WASHINGTON, D.C. – The USDA released a proposed rule with new regulatory requirements March 6 the agency said would “better align the voluntary ‘Product of USA’ label claim with consumer understanding of what the claim means.”

The USDA said the proposed rule allows the voluntary ‘Product of USA’ or ‘Made in the USA’ label to be used on meat, poultry and egg products only when they are derived from animals born, raised, slaughtered, and processed in the United States.

“American consumers expect that when they buy a meat product at the grocery store, the claims they see on the label mean what they say,” said USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack. “These proposed changes are intended to provide consumers with accurate information to make informed purchasing decisions. Our action today affirms the USDA’s commitment to ensuring accurate and truthful product labeling.”

Under the proposed rule, the ‘Product of USA’ label claim would continue to be voluntary. The USDA said the proposed rule-making is supported by petitions, thousands of comments from stakeholders, and data.

Kent Bacus, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) executive director of government affairs, said, “There is no question that the current ‘Product of USA’ label for beef is flawed, and it undercuts the ability of U.S. cattle producers to differentiate U.S. beef in the marketplace.

“For the past few years, the (NCBA)’s grassroots-driven efforts have focused on addressing problems with the existing label, and we will continue working to find a voluntary, trade-compliant solution that promotes product differentiation, and delivers profitable solutions and for U.S. cattle producers,” he said.

“Simply adding born, raised and harvested requirements to an already broken label will fail to deliver additional value to cattle producers, and it will undercut true voluntary, market-driven labels that benefit cattle producers,” he added. “We cannot afford to replace one flawed government label with another flawed government label.”

In July 2021, the USDA initiated a comprehensive review “to understand what the ‘Product of USA’ claim means to consumers and inform planned rule-making to define the requirements for making such a claim.”

As part of its review, the USDA commissioned a nationwide consumer survey, which revealed “the current ‘Product of USA’ labeling claim is misleading to a majority of consumers surveyed, with a significant portion believing the claim means that the product was made from animals born, raised, slaughtered and processed in the United States.”

Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016, the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service issued a final rule that amends the country-of-origin labeling regulations by removing the requirements for muscle cuts of beef and pork, and ground beef and pork.

After the legislation was passed, the USDA immediately stopped enforcing the country-of-origin labeling requirements for beef and pork, which became effective Dec. 18, 2015.

On Jan. 10, 50 cattle, farm, rural and consumer groups sent a joint letter to U.S. Senate and House members who, during the last session of Congress, cosponsored the American Beef Labeling Act that restores mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef.

The legislation would require the U.S. Trade Representative, in consultation with Vilsack, to develop a World Trade Organization-compliant means of reinstating mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef within one year of enactment.

The U.S. Trade Representative would have six months to develop a reinstatement plan followed by a six-month window to implement it. If the U.S. Trade Representative fails to reinstate mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef within one year of enactment, it would automatically be reinstated for beef only.

Under the proposed rule, the ‘Product of USA’ label claim would also remain eligible for generic label approval, not needing to be pre-approved by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service before it could be used on regulated product. But it would require supporting documentation to be on file for agency inspection personnel to verify, the USDA said.

The rule also proposes to allow other voluntary U.S. origin claims on meat, poultry, and egg products be sold in the marketplace. These claims would need to include a description on the package of all preparation and processing steps that occurred in the United States upon which the claim is made.

The proposed rule follows a request made by the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association in a petition for rule-making submitted to the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service in 2019.

“In our 2019 petition for rule-making to the (Food Safety and Inspection Service), the (U.S. Cattlemen’s Association) called out the practice of applying ‘Product of the USA’ and ‘Made in the USA’ labeling claims on beef products that the food safety agency itself admitted could have come from other countries,” said Justin Tupper, U.S. Cattlemen’s Association president.

“The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association) is pleased to see that the proposed rule finally closes this loophole by accurately defining what these voluntary origin claims mean, something we have been working to clarify since the repeal of mandatory country-of-origin labeling in 2015,” he added. “If it says ‘Made in the USA,’ then it should be from cattle that have only known USA soil. Consumers have the right to know where their food comes from, full stop.”

The North American Meat Institute said the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service’s latest attempt at proposed rules for a ‘Product of the USA’ label for meat products “are again likely to result in trade retaliation from Canada and Mexico, costing American consumers and businesses billions of dollars.

“Unfortunately, this proposed rule is problematic for many reasons,” said Julie Anna Potts, the organization’s president and CEO. “The USDA should have considered more than public sentiment on an issue that impacts international trade.

“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,” she added. “This food should be allowed to be labeled a ‘Product of the USA.’”

Andrew P. Griffith, University of Tennessee associate professor of agricultural and resource economics, said, “The proposed rule states that the statement ‘Product of the USA’ and ‘Made in the USA’ can only be used for products that are produced solely in the United States.

“This results in excluding all the cattle coming from Mexico and Canada, and the hogs coming from Canada,” he said. “Many of these animals spend most of their lives in U.S. production systems, but would be excluded from the voluntary labeling.

“It is difficult to know what the motivation is behind this change in the regulations to this voluntary labeling,” he added. “It almost appears as a way around mandatory country-of-origin labeling that was such a hot topic over the past decade.”

He said, “The World Trade Organization essentially said the United States was in violation to trade deals with mandatory country-of-origin labeling. It seems to me that the hidden agenda is to find a way around this ruling by putting regulations on a voluntary program. This would provide a method for companies to show their products are solely produced in the United States.

“Several research projects have demonstrated that consumers do not place much value on country-of-origin labeling. Thus, I do not see this having much influence on what consumers are purchasing.”