‘Made in the USA’ meat rule sparks trade battle

A newly finalized rule with stricter requirements for meat products labeled “Made in the USA” promises to change the dynamics of U.S. meat consumption and trade, as the country’s meat producers It has been praised by industry groups and concerned by industry groups.

The new rules require that only meat, poultry, and egg products that are “born, raised, slaughtered, or processed in the United States” can be labeled as “Made in the United States” or “Product of the United States” on their packaging.

It also requires that all other ingredients in meat products, other than spices and flavorings, that bear a U.S. label are sourced domestically, and that all food preparation is done in the U.S. You can

Although the new rule is voluntary and does not require companies to label their meat products with a U.S. label if they do not wish to do so, it could still have a significant impact on the meat choices Americans consume.

Many scientific studies have shown that country of origin claims influence consumer demand levels for food products. One study in 2003 They found that consumers were “willing to pay an average of $184 per household per year for mandatory country of origin labeling programs.”

“Respondents also said they were willing to pay an average of $1.53 and $0.70 more per pound for steaks and hamburgers labeled as ‘US Certified Steak’ and ‘US Certified Hamburger.’ This represents increases of 38 percent and 58 percent, respectively, compared to the U.S., the Western Agricultural Economics Association study found, given the initial prices.

Another report says nearly half of all U.S. beef is consumed by just 12 percent of Americans. recent researchpremiums for similar labels can translate into hundreds of millions of dollars in change in sales revenue.

“Today’s announcement is an important step toward consumer protection and builds on the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts to strengthen trust and fairness in the markets where small processors can compete,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement. It’s a thing,” he said.

Some Republicans also support the measure, especially those in states where meat production is a large part of the economy.

“This rule change is a win for American consumers and producers,” Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said in a statement, acknowledging the “scale” of the change. Rounds also takes issue with the concentration of the meat packaging industry, which is run by just three or four giant companies that control prices, and with mandatory country-of-origin labeling in cattle markets.

Advocates representing U.S. meat producers consider the rule change a major victory.

“These are long, hard battles measured in years, but today’s victory for the ‘Product of USA’ label means that we It shows that our efforts have paid off.”

Other industry groups and foreign governments oppose the rule change, believing it portends retaliation in the international trade arena.

“Congress abolished COOL (Country of Origin Labeling). “Canada and Mexico challenged COOL as a non-tariff trade barrier,” the North American Meat Association trade group said in a statement last year. “The U.S. government lost four times before the World Trade Organization (WTO) decided, and the WTO allowed Canada and Mexico to retaliate and impose the following amounts: Tariffs on goods amount to $1 billion They range from meat to wine, chocolate, jewelry and furniture. ”

The group added that “Canada and Mexico still retain their powers and may initiate retaliation without further action by the WTO.”

The Mexican government has already expressed “disappointment” with the USDA’s new regulations, arguing that the measures “do not take into account the deep integration of North America’s livestock and meat industry.”

According to the Mexican government, exports of cattle and beef products from Mexico to the United States were approximately $3 billion in 2023, comprising 1.25 million head of cattle and 260,000 tons of beef.

Mexico’s Agriculture Ministry said on Monday that the new rules create a “conflict” with U.S. obligations to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and that “Mexico reserves its rights accordingly.”

U.S. pork producers also warned of trade retaliation stemming from “Made in the USA” labeling rules, and the repeal of the 1994 NAFTA trade agreement and its successor, USMCA, has made pork production and distribution chains more international. He argued that they are closely connected. Changes in pork tariffs across the continent.

The rule change is the latest sign of growing protectionism in U.S. economic policy following the Made in America requirement on clean energy production provisions included in Democrats’ Inflation Control Act.

Former president and current presidential candidate Donald Trump has already proposed imposing a flat 10% tariff on foreign imports, which would further erode the international trade system that was significantly strengthened in the 1990s. That’s what you do.

Concerned about the U.S. withdrawal from agricultural trade, Republican senators said in a letter to Vilsack and U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai on Wednesday that the U.S. trade strategy is “not ambitious.”

“The current sharp decline in U.S. agricultural exports is due to

The situation is made worse by an ambitious U.S. trade strategy that fails to meaningfully expand market access or reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade.” John Thune, SD 21 other senators wrote Wednesday.