America’s meat, poultry and egg producers are applauding a new country-of-origin labeling rule that changes how meat, poultry and eggs can bear the “Product of USA” and “Made in the USA” labels.
The new rule, which according to USDA will begin in January 2026, requires that “Product of USA.” or “Made in the USA” food labels only be used on products derived from animals that were born, raised, and slaughtered within the United States.
Current regulations allow products derived from animals born, raised, and slaughtered outside the U.S. to be labeled “Product of USA” or “Made in the USA” as long as they were packaged within the U.S.
“The new rule is a vital step toward consumer protection and builds on the Biden-Harris Administration’s work to bolster trust and fairness in the marketplace where smaller processors can compete,” said U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a statement announcing the change. “This final rule will ensure that when consumers see ‘Product of USA’ they can trust the authenticity of that label and know that every step involved, from birth to processing, was done here in America,” he added.
Ranchers, farmers and industry trade groups have lobbied for the rule change for many years. They and other agriculture experts say the new rule will end consumer confusion – most consumers are surprised when they learn that meat labeled “Product of the USA” doesn’t come from animals born and raised in the U.S. – and give consumers better decision-making information at the grocery store.
The previous rule also put smaller domestic cattle producers at a big disadvantage over the four big meatpacking companies – JBS, Cargill, Tyson and National Beef Packing – that dominate U.S. meat production. These global conglomerates are able to put “Product of U.S.A” or “Made in the USA” labels on foreign meat they import for cheap costs and package in the U.S. The new rule will help eliminate some of the competitive advantage these giants have over smaller, independent domestic producers.
USDA Secretary Visack and others say the new rule will ultimately help these American producers sell more beef and increase their profits because the meat, poultry and eggs they produce will be the only products labeled “Product of the USA” or “Made in the USA.”
Long-time advocates for the country-of-origin rule change like the advocacy group Farm Action agree with this assessment.
“The abuse of the “Product of USA” label stripped America’s cattle producers of a vital opportunity to market their USA beef while denying consumers the opportunity to support them,” Joe Maxwell, a farmer and co-founder of Farm Action, said in a press release, adding that the rule change is “a huge win for America’s farmers, ranchers and consumers.”
Some Disagreement
Not everybody in the industry agrees with the new country-of-origin rule change though.
Colorado Livestock Association CEO Zach Riley said in a recent discussion on the nationally-broadcast NPR (National Public Radio) program All Things Considered that it’s an “anti-trade practice.”
“It’s definitely got the potential to be exclusionary, and could vilify some of our international trading partners,” he told NPR, citing concerns that disrupting key trade relationships could threaten the food supply.
“It [meat grown on foreign soil and packaged in the U.S] still is USDA-inspected, still rendered here, sorted through here,” he said. “You still have to meet the level of standard that makes it ‘U.S. good.’”
Marie Bonds, a fifth generation cattle rancher and president of the Colorado Independent Cattle Growers Association, disagreed with Riley, saying that the fact her beef will now be recognized as that it is grown in the USA is a positive for her and other smaller domestic ranchers.
Mandatory Country-Of-Origin Labeling
Most of the disagreement regarding the new “Product of USA” rule though isn’t that it’s not a positive but rather that it doesn’t go far enough.
The new rule tightens up the requirements for labels producers voluntarily put on their meat and egg products but it stops short of requiring mandatory country-of-origin labels for certain imported meat products. Companies that import meat produced elsewhere but packaged it in the U.S. will no longer be able to label it as a product of the USA. In contrast, producers of meat and eggs produced in the U.S. will be able to tout that fact.
Until 2015, country-of-origin labels were required in the U.S. for all imported meats. Mexico and Canada challenged the policy with the World Trade Organization (WTO), however, saying it put their meat products at an unfair disadvantage in American markets.
The WTO sided with Mexico and Canada and at the end of 2015 the country-of-origin labeling laws were repealed for beef and pork products. They remain in place though for other products, including lamb, chicken, goat and fish.
In order to be reinstated nationally, mandatory country-of-origin labeling legislation must be passed by Congress and signed by the president.
Last year two bills to strengthen federal country-of-origin labeling rules for beef and pork were introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and a bill to reinstate mandatory country-of-origin labeling was introduced in the U.S. Senate. None of the bills made it out of their respective committees because members couldn’t come to an agreement.
There’s also the issue of getting the WTO to reopen the case and agree to overturn its ruling exempting beef and pork, which is unlikely. Mexico and Canada oppose any such attempt.
Because achieving full mandatory country-of-origin labeling any time soon is unlikely, most advocates are pleased with the new country of origin rule and USDA’s action on it. The reaction to the new rule from most independent domestic producers also appears to be positive.
Efforts for mandatory country-of-origin labeling on both the federal and state levels continue though, despite not showing much promise.
Some advocates see the new rule as the start of a process which will eventually lead to new mandatory country-of-origin labeling legislation that paves the way for also overturning the WTO ruling in favor of Mexico and Canada. Others though see that as a very difficult bridge to cross. They instead are focusing on the benefits the new rule might bring to independent domestic producers.
My Job Depends on Ag Magazine columnist and contributing editor Victor Martino is an agrifood industry consultant, entrepreneur and writer. One of his passions and current projects is working with farmers who want to develop their own branded food products. You can contact him at: victormartino415@gmail.com.
