Do you want to know what country your food comes from?

March 28, 2013 by 1 Comment

We think you do and an overwhelming 92% of American’s say -YES in a recent Boston Consulting Group survey of consumers.

Sadly, the WTO (World Trade Organization) doesn’t see it that way.  The WTO has ruled that U.S. producers of beef, poultry, lamb and other agriculture products must remove the current legislated Country of Origin Labeling from their packages by May 23rd. (less then 2 short months away)
So, now consumers will lose the transparency in their food supply that for years they have fought for.  Scary, but true.
What is even scarier is that mainstream media hasn’t picked up on this story in a major way so, many consumers don’t even know what is about to happen in May to the packaging of the goods they buy everyday for themselves and their families.
So, what can you do about it.

1st Let your Grocer, Retailer and Producer know this is important and you want to know where your food comes from
2nd tell them we have an independent solution for you to know and you want to see the label “Product of USA Certified”.

Our company is the  leader in independent, 3rd party certification of the Product of USA Certified claim.  We are a voluntary certification that producers can use on their product and packaging to let consumers know –that they are proudly – PRODUCT OF USA CERTIFIED.

U.S. consumers have the right to now where their food comes from and producers have the right to voluntary market their products with our trademarked certification.

We are the solution that consumers and producers are looking for.

Contact us today for more information.

Product of USA Certified

Please get the word out and follow us on
Facebook Twitter Website

“Trust but Certify”

Filed under COOL Country of origin labeling, CPG, Farming, Food, Government, Made in America, Made in USA Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Label It Bull: Livestock Regulations Spark Backlash From Meat Producers

March 13, 2013 by 1 Comment

cattle U.S.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is facing a backlash from small livestock producers and others over its move to tighten meat-labeling regulations, which would force them to separate animals based on where they were born, raised and slaughtered.

The step is being billed as a way to bring the U.S. into compliance with World Trade Organization agreements, but there are a growing number in the industry who argue it will alienate the country’s trading partners and force small American meat farms out of business.

“Only the government could take a costly, cumbersome rule like mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) and make it worse even as it claims to ‘fix it,” said American Meat Institute President J. Patrick Boyle.

Boyle believes the proposed rule will make the current requirements even more expensive, onerous and disruptive.

The Department of Agriculture recently proposed the new rule for labeling muscle cuts of meat. That means beef, veal, lamb, pork, goat and chicken — which are now labeled as simply a product of one country or more — will have to include additional details including where each animal was born, raised and slaughtered.

The new labeling regulations would force thousands of meat processors and retailers to change the way they label products. The USDA estimates the initial cost would range between $17 million and $48 million.

The USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service began working on a rule change after the U.S. partially lost a WTO appeal in 2012. “The USDA expects that these changes will improve the overall operation of the program and also bring the current mandatory (country of origin labeling) requirements into compliance with the U.S. international trade obligations,” USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement.

The National Farmers Union praised the rule change as an “excellent response.”

Read more of this post

Filed under Canada, COOL Country of origin labeling, CPG, Farming, Food, Made in America, Made in USA, Mexico, Product of USA Tagged with , , , , , ,

The European Commission found that Beijing illegally subsidizes Chinese steel producers.

January 16, 2013 by Leave a comment

china dumping steelBEIJING (Reuters) - The European Union will not be drawn into a trade war with China, the EU’s ambassador to the country said on Wednesday, a day after trade sources said the European Commission found that Beijing illegally subsidizes Chinese steel producers.

The Commission is investigating 37 dumping and subsidy cases, 21 of them involving China, and Tuesday’s preliminary finding asked EU members to back punitive tariffs against Chinese steel firms, a move that angered Beijing.

But EU Ambassador to China Markus Ederer said he was puzzled by and “flatly rejects” reports of atrade war between the two economies which together comprise the world’s largest trade relationship.

“I don’t want this to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. First of all, it takes two for a war, and I can declare here that the EU is not available for a trade war with China,” Ederer told a news briefing.

China’s Commerce Ministry spokesman Shen Danyang on Wednesday called the Commission’s investigation into steel subsidies “unreasonable”.

“Such a conclusion based on unreasonable investigations will seriously hurt Chinese companies’ legal rights and interests,” Shen said at a separate news briefing.

European anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties affect less than 1 percent of Chinese exports to Europe, Ederer said.

“China, as well, has investigations, as you know, into European exports to China. We have no issue with that as long as it is under WTO rules,” he said, adding that observers should not “over dramatize” the issue.

The Commission’s ongoing investigations include a study of the alleged dumping of 21 billion euros of solar panels and components by Chinese producers. A preliminary ruling on that case, the Commission’s largest investigation to date, is due in the first half of 2013.

The European Union is China’s biggest trading partner while for the EU, China is second only to the United States.

(Reporting by Michael Martina and Aileen Wang; Editing by Jeremy Laurence)

Filed under Business, China, Construction, Currency Manipulation, EU, Political Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

US Rejects China’s Request For Panel To Mediate WTO Dispute

December 11, 2012 by Leave a comment

china dumping steel

The US on Friday deferred China’s first request to establish a WTO dispute settlement panel to mediate its dispute against the US and its practice of levying both antidumping and countervailing duties on imports from nonmarket economies (NMEs), such as China.

China filed its WTO complaint in mid-September, taking issue with US CV and AD duty measures on a variety of products, including steel. As reported, WTO documents show the suit pertains to import orders and investigations implemented by the US between November 20, 2006 and March 13, 2012. March 13 was the date the US signed into law the newest CVD legislation permitting it to levy both AD and CV duties against NMEs.

The implementation of CVDs in addition to AD duties in NME cases is called “double remedies” or “double counting” by opponents of the measure.

As reported, China is questioning “any and all determinations or actions” by the US Department of Commerce, the US International Trade Commission or US Customs and Border Protection relating to the “imposition or collection” of CVDs. The dispute also includes AD measures, “as well as the combined effect of these antidumping measures and the parallel countervailing duty measures.”

Imports covered in the dispute include circular welded carbon quality steel pipe, light-walled rectangular pipe and tube, circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe, circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe, pre-stressed concrete steel wire strand, steel grating, wire decking and OCTG. Also included are seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line and pressure pipe; drill pipe and galvanized wire.

 

MADE IN USA CERTIFIED® ….. http://usa-c.com

Filed under China, COOL Country of origin labeling, Tariff, WTO Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

WTO hands Obama victory in U.S.-China steel case

October 19, 2012 by Leave a comment

Reuters/Reuters – A worker checks on coils of steel at a factory in Dalian, Liaoning province

GENEVA/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The World Trade Organization barred China on Thursday from imposing duties on certain U.S. steel exports, siding with U.S. President Barack Obama in a dispute with Beijing over a type of steel made in two election battleground states.

The case involved duties imposed by China on “grain-oriented electrical steel,” which is used in the cores of high-efficiency transformers, electric motors and generators. The steel is made by AK Steel Corp of Ohio and ATI Allegheny Ludlum of Pennsylvania.

Although the specialty steel case is tiny compared with other trade disputes with Beijing, the WTO ruling gave Obama a timely win as he defends himself against accusations by his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, that he is soft on China.

“Today we are again plainly stating that we will continue to take every step necessary to ensure that China plays by the rules and does not unfairly restrict exports of U.S. products,” Obama administration trade representative Ron Kirk said in a statement.

China’s Ministry of Commerce had no immediate comment on the ruling, which arrived late in the evening in Beijing.

When the Obama administration filed the case, the volume of specialty steel trade with China was in the range of $250 million. That pales in comparison with the auto and auto-parts trade at issue in the most recent case Washington filed against China in September. The volume of auto parts trade alone amounted to about $12 billion in 2011, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing.

Read more of this post

Filed under Automotive, Business, China, Construction, Currency Manipulation, Defense, Made in USA, Manufacturing, Solar, Supply Chain, Tariff Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama to hit China with trade case over cars, parts

September 17, 2012 by Leave a comment

President Barack Obama launches a campaign swing through the pivotal battleground of Ohio on Monday — armed with a new trade enforcement case against China over allegedly improper subsidies to its auto and auto-parts sectors.

Mitt Romney has recently escalated his attacks on the incumbent as not doing enough to protect America’s battered manufacturing sector from unfair competition from Beijing. The message has special resonance in states like Ohio, where the auto-parts sector accounts for a sizeable chunk of the economy. (The White House says the industry directly employs 54,200 Ohioans and supports some 850,000 total jobs).

Obama decided to go after China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) because its subsidies are giving its auto parts a leg up — even in the U.S. market — over their American counterparts, the administration says.

 

The Obama Administration is also escalating another trade enforcement action, begun in July, against what it says are unfair anti-dumping and countervailing duties on some $3.3 billion in U.S. automobile exports to China.

The United States will ask the WTO to set up a dispute settlement panel to consider its case against those duties, which Beijing imposed in December 2011. China acted in response to the auto bailout Obama championed, arguing the rescue amounted to unfair government support for the industry.

“The key principle at stake is that China must play by the rules of the global trading system,” an administration official said on condition of anonymity. “When it does not, the Obama Administration will take action to ensure that American businesses and workers are competing on a level playing field.”

 

The Cleveland Plain-Dealer first reported the news.

Filed under Automotive, China, Currency Manipulation, Economy, Espionage, Government, Jobs, Labor, Manufacturing, Tariff, Technology, Union Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Made in the USA Foundation, Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund and Mile High Organics Sues WTO to Keep Country of Origin Labeling Act in Force

September 7, 2012 by Leave a comment

DENVER, Colo., Sept. 5, 2012 – /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Made in the USA Foundation led a coalition of groups filing suit against the World Trade Organization, the U.S. Trade Representative and the Secretary of Agriculture to keep the U.S. Country of Origin Labeling Act (COOL) in force.  The WTO ruled this summer that COOL, which required meat from Mexico, Canada and other nations to be labeled as such, discriminated against imported beef.

The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court in Denver, Colorado.  The case seeks a court order declaring that the World Trade Organization does not have the authority to override U.S. law.  The Country of Origin Labeling Act requires all meat, fish, chicken and produce to be labeled at the grocery store with an accurate country of origin.

Canada and Mexico challenged the U.S. law at the World Trade Organization, arguing that the law unfairly discriminates against imports from these two nations.  The WTO does not have permanent judges.  The WTO appointed an appellate panel of three judges that included a Mexican lawyer who has represented Mexico in trade cases.

Joel D. Joseph, general counsel of the Made in the USA Foundation, said, “the WTO does not have the right to interfere with domestic laws of the United States.  When the U.S. joined the WTO, it agreed to do so only if the WTO could not overrule U.S. law.  More than 90% of U.S. consumers favor the Country of Origin Labeling Act.  This law does not discriminate against any country, it merely requires labeling.  Consumers have a right to decide whether to buy U.S. or imported meat, and accurate labeling is a consumer right.”  Joseph added, “the WTO’s appellate panel was unfairly biased against the United States and should not have allowed a Mexican lawyer, with an obvious conflict of interest, to sit on the panel.”

This is the third major decision of a WTO court that attempts to overturn U.S. law.  The prior two cases involved “dolphin safe” labels on tuna and a U.S. ban on flavored cigarettes.  Congress allows tuna to be labeled “dolphin safe” if it meets specific requirements.  Mexico complained that this discriminates against Mexican tuna because Mexican tuna is not fished in a manner that protects dolphins.

Indonesia filed a complaint with the WTO charging that the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, that prohibits flavored cigarettes from being sold in the United States discriminates against Indonesia cigarettes.  Indonesia produces clove-flavored cigarettes and wants to sell them in the U.S.  The WTO ruled that the U.S. ban on flavored cigarettes discriminated against Indonesia.

The Made in the USA Foundation is a non-profit organization formed in 1989 to promote American-made products.  The Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund (R-CALF) represents 5,400 ranchers and cattlemen in 45 states.  Made in the USA Foundation and R-CALF were the primary supporters of the Country of Origin Labeling Act.  Mile High Organics is a food distributor in Denver, Colorado that delivers food to homes throughout the state.  Mile High Organics seeks to distribute local, Made in the USA food and supports country of origin labeling.

SOURCE Made in the USA Foundation

Filed under Brazil, Business, Canada, Certifications, COOL Country of origin labeling, Economy, Export, Farming, Food, Industry, Jobs, Mexico Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

China escalates U.S. trade dispute, requests WTO decision

August 24, 2012 by Leave a comment

The low cost of labour, coupled with the massive scale of production at its 14,000-person plant, have enabled China’s Suntech to become the global industry leader in solar power in just a decade

GENEVA (Reuters) – In a move that escalates a trade row with the United States, China said it would ask the World Trade Organization (WTO) to adjudicate a dispute over U.S. punitive import duties on 22 Chinese exports, including solar panels and steel products.

China first brought the complaint to the WTO in May by asking the United States for formal “consultations” to explain the duties, which Washington says are intended to offset illegal subsidies that gave Chinese goods an unfair price advantage.

WTO rules entitle China to demand adjudication after a 60 day period of consultations. China will make the demand for adjudication at a meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body on Aug 31, China said in a statement circulated to WTO members this week.

The office of the U.S. Trade Representative said in May that China’s decision to bring the dispute to the WTO was “premature and not an appropriate use of dispute settlement system resources”, because the U.S. Department of Commerce was already working to address the issues raised by China.

But China’s statement said two subsequent rounds of talks, on June 25 and July 18, had failed to resolve the dispute, which includes wind towers, as well as certain types of steel pipe, wire, cylinders and wheels, aluminum extrusions, wood flooring, magnesia bricks, thermal and coated paper and citric acid.

China is by far the world’s biggest producer of steel and is also a leading maker of clean energy equipment such as solar panels and wind towers, helped by Beijing’s ambition of tackling carbon emissions without slowing China’s growth.

Foreign competitors complain that its oversupply is the result of a market that is driven by forces such as government edicts and subsidies rather than fundamental supply and demand, and China has created surpluses that distort the global market.

China decided to bring the latest WTO complaint, which it says affects exports worth $7.3 billion, after winning a previous WTO dispute last year over U.S. duties on imports of Chinese steel pipes, off-road tires and woven sacks.

Many of China’s grievances might have been dealt with by a U.S. court decision last year, which struck down the Commerce Department’s ability to impose anti-subsidy duties on “non-market economies” like China.

But the U.S. Congress voted to restore it in March, ensuring U.S. duties on about two dozen Chinese goods stayed in place.

The case is one of several currently “live” disputes between the United States and China at the WTO.

Read more of this post

Filed under Aerospace, Banking, China, Currency Manipulation, Defense, Energy, Espionage, Green, Jobs, Manufacturing, Solar Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CHINA: DON’T LET US AUTO CASE IN WTO HURT TIES

July 6, 2012 by Leave a comment

BEIJING (AP) — China’s government said Friday it will “properly handle” a U.S. complaint to the World Trade Organization about its anti-dumping duties on auto imports and doesn’t want the latest in a string of trade disputes to harm relations.

“It is normal for frictions to occur,” said a foreign ministry spokesman, Liu Weimin, at a regular briefing. “What is important is to properly handle it and not to let it impede friendly relations.”

The U.S. complaint Thursday adds to a series of disputes with Beijing over market access for goods ranging from poultry to steel. Political tensions over trade are mounting as governments try to boost exports at a time of slumping global demand.

Washington accused Beijing of improperly imposing anti-dumping duties on American-made autos worth $3 billion. The Chinese duties of 2 to 21.5 percent affect cars and SUVs with engine capacity of 2.5 liters or larger.

A Commerce Ministry statement said Beijing will “properly handle the request for consultations under the WTO dispute settlement procedures” — the first step in resolving a complaint.

Read more of this post

Filed under Automotive, China, Currency Manipulation, Tariff, WTO Tagged with , , , , , , ,

U.S. to appeal WTO ruling against meat labels

March 25, 2012 by Leave a comment

Reuters
By Doug Palmer and Rod Nickel | Reuters

WASHINGTON/WINNIPEG (Reuters) – The United States said on Friday it would appeal a World Trade Organization ruling against a law requiring country-of-origin labels on all meat sold in grocery stores, a move that disappointed Canada and Mexico, both of which want the law changed.

The meat labels became mandatory in March 2009 after years of debate. U.S. consumer and mainline farm groups supported the requirement, saying consumers should have information to distinguish between U.S. and foreign products.

Big meat processors opposed the provision, which they said would unnecessarily boost costs and disrupt trade.

Read more of this post

Filed under Brazil, Canada, China, Tariff, WTO Tagged with , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 98 other followers

%d bloggers like this: