In the end, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled that the United States had violated international trade laws and threatened to say Severe sanctions U.S. legislators will repeal the regulation in 2015.

However, support for the U.S. strategy still exists, and in struggle For American ranchers, efforts to revive the law in some form seem to be spreading on their farmland and Capitol Hill.

Those who support the return of the labeling system say it is about transparency and competition, and believe that American consumers (with a clear choice to buy beef exclusively produced in the United States) will pay the price for the farmers and ranchers who support them.

‘We are going to do it’

Bill Bullard of R-CALF USA, the American Cattle Trade Association, said: “What we are going to do is.” The association represents 5,500 farmers and ranchers in 44 states. “We will bring back the country of origin label for beef.”

After the last WTO ruling, with the strong opposition of large US cattle-raising groups, it seems that it is no easy task to withdraw the labeling system that complies with US trade regulations.

However, politicians raised the issue twice during the confirmation hearing of President Joe Biden’s Minister of Agriculture in February, and supporters continue to be encouraged by the discussion.

Canadian producers and trade experts who are paying close attention to this issue are paying attention.

The Canadian cattle industry sets the annual value of its beef and live cattle exported to the United States at between US$2.5 billion and US$3 billion.

Carlo Dade, a North American trade expert at the Canada West Foundation, a public policy think tank based in Calgary, said: “We must be vigilant about this issue.”

“Just like cork wood and other problems that Americans face all year round. It will never disappear. “

Old rules have a major impact

The use of mandatory country-of-origin regulations or mandatory COOL in the United States has long remained in the memory of producers on both sides of the border. This rule first appeared on the scene at the end of 2008 and was revised in 2013.

The regulations set mandatory labels on packaged steaks and other meats, requiring grocery labels to indicate where the animals were born, raised, and slaughtered.

At the time, American supporters believed that consumers should know where their meat came from. But the rule was opposed on both sides of the border, and some called it simple protectionism.

Critics in Canada and the United States say these requirements have caused expensive management costs and logistical problems for the industry.

Dennis Laycraft, executive vice president of the Canadian Herdsmen Association, said: “The biggest impact is the movement of live animals and the requirements for isolation.”

“They keep the animals separately in the factory. They must be treated separately when they arrive, which is why many plants just don’t think it’s worth the extra work and cost.”

Before the regulation went into effect, Laycraft said that Canadian producers could export live animals to 16 processors in the United States every five to six days.

He said: “When these new regulations came into effect, they were very difficult to meet, and it dropped to six processors, and five of them could only raise our cattle one day a week.”

During the trade dispute, Ottawa estimated that US legislation cost the Canadian pork and beef industry about $1 billion annually.

The WTO has established the United States Violation of international trade law And requirements.Facing $1 billion in trade taxes From Canada, United States Abolish mandatory COOL Used in beef and pork in December 2015.

U.S. sector “in crisis”

The regulation is divisive in the region south of the border, but organizations such as R-CALF USA believe that the regulation can help departments that need support.

Former rancher Bullard said that when the mandatory country of origin label was fully effective between May 2013 and December 2015, American cattle producers saw better prices.

“We set these labels in that time frame [and that] It coincides with the highest nominal price paid to cattle farmers in the history of the same period. “He said in an interview in Billings, Montana.

Bullard said that these days, the United States uses voluntary labels to allow American meat packers to import beef, repackage the beef, and put the “American product” label on it.

Brad said that in the past two and a half centuries, the number of American pastures, “cows” and “feeding farms” have been declining, and the American livestock industry is in a “serious crisis.”and also frustration With the soaring retail price of beef, American ranchers have seen no benefit.

Supporters of mandatory COOL hope this idea will be fascinating.

President Joe Biden rejected the predecessor’s “America First” speech, but he boasted of his “Buy usaPolicy and news continue the old war Before joining the WTO.

Tom Vilsack also served as Secretary of Agriculture again-during the last dispute, he served in the Obama administration.

During Vilsack Confirmation hearing In February, South Dakota Senator John Thune asked him if he would work with him to find new ways to enforce COOL.

Vilsack said: “It is a pleasure to work with you and your employees on any work that will enable us to improve the country of origin label.” “If there is a way to make it comply with WTO regulations, I will be more than happy to work with you.”

For supporters of mandatory COOL, it is encouraging.

Matt Perdue, director of government relations for the North Dakota Farmers Union, said: “This is the first serious discussion in several years about mandatory COOL-we think this is positive.”

However, support for country of origin labeling is not shared across the entire industry in the United States. One of its main opponents is the National Herders Beef Association, which is the oldest and largest national association representing American cattle producers.

Kent Bacus, the organization’s senior director of international trade, said that mandatory COOL is a “zombie problem.” A small group of people in the U.S. cattle industry will continue to promote this behavior, and they hope to get more government. Intervention, trade protectionism, and “out of touch” with it. Current economic reality.

Bakus said: “The last thing we want is to start another trade war with Canada and Mexico, where we might be levied $1 billion in retaliatory tariffs for an unsuccessful marketing plan.”

The North American Meat Institute, the largest trade association representing American meat packers and processors, confirmed that it still opposes mandatory COOL.

Canada “stands up” for the industry

The Canadian Global Affairs spokesperson said that Canada’s view is that the issue has been fully litigated in the WTO, and it believes that the United States will continue to comply with this ruling and its obligations.

Michel Cimpaye said in an e-mail: “Canada will continue to support the Canadian beef industry… and firmly oppose any new US proposal to restore mandatory country-of-origin labels for beef and pork.”

Christopher Sands, director of the Canadian Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC, said the matter should not be taken lightly, adding that officials should also talk to allies in American industry.

He warned that a good relationship with the White House still cannot guarantee success in trade affairs.

“Biden will at least answer the phone, and better than [Donald] Trump is,” Sands said. “But, as we saw on Line 5. Enbridge Pipeline, This is not a card without trade disputes. “

Laycraft of the Canadian Herdsmen Association said that after the WTO ruling, Canada reserves the option of imposing huge tariffs if the United States commits any illegal activities.

But he hopes that efforts to restore mandatory COOL will not make so much progress.

Lefklat said: “I think we have many allies standing between this measure and the plan to move forward.” “But we have always been vigilant about this.”