Knitting Mills Colton yarn 1975 Martinez. GA 150 employe!!s Toyo Bozeki KK ,., Acquired Cotton yarn and others 1986 N.A. '\ Swdi Knilling Mills i! Colurnhus. GA Kitaura Spinning Co. Acquired TNS Mills, Inc. Cotton yarn EUfaula. AL 1990 450 employees Ltd. Tsu7.Uki Spinning Co, Blacksburg, SC Nl!w Cotton yarn and 1985 Gaffney. SC Purchased for $10 million fabrics 1967 Spartanburg. SC 1989 Vl.1;etable oib: 1982

California Oils Richmond, CA Corp. Mitsubishi Corp. Acquired Edible Vegetable 1988 90 employees oils

Continued­ Appendix tahle 2-Plirtially or whoUy Japanese-owned COUlpanies in the United States--Continned

Company Planl localion Parenl company New or Producl line Ycar OIhcr cconomic acquired informalion

Chickasha COllon Casa Grande, AZ Toyo Minh Acquired COllonsced oil 1981 1,000 employces and Oil Co. Clinlon, OK Kaisha, LId. purchased for S30 million Harlinglcn, TX

Fuji Vcgelablc New York, NY Fuji Oil Co., Ltd. New Cocoa bUller, 1981, SI2 million facility; Oil, Incorporalcd Savannah, GA C. Itoh and Co., Ltd. v.:getable oils 1989 15,000 Ions/year capacity; 26 slorage Ianks

P.lmco Ponland, OR Mitsubishi Corp. New Vegetable oils 1915 N.A.

Wclsey Fooos Los Angeles, CA Mitsui Foods Acquired Vegetable oils; 1989 Food processing division Japanese gourmet purchased for S55.2 million dinners

Wineries:

Abboll Vineyards Napa, CA Sapporo Breweries, Ltd. Acquired Wine 1981 9 employees

·:l American Pacific Rim V.:mon, CA Numano Shoji Ltd. New Sake 1988 1 employ.:cs j Incorporaled

Ariel Vineyards Napa, CA Tok.:i Boeki, Ltd. Acquircd Nonalcoholic 1990 10% shan: wines purchased for S800,000

Chaleau 51. Jean K.:nwood, CA Sunlory, Ltd. Acquired Wine 1984 100 cmployecs

Fireslone Vineyards Los Olivos, CA Sunlory, '~td.(31 %) Acquired Wine 1916 25 employees

Gekkeikan Sake Folsom, CA Gekkdkan Co. New Sake 1990 N.A.

Honolulu Sake Honolulu, HI Takua Shuzo Co .. LId. Acquired Sake and soy sauce 1986 32 employ.:es Brewery Co.

Kolman Co. Napa, CA MCB Trading Co. New Sake 1990 N.A. Continued-­

~ ~ Appendi" table 2-Partially or whoUy JallaJles~oWlII.'dcOIIIJlallies ill the Ullill.'d Slales-Collti.llul.'d

Company Plant location Parent company New or Product line Year Other economic acquired infonnation

Markham Vineyards SI. Helena. CA Sanraku, Inc. Acquired Wine: 1987 13 employees and purchased for S8 million Ozeki San Benito Hollister, CA 07.d.:i Sake Brewing Co. Inc. New Sakc and cooking 1979 17 employees Ltd. (80%) wine Raymond Vineyards Napa. CA Kirin Brewery Acquired Wine 1990 N.A. Ridge Vineyards Cupertino, CA Otsuka Pharmaceuticals Acquired Wine 1986 24 employees St. Clement Vineyards St. Hdena. CA Sapporo Breweries Ud. Acquired Wine 1987 7 employecs and purchased for $3.4 million Silverado Hills Napa, CA Minami Kyushu Vineyard Acquired Wine 1987 N.A.

Staton Hills Vineyard Wapato, WA Kukuriku Coca·Cola Acquired Wine 1990 N.A. Bottling Co.

Takara Sake USA, Inc. Berkeley, CA Takara Shu7.o Co., Ltd. New Sake 1990 N.A. Whitehall Land Vineyards i' Napa, CA Ando Hideaki Acquired Wine: 1990 N.A.

N.A. = Not "vailable. Sources: (10), (11). (20).

Note: There are several listings of companies that are either Japanese-owned or affiliated with Japanese-owned companies. Foreign Direct Investment in the United States, an annual p~blicationby the U.S. Department of Commerce; Japan's Expanding U.S. Manufacturing Presence, an 1I11nuai publication by Japan Economic Instilllle; and the 1989-90 Directory: Japanese Affiliated Companies in the USA and Canada, published by Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO), an: the basic listings for Japanese investment used in this publication. Each ofthes!! publications covers a specific area; none of these publications is all-inclusive for the purposes of this publication. JETRO's publication lists 1.300 ethnic Japanese restaurants. for example, as well as many primarily wholesale or importer/exporter businesses that may have as little as 10 perce:nt of their investment capital from Japanese source:s. In JETRO. such companie:s arc listed as affiliates in a separate: list;.lg. For the most part, these companies are: not included in the Japan Economic Institute's listing that is primarily of manufacturing est:lhlishments. Anecdotal material from selected newspape:rs supplements these lists to atte:mpt to keep curreni with the rapid increase in investment in the late 1980's and 1990.