Two livestock trade associations have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) alleging the agency’s 2016 repeal of marking and labeling regulations violates the Meat Inspection Act and the Tariff Act. Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of Am. v. U.S. Dept of Agric., No. 17-0223 (E.D. Wash., filed June 19, 2017). The Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF) and the Cattle Producers of Washington (CPW) assert that the Meat Inspection Act requires that meat from animals slaughtered outside the United States be “marked and labeled as required for imported articles” and the Tariff Act requires “conspicuous” marking “as to indicate to an ultimate purchaser in the United States the English name of the country of origin of the article." After a World Trade Organization ruling against a U.S. requirement to include country-of-origin labeling (COOL) on imports of livestock from Canada and Mexico, USDA…
Category Archives World Trade Organization
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has held that Mexico can impose $163 million in trade sanctions against the United States for enacting tougher “dolphin-safe” requirements on fish caught in a part of the Pacific Ocean used primarily by Mexican fishers. The decades-long dispute began when international conservation efforts pressured countries to protect dolphins, which commonly swim with yellowfin tuna in that area. In response, the United States implemented stringent rules for tuna catches and imports, which Mexico argues has shut its fishing businesses out of an import market worth $680 million in 2014. The U.S. revised its requirements after WTO found in favor of Mexico in 2012, but Mexico argued that the revisions still improperly restricted tuna imports and asked for $472 million in sanctions. WTO rejected a U.S. argument to decide the dispute based on 2016 revisions that expanded the same requirements to all countries, but an expected July…
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has reportedly established a compliance panel at the request of Canada and Mexico in an ongoing dispute over the U.S. country-of-origin (COOL) meat labeling rules. Canada’s International Trade Minister Ed Fast and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz applauded the WTO action, saying that the United States must “respect its international trade obligations and put an end to mandatory Country of Origin labeling.” Canada argues that recent changes to the COOL implementing regulations did not bring them into conformity with WTO obligations. Because the compliance panel consists of the original members who found that the U.S. law was unfair to foreign meat producers, the Canadian officials suggest that the process will be accelerated. If the challenge succeeds, “which may include an appeal to the WTO Appellate Body, Canada could seek authorization from the WTO to impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports.” Meanwhile, meat and livestock organizations that…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has issued a final rule amending the Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) regulations to comply with a World Trade Organization (WTO) appellate ruling that certain provisions relating to muscle cut meat commodities were inconsistent the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), which includes an obligation “to accord imported products treatment no less favorable than that accorded to domestic products.” Effective May 23, 2013, the final rule requires origin designations for muscle cut covered commodities “to specify the production steps of birth, raising, and slaughter of the animal from which the meat is derived that took place in each country listed on the origin designation.” It also eliminates “the allowance for commingling of muscle cut covered commodities of different origins” and expands the definition for “retailer” “to include any person subject to be licensed as a retailer under…
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently issued a report to explore whether U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed rules on labeling muscle cuts of meats will comply with World Trade Organization (WTO) findings that current country-of-origin labeling (COOL) requirements discriminate against livestock imports. Titled “Country-of-Origin Labeling for Foods and the WTO Trade Dispute on Meat Labeling,” the report reviews events that led to the WTO ruling which followed a challenge filed by Canada and Mexico to the 2008 farm bill amendments that adopted the disputed COOL provisions. A WTO arbitrator established May 23, 2013, as the deadline for the United States to comply. Various stakeholders have apparently presented a number of options to bring the United States into compliance, and USDA issued a proposed rule in March. Canada and Mexico have evidently argued that the proposed rule does not fulfill U.S. WTO obligations, and the CRS report notes that this…
A World Trade Organization (WTO) arbitrator has determined that the United States must conform its country-of-origin-labeling (COOL) rules in accordance with an earlier ruling by May 23, 2013, finding that 10 months was a reasonable time for implementation. Additional details about the dispute, which involved a challenge brought by Canada and Mexico over 2008 COOL provisions for beef and pork products, appear in Issue 446 of this Update. According to a news source, the labeling program has sharply reduced U.S. imports of Canadian pigs and cattle, because it purportedly raised U.S. packers’ costs by requiring them to segregate imported animals from U.S. livestock. COOL supporters contend that such labeling provides consumers with important information about food origins. Canada’s International Trade Minister Ed Fast and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz reportedly said, “We are particularly pleased that the arbitrator determined a reasonable period of time close to that proposed by Canada and…
According to University of Oklahoma College of Law Professor Drew Kershen, writing for the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics publication Agricultural and Resource Economics, if California voters approve Proposition 37 (Prop. 37) in November 2012, it could be vulnerable to challenge under World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. As Kershen notes, the ballot proposition would “impose mandatory labeling on a broad range of raw and processed foods.” Those produced “entirely or partially” through genetic engineering would be required to state that fact on product labels, and no processed food could be marketed as “natural,” “naturally made,” “naturally grown,” or “all natural.” Kershen focuses on the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). While the United States, but not California, is a member state under the agreements, Kershen argues that they nevertheless apply to California’s Prop. 37. He contends that…
The World Trade Organization Appellate Body has partially rejected the U.S. Office of the Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) appeal in a dispute with Canada and Mexico over “country of origin” labeling (COOL) for beef and pork products. After WTO’s Dispute Settlement Panel ruled in November 2011 that specific provisions of the U.S. COOL program provided less favorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock, USTR appealed the ruling on the ground that COOL does not impose unfavorable treatment of imported products because it “requires meat derived from both imported and domestic livestock to be labeled under the exact same set of circumstances.” Additional details about the appeal appear in Issue 433 of this Update. In upholding the Dispute Panel’s assessment, the WTO Appellate Body agreed that “the COOL measure treats imported livestock differently than domestic livestock,” in part because it creates “an incentive in favor of processing exclusively domestic livestock and a…
The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently agreed to a convene a dispute settlement panel to investigate India’s restrictions on the importation of U.S. poultry, eggs and other agriculture products purportedly due to concerns over avian influenza. The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) apparently requested the panel after failing to resolve the dispute during an April 16-17, 2012, consultation with the Indian government, which has restricted the importation of various agricultural products from “those countries reporting Notifiable Avian Influenza (both Highly Pathogenic Notifiable Avian Influenza and Low Pathogenic Notifiable Avian Influenza).” According to USTR, however, these restrictions violate several provisions of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement as well as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, in part “because India’s avian influenza measures are not applied only to the extent necessary to protect human or animal life or health, are not based upon scientific principles, and are maintained without sufficient…
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has appealed a ruling made by a World Trade Organization (WTO) panel against the United States in a dispute with Mexico and Canada over country-of-origin labeling (COOL) laws for beef and pork products. Responding to complaints filed by Canada and Mexico, WTO’s Dispute Settlement Panel ruled in November 2011 that although the United States has the right to require COOL regulations, specific requirements enacted in 2008 such as those calling for segregation of imported livestock before processing provide less favorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock. The ruling was covered in Issue 419 of this Update. According to the appeal, USTR found several errors in the panel’s ruling and contends, among other issues, that its COOL labeling does not impose unfavorable treatment of imported products because it “requires meat derived from both imported and domestic livestock to be labeled under the exact…
