Veterinary costs rise as private-equity ownership expands
U.S. pet owners face higher veterinary bills amid a surge in private-equity acquisitions of clinics, prompting concerns about pricing, competition and care quality.
Veterinary expenses in the United States have climbed about 60 % since 2014, outpacing general inflation, as private-equity firms increasingly acquire animal-health practices. Owners of pets such as a California boxer and a Balinese cat reported spending $3,500 and $20,000 respectively on treatments, illustrating the financial pressure on families.
Economist Matt Salois, who studies the sector, said the price increase reflects a mix of inflation, advances in veterinary medicine, labor shortages and changes in ownership structure. He noted that while private-equity involvement is not inherently good or bad, larger corporate groups can distance decision-makers from day-to-day care, potentially shifting focus toward profit.
Financial journalist Helaine Olen observed that private-equity firms often pressure clinics to boost revenue, leading to rapid price hikes. In the United Kingdom, a government-led review estimated that corporate ownership added more than $1 billion in costs to consumers over five years.
In the United States, corporate-owned veterinary practices have grown from roughly 10 % of the market a decade ago to an estimated 30-50 %, and up to 75 % in specialty areas such as oncology and cardiology. Independent veterinarians, like Michele Forbes of Compassionate Care Animal Hospital in Michigan, say they receive frequent acquisition offers—one cited an $8.5 million bid—but declining such offers can leave them at a competitive disadvantage because corporate chains obtain larger volume discounts on supplies.
Critics argue that consolidation reduces local competition and may drive up prices. Matt Salois warned that reduced competition could pressure independent clinics, which serve as an important market counterbalance.
A pet owner in California, whose dachshund was treated at a clinic owned by private-equity firm KKR, complained about fragmented care and repeated payment authorizations after the animal’s death. The owner was offered a refund in exchange for signing a nondisclosure agreement and subsequently launched a website, PrivateEquityVet.org, to map corporate veterinary ownership and promote transparency.
Mars, Inc., which now owns several large veterinary groups, responded that advances in diagnostics and a national shortage of veterinary professionals contribute to higher costs, while asserting that its veterinarians retain clinical autonomy.
The growing prevalence of private-equity ownership in veterinary medicine continues to spark debate over its impact on pricing, competition and the quality of care for pets.
