SEABOARD CORP DE

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)

Note 1 – Basis of Presentation and Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements of Seaboard Corporation and its subsidiaries (“Seaboard”) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the rules and regulations for reporting on Form 10-Q. Accordingly, they do not include certain information and disclosures required for comprehensive financial statements. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes included in Seaboard’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023. The unaudited financial information reflects all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the results of operations, financial position and cash flows for the periods presented. Seaboard’s first three quarterly periods include approximately 13 weekly periods ending on the Saturday closest to the end of March, June and September. Results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the full year.

Related-Party Transactions

Seaboard has investments in non-consolidated affiliates to further its business strategies and partner with other entities that have expertise in certain industries and countries. These investments are all accounted for using the equity method of accounting. As Seaboard conducts its agricultural commodity trading business with third parties, consolidated subsidiaries and non-consolidated affiliates on an interrelated basis, cost of sales on affiliate sales transactions cannot be distinguished without making numerous assumptions, primarily with respect to mark-to-market accounting for commodity derivatives. Purchases of raw materials or services from related parties included in cost of sales were $15 million and $26 million for the three months ended March 30, 2024 and April 1, 2023, respectively.

Supplemental Cash Flow Information

Non-cash activities for the three months ended March 30, 2024 and April 1, 2023, included capital expenditures of $6 million and $8 million, respectively, that were in accounts payable. The following table includes supplemental cash and non-cash information related to leases. Seaboard reports the amortization of right-of-use (“ROU”) assets and changes in operating lease liabilities in other liabilities, exclusive of debt in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows.

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

The change in the carrying amount of goodwill was related to foreign currency translation of $3 million within the Commodity Trading and Milling (“CT&M”) segment. As of March 30, 2024, intangible assets, included in other non-current assets, were $25 million, which consists of the gross carrying amount of $79 million net of accumulated amortization of $49 million and net of accumulated foreign currency translation of $5 million.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Disclosure Rules Not Yet Adopted

In November 2023, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued guidance that requires incremental segment disclosures on an annual and interim basis related to significant segment expenses. Seaboard will adopt this guidance in the 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, and interim periods beginning on January 1, 2025. The disclosure requirements must be applied retrospectively to all prior periods presented in the financial statements. Seaboard is currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on its related disclosures.

In December 2023, the FASB issued guidance that requires additional detailed income tax disclosures related to standardization and disaggregation of information in the rate reconciliation and income taxes paid by jurisdiction. Seaboard will adopt this guidance for the annual reporting period beginning on January 1, 2025. Seaboard is currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on its disclosures.

In March 2024, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) adopted final rules to enhance and standardize climate-related disclosures in registration statements and annual reports on Form 10-K. The new rules will require climate-related disclosures related to governance, strategy, risk management, targets and goals and greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, within the notes to the financial statements, the rules would require disclosure of financial statement effects of severe weather events and other natural conditions and other climate-related financial metrics as applicable. Certain elements of the new rules are currently scheduled to become effective for Seaboard’s annual reporting period beginning on January 1, 2025, with the remaining requirements to be phased-in effective for subsequent fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2025. On April 4, 2024, the SEC issued an order staying the effectiveness of the final rules pending completion of the judicial review of consolidated challenges to the rules by the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Seaboard is currently evaluating the impact the rules will have on its disclosures.

Note 2 – Investments

The following is a summary of the estimated fair value of short-term investments classified as trading securities:

The unrealized gains related to trading securities still held at the end of the respective reporting period were $16 million and $30 million for the three months ended March 30, 2024 and April 1, 2023, respectively.

Seaboard had $26 million and $18 million of short-term investments denominated in foreign currencies, primarily euros, as of March 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

As of March 30, 2024, Seaboard had long-term investments of$133 million, in real estate and renewable energy facilities, classified in other non-current assets on the condensed consolidated balance sheet. As of December 31, 2023, Seaboard had long-term investments of $207 million which included an investment of $68 million in a business development company (“BDC”) that completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) and became a publicly traded company on the NYSE during the first quarter of 2024. Seaboard’s securities in this BDC are subject to standard contractual sale restrictions associated with an IPO, and have phased expiration dates, with all restrictions expiring by February 2025. As of March 30, 2024, the BDC securities are included in short-term investments on the condensed consolidated balance sheet and in domestic equity securities in the table above. The reclassification of these securities from long-term investments to short-term investments was a non-cash activity on the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows.

Note 3 – Inventories

The following is a summary of inventories:

Note 4 – Lines of Credit, Long-Term Debt, Commitments and Contingencies

Lines of Credit

As of March 30, 2024, the outstanding balances under committed and uncommitted lines of credit were $224 million and $165 million, respectively. Of the total outstanding balance as of March 30, 2024, $91 million was denominated in foreign currencies, with $77 million denominated in the South African rand and the remaining in various other currencies. As of December 31, 2023, the outstanding balances under committed and uncommitted lines of credit were $105 million and $150 million, respectively. Of the total outstanding balance as of December 31, 2023, $70 million was denominated in foreign currencies, with $57 million denominated in the South African rand and the remaining in various other currencies. The weighted average interest rate for outstanding lines of credit was 6.97% and 7.34% as of March 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

Long-Term Debt

The following is a summary of long-term debt:

The Term Loan due 2033 credit agreement provides for quarterly payments on the $975 million original principal balance, with the balance due on November 10, 2033. The interest rate was 7.05% and 7.08% as of March 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. Seaboard was in compliance with all restrictive debt covenants relating to these agreements as of March 30, 2024.

Legal Proceedings

Seaboard is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business and otherwise, including those matters described below.

Seaboard accrues liabilities for loss contingencies when it is deemed probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. If a range of loss is estimated, and some amount within that range appears to be a better estimate than any other amount within that range, then that amount is accrued. If no amount within the range can be identified as a better estimate than any other amount, Seaboard accrues the minimum amount in the range. For such matters where a loss is believed to be reasonably possible, but not probable, or the loss cannot be reasonably estimated, no accrual has been made.

In Seaboard’s opinion, it has made appropriate and adequate accruals for loss contingencies where necessary as of March 30, 2024. Substantially all of Seaboard’s contingencies are subject to uncertainties and, therefore, determining the

likelihood of a loss or the measurement of any loss can be complex. Consequently, Seaboard is unable to estimate the range of reasonably possible loss in excess of the amounts accrued. Seaboard’s assessments, which result from a complex series of judgments about future events and uncertainties, are based on estimates and assumptions deemed reasonable by management, including an expected probable loss associated with settling or otherwise resolving such contingencies. These estimates and assumptions may prove to be incomplete or inaccurate, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur that might change such estimates and assumptions.

At the end of each reporting period, Seaboard reviews information with respect to its legal proceedings, claims and other related loss contingencies and updates its accruals, disclosures and estimates of reasonably possible loss or range of loss based on such reviews. Costs for defending claims are expensed as incurred. Any receivable for insurance recoveries is recorded separately from the corresponding liability, and only if recovery is determined to be probable and reasonably estimable.

Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted in the matters described below, and it intends to defend them vigorously, but litigation is inherently unpredictable and there can be no assurances as to their outcomes. Seaboard does not currently believe that any of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its business or its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, Seaboard could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise its expectations regarding the outcome of matters, which could have such a material adverse effect in the particular annual or quarterly period in which the amounts are accrued or paid.

Helms-Burton Act Litigation

On July 21, 2021, a lawsuit was filed by an individual, Odette Blanco de Fernandez (“Ms. de Fernandez”), and the heirs (“Inheritors”) and estates (“Estates”) offour of her siblings (Ms. de Fernandez, together with the Inheritors and the Estates being referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) against Seaboard Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Delaware District Court”), making claims under Title III of the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act of 1996, also known as the Helms-Burton Act (the “Act”). The same Plaintiffs filed a separate lawsuit against Seaboard Marine Ltd. (“Seaboard Marine”) on December 20, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “Florida District Court”). The complaints in each lawsuit seek unspecified damages (including treble damages) and pre-filing interest as provided in the Act; pre-judgment interest; attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses; and such other relief as is just and proper.

The Act provides that any person who knowingly and intentionally “traffics” in property which was confiscated by the Cuban government may be liable to any U.S. national who acquires an ownership interest in such property for money damages in an amount equal to the greater of the current fair market value of the property or the value of the property when confiscated, plus interest from the date of confiscation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and treble damages under certain circumstances. The complaint in each of the cases alleges that the Plaintiffs acquired ownership interests to a 70-year concession to develop port facilities at Mariel Bay, Cuba, and ownership of surrounding land, and that these and other property rights were confiscated by the Cuban government in 1960. The complaints further allege that Seaboard Corporation and Seaboard Marine knowingly and intentionally “trafficked” in the confiscated property within the meaning of the Act by carrying and/or directing cargo to the Port of Mariel.

The Florida District Court in the Seaboard Marine case dismissed the claims of the Inheritors and the Estates because they did not acquire the ownership claims prior to March 1996, as required by the Act. The remaining plaintiff, Ms. de Fernandez, contends she owns 20% of the companies that were granted the concession and owned land in or around Mariel Bay, Cuba. On August 19, 2022, the Florida District Court granted Seaboard Marine’s Motion for Summary Judgment and entered a Final Judgment (the “Summary Judgment”) in favor of Seaboard Marine. On September 1, 2022, the Plaintiffs appealed the Summary Judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (“Appeal”). Oral arguments with respect to the Appeal were held on January 24, 2024, and the Court has not yet ruled.

As to the suit against Seaboard Corporation, on October 21, 2021, the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint which principally added allegations that there were other callings made by Seaboard Marine at the Port of Mariel and that Seaboard Corporation engaged in a pattern of doing business with individuals and entities in contravention of U.S. foreign policy. Seaboard Corporation filed a Motion to Dismiss which is pending. On September 28, 2022, the Delaware District Court stayed this lawsuit against Seaboard Corporation until 30 days after the outcome of the Appeal in the Seaboard Marine case.

Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims and intends to vigorously defend the litigation. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties, and if unfavorable, could result in a material liability.

Pork Price-Fixing Antitrust Litigation

On June 28, 2018, twelve indirect purchasers of pork products filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota (the “Minnesota District Court”) against several pork processors, including Seaboard Foods LLC (“Seaboard Foods”) and Agri Stats, Inc., a company described in the complaint as a data sharing service. The complaint also named Seaboard Corporation as a defendant. Additional class action complaints with similar claims on behalf of putative classes of direct and indirect purchasers were later filed in the Minnesota District Court, and additional actions by standalone plaintiffs (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) were filed in or transferred to the Minnesota District Court. The consolidated actions are styled In re Pork Antitrust Litigation. The complaints allege, among other things, that beginning in January 2009, the defendants conspired and combined to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of pork products in violation of U.S. antitrust laws by coordinating output and limiting production, allegedly facilitated by the exchange of non-public information about prices, capacity, sales volume and demand through Agri Stats, Inc. The complaints on behalf of the putative classes of indirect purchasers also assert claims under various state laws, including state antitrust laws, unfair competition laws, consumer protection statutes, and common law unjust enrichment. The relief sought in the respective complaints includes treble damages, injunctive relief, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs and attorneys’ fees. On October 16, 2020, the Minnesota District Court denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss the amended complaints, but the Minnesota District Court later dismissed all claims against Seaboard Corporation without prejudice. On March 3, 2023, the Minnesota District Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motions to Certify the Classes with respect to all three classes.

Additional standalone “direct action” plaintiffs filed similar actions in federal courts throughout the country, several of which named Seaboard Corporation as a defendant. Those actions filed in courts other than the District of Minnesota have been conditionally transferred to Minnesota for pretrial proceedings pursuant to an order by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. The states of New Mexico and Alaska filed civil cases in state court against substantially the same defendants, including Seaboard Foods and Seaboard Corporation, based on substantially similar allegations. Except in the New Mexico action, all claims against Seaboard Corporation have been dismissed without prejudice.

On June 12, 2023, Seaboard Foods entered into a settlement agreement for approximately $10 million with the putative direct purchaser plaintiff class (the “DPP Class”). Seaboard believes that this settlement was in the best interests of Seaboard and its stakeholders in order to avoid the uncertainty, risk, expense and distraction of protracted litigation. Members of the class were given the opportunity to opt-out of the settlement and commence or continue their own actions. The settlement with the DPP Class does not cover the claims of (a) the “direct action” plaintiffs (“DPP’s”) that opted-out of Seaboard’s settlement with the DPP Class; (b) other direct purchasers, if any, that opted-out of the settlement and may in the future file actions against Seaboard; (c) the End User Consumer Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff Class (the “EUCP Class”); or (d) the Commercial and Industrial Indirect Purchaser Class (the “CIIP Class”). Subsequent to the settlement with the DPP Class, Seaboard settled some of the actions brought by the DPP’s. Seaboard continues to litigate against the DPP’s it has not settled with, the EUCP Class and the CIIP Class, and will consider additional reasonable settlements where they are available. Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims alleged in these matters and intends to vigorously defend any matters not resolved by settlement. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties, and if unfavorable, could result in a material liability.

Pork Compensation Antitrust Litigation

On November 11, 2022, three employees of pork or beef processing plants filed a class action complaint (the “Class Action”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (the “Court”) individually and on behalf of all other employees at such plants (the “Class”), against several pork and beef processors and their subsidiaries and related companies, including Seaboard Foods. The complaint alleges, among other things, that beginning in January 2014, the defendants conspired in violation of antitrust laws to fix and depress the compensation paid to the Class by, among other things, participating in third-party compensation surveys and exchanging wage-related information through a third-party benchmarking service. The relief sought includes treble damages, injunctive relief, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs and attorneys’ fees.

On June 23, 2023, Seaboard Foods reached a settlement with the Class to settle the Class Action for an immaterial amount which was approved by the Court and paid during Seaboard’s first quarter of 2024.

Cereoil and Nolston Litigation

On March 20, 2018, the bankruptcy trustee (the “Trustee”) for Cereoil Uruguay S.A. (“Cereoil”) filed a suit in the Bankruptcy Court of First Instance in Uruguay naming as parties Seaboard Corporation and its subsidiaries, Seaboard Overseas Limited (“SOL”) and Seaboard Uruguay Holdings Ltd. (“Seaboard Uruguay”). Seaboard Corporation has a 45% indirect ownership of Cereoil. The suit (the “Clawback Action”) seeks an order requiring Seaboard Corporation, SOL and Seaboard Uruguay to reimburse Cereoil the amount of approximately $22 million (approximately $30 million with interest at the statutory rate) (the “Clawback Amount”), contending that deliveries of soybeans to SOL pursuant to purchase agreements should be set aside as fraudulent conveyances. Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims alleged in this matter and intends to vigorously defend this matter. In the event of an adverse ruling, Seaboard and itstwo subsidiaries could be ordered to pay the Clawback Amount to Cereoil.

On April 27, 2018, the Trustee filed an additional suit in the Bankruptcy Court of First Instance in Uruguay that was served during the second quarter of 2018, naming as parties Seaboard Corporation, SOL, Seaboard Uruguay, all directors of Cereoil, includingtwo individuals employed by Seaboard who served as directors at the behest of Seaboard, and the Chief Financial Officer of Cereoil, an employee of Seaboard who also served at the behest of Seaboard (collectively, the “Cereoil Defendants”). The Trustee contends that the Cereoil Defendants acted with willful misconduct to cause Cereoil’s insolvency, and thus should be ordered to pay all liabilities of Cereoil, net of assets. The bankruptcy filing listed the U.S. dollar equivalent of liabilities of approximately $50 million and assets of approximately $30 million. Based on the information received from the Trustee on the administration of the case and the liquidation of assets, as of March 30, 2024 the U.S. dollar equivalent of liabilities was estimated to be approximately $45 million, and the liquidation value of the remaining assets is negligible. Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims alleged in this matter and intends to vigorously defend this matter. In the event of an adverse ruling, Seaboard Corporation and the other Cereoil Defendants could be ordered to pay the liabilities of Cereoil, net of any amounts received from the liquidation of Cereoil’s assets, and could be ordered to pay an inflation adjustment, interest, the Trustee’s fees and other expenses. Any award in this case should be reduced by the amount of any award in the Clawback Action described above that is paid to Cereoil.

On September 30, 2021, HSBC Bank (Uruguay) SA (“HSBC”), a creditor in the Cereoil bankruptcy proceeding pending in Uruguay, filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas (the “Kansas District Court”) against Seaboard Corporation alleging claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, fraud, negligent misrepresentation and fraud by concealment based upon a comfort letter, alleged statements by Cereoil personnel (including the Chief Financial Officer serving at the behest of Seaboard), and the same grain transactions that the Trustee challenges as fraudulent conveyances in the Cereoil bankruptcy in Uruguay discussed above. HSBC seeks $10 million plus interest and other relief in excess of $3 million. In March 2022, Seaboard filed a motion to dismiss HSBC’s claims on various grounds. On September 23, 2022, the Kansas District Court dismissedsix of HSBC’sseven claims. Three of those claims, for fraud, negligent misrepresentation and fraud by concealment, can be refiled by HSBC in Uruguay. The other three claims, for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment, were dismissed with prejudice and cannot be refiled unless HSBC successfully appeals the Kansas District Court order. Theone claim not dismissed in this matter is for promissory estoppel. Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to this claim and intends to vigorously defend it. In the event of an adverse ruling, Seaboard Corporation could be ordered to pay HSBC the amounts described above.

On May 15, 2018, the Trustee for Nolston S.A. (“Nolston”) filed a suit in the Bankruptcy Court of First Instance in Uruguay that was served during the second quarter of 2018, naming as parties Seaboard and the other Cereoil Defendants. Seaboard has a 45% indirect ownership of Nolston. The Trustee contends that the Cereoil Defendants acted with willful misconduct to cause Nolston’s insolvency, and thus should be ordered to pay all liabilities of Nolston, net of assets. The bankruptcy filing listed the U.S. dollar equivalent of liabilities of approximately$29 million and assets of approximately$15 million. Based on the administration of the case which resulted in duplicative claims made in the Cereoil case and the liquidation of assets, as of March 30, 2024, the U.S. dollar equivalent of liabilities was estimated to be approximately$1 million, and there areno remaining assets with any value. Seaboard believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims alleged in this matter and intends to vigorously defend this matter. In the event of an adverse ruling, Seaboard Corporation and the other defendants could be ordered to pay the liabilities of Nolston, and could be ordered to pay an inflation adjustment, interest, the Trustee’s fees and other expenses.

Guarantees

Certain of Seaboard’s non-consolidated affiliates have debt supporting their underlying operations. From time to time, Seaboard will provide guarantees of such debt in order to further Seaboard’s business objectives. As of March 30, 2024,

guarantees outstanding were not material. Seaboard has not accrued a liability for any of the guarantees as the likelihood of loss is remote.

Note 5 – Derivatives and Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The following tables show assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis and the level within the fair value hierarchy used to measure each category of assets and liabilities. The trading securities classified as other current assets below are assets held for Seaboard’s deferred compensation plans.

Financial instruments consisting of cash and cash equivalents, net receivables, lines of credit and accounts payable are carried at cost, which approximates fair value as a result of the short-term nature of the instruments. The fair value of short-term investments is measured using multiple levels. Debt securities categorized as level 1 in the fair value hierarchy include debt securities held in mutual funds and exchange traded funds.

As of December 31, 2023, Seaboard held a long-term investment in a BDC that primarily lends to and invests in debt securities of privately held companies. During the first quarter of 2024, the BDC completed an IPO, and the investment is included in short-term domestic equity securities as of March 30, 2024. See Note 2 to the condensed consolidated financial statements for further discussion.

The fair value of long-term debt is estimated by comparing interest rates for debt with similar terms and maturities. As Seaboard’s long-term debt is mostly variable-rate, the carrying amount approximates fair value. If Seaboard’s long-term debt was measured at fair value on its condensed consolidated balance sheets, it would have been classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.

Seaboard’s operations are exposed to market risks from changes in commodity prices, foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates and equity prices. Seaboard uses various commodity derivative futures and options to manage some of its risk of price fluctuations for raw materials and other inventories, finished product sales and firm sales commitments. Seaboard also enters into foreign currency exchange agreements to manage the foreign currency exchange rate risk with respect to certain transactions denominated in foreign currencies. From time to time, Seaboard enters into interest rate swap agreements to manage the interest rate risk with respect to certain variable rate long-term debt and enters into equity futures contracts to manage the equity price risk with respect to certain short-term investments. Although management believes its derivatives are primarily economic hedges, Seaboard does not perform the extensive record-keeping required to account for these types of transactions as hedges for accounting purposes. These derivative contracts are recorded at fair value, with any changes in fair value recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income. As the derivative contracts are not accounted for as hedges, fluctuations in the related prices or rates could have a material impact on earnings in any given reporting period. The nature of Seaboard’s market risk exposure has not materially changed since December 31, 2023.

Seaboard had the following aggregated outstanding notional amounts related to derivative financial instruments:

Credit risks associated with these derivative contracts are not significant because Seaboard minimizes counterparty exposure by dealing with credit-worthy counterparties and using margin accounts for some contracts. As of March 30, 2024, the maximum amount of credit risk, had the counterparties failed to perform according to the terms of the contract, was $1 million.

The following table provides the fair value of each type of derivative held and where each derivative is included in the condensed consolidated balance sheets:

Seaboard’s commodity derivative assets and liabilities are presented in the condensed consolidated balance sheets on a net basis, including netting the derivatives with the related margin accounts. As of March 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the commodity derivatives had a margin account balance of $51 million and $19 million, respectively, resulting in a net other current asset in the condensed consolidated balance sheets of $43 million and $24 million, respectively.

The following table provides the amount of gain (loss) recognized in income for each type of derivative and where it was recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income:

Note 6 – Stockholders’ Equity and Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss (“AOCL”), net of related taxes, were as follows:

Note 7 – Segment Information

Seaboard hassix reportable segments: Pork, CT&M, Marine, Sugar and Alcohol, Power and Turkey, each offering a specific product or service. For details on the respective products or services of each segment, see Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements included in Seaboard’s annual report for the year ended December 31, 2023.

During the first quarter of 2024, Seaboard’s chief executive officer and chief operating decision maker (“CODM”) made changes to his organizational structure effective April 1, 2024, Seaboard’s second quarter. Beginning April 1, 2024, Seaboard’s CODM will have direct oversight of the liquid fuels business, previously reported in the Pork segment, and, therefore, this business will be its own reportable segment. The liquid fuels business includes renewable diesel and biodiesel operations and related environmental credits. Additionally, the Sugar and Alcohol reportable segment will be moved to All Other as the ongoing economic conditions of Argentina have lessened this segment’s impact on the condensed consolidated financial statements. These changes will not impact the consolidated financial statements and because these changes did not occur until the second quarter of 2024, the periods presented in this 10-Q are reported under the historical segments.

The following tables present Seaboard’s sales disaggregated by revenue source and segment:

The following tables present Seaboard’s operating income (loss) and income (loss) from affiliates by segment. Operating income (loss) for segment reporting is prepared on the same basis as that used for consolidated operating income. Operating income (loss), along with income (loss) from affiliates for the Pork, CT&M and Turkey segments, is used as the measure of evaluating segment performance because management does not consider interest, other investment income (loss) and income tax benefit (expense) on a segment basis. Administrative services provided by the corporate office are allocated to the individual segments and represent corporate services rendered to and costs incurred for each specific segment, with no allocation to individual segments of general corporate management oversight costs.

The following tables present total assets by segment and the investments in and advances to affiliates by segment. Corporate assets primarily include cash and short-term investments, other current assets related to deferred compensation plans, long-term investments and other miscellaneous items. Corporate operating results represent certain operating costs not specifically allocated to individual segments and include costs related to Seaboard’s deferred compensation plans, which are offset by the effect of the mark-to-market adjustments on these investments recorded in other investment income, net.

The Turkey segment represents Seaboard’s investment in Butterball, LLC (“Butterball”), which is accounted for using the equity method. As of March 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, Butterball had total assets of $1.2 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively. Butterball’s summarized income statement information was as follows: