It’s illogical, but the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) wants a new voluntary label on meat. On March 6, it proposed a new rule that the “Product of USA” and “Made in USA” labels be restricted to “products that are derived from animals born, raised, slaughtered, and processed in the United States.”

While it differs slightly from Country of Origin (COOL) labelling or mCOOL, it has the same DNA. COOL resulted in American processors cutting prices for (or rejecting) Canadian beef and pork because the animals had to be segregated.

“That regulation was eventually shot down by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2012,” Manitoba Co-operator editor Laura Rance pointed out, “but not before it cost the Canadian industry billions in lost sales and more than $4 million in legal fees as lawyers ushered the grievance through diplomatic channels and, ultimately, world trade courts.”

“The U.S. government lost four times before the World Trade Organization, and the WTO authorized Canada and Mexico to retaliate and levy more than $1 billion in tariffs on goods ranging from meat to wine, chocolate, jewellery, and furniture,” the North American Meat Institute (NAMI) said in a press release. The U.S. trade association is the largest one representing packers and processors.

“Our members make considerable investments to produce beef, pork, lamb, veal, and poultry products in American facilities, employing hundreds of thousands of workers in the U.S. and with processes overseen by USDA inspectors. This food should be allowed to be labelled a ‘Product of the USA,’” NAMI president and CEO Julie Anna Potts stated.

“No economic data supports the proposed rule,” said NAMI. The list of reasons to support its conclusion included: “it conflicts with federal law; it could trigger international trade retaliation; it will increase prices for consumers; and it will place additional duties on FSIS, which is already overburdened and understaffed.”

When asked if the proposed rule would help livestock producers, the association replied with a resounding, “No.”

In a March 7 article, Glacier FarmMedia Network noted the proposed rule would allow “other voluntary U.S. origin claims seen on meat, poultry, and egg products sold in the marketplace.” But the rule stipulated that this “qualified” claim packaging must include a biography of “all preparation and processing steps that occurred in the United States upon which the claim is made.” One example, Glacier FarmMedia referred to, was “Sliced and packaged in the United States, using imported pork.”

“Canada is concerned about any measures that may cause disruptions to the integrated North American livestock supply chains,” Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau and International Trade Minister Mary Ng said in a joint statement on March 7.

“Canada will closely review the proposed amendments to the labelling of meat, poultry, and egg products in the U.S., and will participate in the U.S. rule-making process to ensure that these changes conform to the U.S.’ international trade obligations and do not disrupt supply chains.”

The ministers warned that “Canada will also firmly oppose any proposition from the United States to renew a mandatory country of origin labelling system for pork and beef, a practice which the World Trade Organization allowed Canada to take retaliation measures against the United States.”

We just don’t see the logic behind the proposed rule. In his Atlantic Marketing Report in the spring issue of Atlantic Beef and Sheep, Bruce Andrews mentioned several facts that dispute its basis. He wrote about the drought that affected large areas of the southwest U.S., reducing national cattle numbers; the country’s increased slaughter capacity; and new meatpacking plants (operating or under construction) that will further increase capacity and the demand for cattle.

The cost to implement the new rule will filter down to consumers. That won’t encourage sales. We don’t believe the average guy in the grocery store or at the ballpark, sitting a few rows above the dugout with glove in hand, cares much about where his beef burger originated. But he will be very annoyed at the price.

And we can’t see how meat packers, who struggled through pandemic shutdowns and employee shortages, would benefit from new expensive supply, processing, and label changes.

The FSIS comment on the proposed rule was extended until June 11.