WASHINGTON D.C. — Foreign meat and chicken sold in the United States would no longer be labeled as from another country, under emergency steps taken in Congress to avoid the threat of financial penalties.

The House of Representatives on June 11 adopted a measure removing the requirements under the country of origin labeling law (COOL), which for the fourth time since 2002 was ruled discriminatory by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The Country of Origin Labeling Amendments Act of 2015 introduced by House Agriculture Committee Chair Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), passed by a vote of 300-131.

The act not only eliminates the existing labeling requirements on beef and pork, but adds chicken from outside countries as not having to carry such a label.

The action in the House stems from the final decision by the WTO on May 18 that paved the way for Canada, Mexico and other countries to retaliate against U.S. exports if the labeling requirements under COOL were not amended within 20-30 days of the WTO ruling.

Mexico and Canada already had begun moving toward imposing retaliatory measures that reportedly could reach as high as $3.6 billion in the first year, prior to the full House passing H.R. 2393, which now moves to the Senate for consideration.

Supporters of lifting the labeling requirements, which include the largest trade groups in the U.S. meat industry, claim the tariffs would also cost tens of thousands of U.S. jobs and that existing COOL requirements drive up costs from having to track and label products coming in from outside the country.

Ted McKinney, director of the Indiana State Department of Agriculture, cited the potential of significant harm to farmers and agribusinesses if the tariffs go through, in a letter to Congress urging lifting the labeling requirements. He said Canada and Mexico are the two largest markets for U.S. exports. "Much of the positive momentum in our state’s economy could be jeopardized without immediate action," he said.

Not all U.S. agriculture groups oppose COOL, though. For example, the U.S. Cattlemen’s Assoc. and National Farmers Union believe the labeling requirements give consumers another choice at the supermarket and provide U.S. producers the ability to differentiate their products.

Supporters of COOL also cited studies that indicate the labeling requirements have little, if any, impact on prices from Americans being willing to pay more for beef and pork raised in the United States. Chris Hurt, a professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at Purdue University, said the projected loss of $3.6 billion from having the tariffs imposed on U.S. exports is not a large amount in terms of impact on total trade.

More significant would be the contradictory message sent by the U.S. in its ongoing efforts to have more balanced trade overall if COOL was not repealed, and the risk that could be placed on major fair trade pacts the U.S. is trying to push through if COOL is allowed to remain, said Hurt. "It’s sure not practicing what you preach," he said.

He explained COOL and the information it provides about products is good for the consumer, but whether a majority of consumers want such a label or find that information useful remains to be seen. He’s also not sure if a majority of the agricultural community supports COOL, but it’s his opinion that most U.S. producers are against leaving COOL in the books. "There is difference of opinion and there are differences among consumer groups," Hurt said.

A special WTO Dispute Settlement Body meeting is scheduled for June 17 to consider the request by Canada and Mexico to impose tariffs on U.S. exports. It could take several months, though, before any tariffs are imposed because of the process that must be followed.

The United States, Canada and Mexico must agree on an Arbitration Panel that will have 60 days to produce a ruling, which could take longer judging by the work on other panels in settling other WTO trade disputes, according to Democrats in the House Committee on Agriculture, which is opposed to repealing COOL. More than 60 other countries have successfully implemented mandatory labeling requirements, according to them.