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

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”

Label It Bull: Livestock Regulations Spark Backlash From Meat Producers

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

Consumers Will Pay More For a ‘Made in the USA’ Label

CHICAGO, March 12, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — New research published in the Journal of International Marketing shows that consumers are willing to pay a premium for products made in countries with favorable reputations.

“Our findings show that consumers not only prefer and assign a higher value to branded products from a country of origin with a favorable country image but also are willing to spend more money to obtain them,” say study authors Nicole Koschate-Fischer, Katharina Oldenkotte and Adamantios Diamantopoulos, in an article appearing this month in the American Marketing Association’s Journal of International Marketing.

The authors ran four experiments in which participants (college students in Germany) revealed how much they were willing to pay for branded products coming from different countries. One study, for example, compared Evian bottled water from France, a nation shown to have a more favorable reputation, and Evian bottled water from Turkey, a nation shown to have a less favorable reputation. On average, respondents showed they were willing to pay the equivalent of $1.28 for Evian coming from France versus $ 1.04 from Turkey. The study also looked at the U.S. shoe brand Nike. When participants were told the Nike’s they were considering were made in America they were willing to pay more for them than when they were told they were made in South Korea. Further experiments, however, showed that the price differential becomes less substantial the more familiar consumers are with the brand in question, regardless of where the brand originates.

The findings can help marketers in their pricing decisions. For example, if marketers are pricing a product that comes from a country with a favorable reputation, they may consider charging a premium for it. They may also want to highlight the product’s country of origin in advertisements. Conversely, if marketers are promoting a product from a less favorable country, they may benefit from highlighting product attributes rather than its origin. The authors also suggest companies consider the impact on price and consumers’ willingness to purchase if they are thinking of relocating manufacturing to a country with a less favorable image.

Read more of this post

%d bloggers like this: