This is from a White House fact sheet from Monday:
Issue new “Product of USA” labeling rules so that consumers can better understand where their meat comes from. Under current labeling rules, meat can be labeled “Product of USA” if it is only processed here—including when meat is raised overseas and then merely processed into cuts of meat here. We believe this could make it hard for American consumers to know what they are getting. USDA has already begun its top-to-bottom review of the current labeling rules and consumers’ understanding of the labels, with the goal of new rulemaking to clarify “Product of USA” standards.
A vague statement like this one is going to generate concern that the U.S. will once again try to use mandatory country of origin labelling (COOL) to protect domestic producers from foreign competition. Of course, COOL doesn't have to be used this way, but it was in the past, and domestic industry groups are always pushing to do that again. Last February, I suggested the following approach to using COOL to provide consumers with information on the origin of meat products:
I always saw the fundamental problem with the U.S. COOL measures as being the costs they impose on meatpackers using foreign products by, in general terms, requiring them to segregate their products by country of origin, in order to be able to gather information on origin at different stages of production. If you are looking for a WTO-compliant approach, I think you could have a more flexible labelling requirement that still provides consumers with country of origin information, while allowing meatpackers to avoid these segregation costs. For example, taking the case of meatpackers who only use cattle that could be classified as either U.S. or Canadian at some stage of production, you could have a label that said "Product of U.S. and/or Canada," without identifying the particular country or stages of production any further. That would let meatpackers commingle from different countries of origin as much as they wanted. This approach to COOL for these kinds of products would narrow down the country of origin for consumers, and the products in question could be distinguished from products where the retailer knew the products were of exclusively U.S. origin (and therefore could be labelled as "Product of the USA"). Consumers could determine which beef is 100% a product of the U.S., and meatpackers could avoid the costs of segregation and still use a label that conveys a good amount of information on origin. And if it turns out "Product of U.S. and/or Canada" makes consumers reluctant to buy the meat (that seems unlikely for most consumers), the meatpackers can think about whether to change their approach to production and sourcing.
If your goal is consumer information, I think this approach makes sense. But I'm not sure that's the goal of most of the folks pushing for this sort of law, so I don't have high hopes for this approach ultimately being used.
