The U.S.-EU beef hormone dispute

The U.S. EU Beef Hormone and Poultry Disputes

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-45

  Johnson, Renée ^a   Hanrahan, Charles E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895317025     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (103)

1. National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA), "Fact Sheet: Growth Promotant Use in Cattle Production," http://www.beefusa.org/uDocs/factsheetgrowthpromotantuseincattleproduction811.pdf.
2. USDA, Food Safety and Inspection Service, "Beef ... from Farm to Table," http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Beef_from_Farm_to_Table/index.asp. The implanted hormone is time-released and is effective for 90 to 120 days.
3. Information on approved hormone products are at 21 CFR Parts 522, 556, and 558. FDA requirements for the review and approval of new animal drug applications is at http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/ucm123821.htm.
4. See FDA's online "Green Book," http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Green_Book/elecgbook.html.
5. Council Directives 81/602 (July 1981), 88/146 (7 March 1988), 88/299 (17 May 1988).
6. Directive 2003/74 (Sept. 22, 2003), amending Council Directive 96/22 concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyrostatic action and of beta-agonists, http://eur-lex.europa. eu/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_2 62/l_2622003 1014en00 170021 .pdf. Directive 96/22 repealed the original regulations (81/602, 88/146 and 88/299).
7. See WTO, "SPS Agreement Training Module, Chapter 8: The Precautionary Principle," http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/sps_agreement_cbt_e/c8s2p1_e.htm.
8. T. Josling, D. Roberts, and A. Hassan, "The Beef-Hormone Dispute and its Implications for Trade Policy," Stanford University, 2000, http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/11379/HORMrev.pdf. DES use in cattle production is also banned in the United States.
9. See CRS Report RL32199, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or "Mad Cow Disease"): Current and Proposed Safeguards, and CRS Report RS21709, Mad Cow Disease and U.S. Beef Trade.
10. See CRS Report RS21556, Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute, and CRS Report RL33334, Biotechnology in Animal Agriculture: Status and Current Issues.
11. In the late 1980s, observers suggested that EU beef surpluses were so large that policymakers were likely to be supportive of any measure that would limit beef imports likely to compete with domestic production and interfere with the operation of the CAP.
12. See CRS Report RL3 1860, U.S.-European Union Disputes in the World Trade Organization.
13. In 1999 the Commission also voted unanimously to continue its ban, with only the Agriculture Minister of the United Kingdom voting to end the ban.
14. WTO, "European Communities-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)," Dispute DS26, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e /ds26_e.htm. Canada initiated a similar action (Dispute DS48).
15. WTO, "The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement)," http://www.wto.int/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm.
16. Delegation of the European Commission to the USA, "EU complies with WTO ruling on Hormone beef, calls on US and Canada to lift trade sanctions," Press Release EU/NR 61/03, October 15, 2003, http://www.eurunion.org/eu/index.php?option=com_content&task=vie w&id=2077&Itemid=58.
17. Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement provides that "Members shall seek to obtain the additional information necessary for a more objective assessment of the risk, and review the sanitary and phytosanitary measures accordingly within a reasonable period of time." See http://www.wto.int/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm.
18. See, e.g., "United States-Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones Dispute," WT/DS320, First Written Submission of the United States of America, August 8, 2005.
19. EC, "EU complies with WTO ruling on hormone beef and calls on USA and Canada to lift trade sanctions," October 15, 2003, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2004 /april/tradoc_113909.pdf.
20. WTO, "United States-Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones Dispute," Dispute DS320, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds320_e.htm. Canada requested to join the consultations, along with Australia and Mexico. The case against Canada is under Dispute DS321.
21. There were separate panel reports and separate Appellate Body reports for Canada and the United States.
22. For more information on Article 21.5, see CRS Report RS20088, Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization (WTO): An Overview.
23. "Burden of Proof in Compliance Cases Unclear in Hormone Ruling," Inside US Trade, October 31, 2008.
24. "Obama Officials to Review Hormone Retaliation Change, Feed Ban Rule," Inside U.S. Trade, January 28, 2009.
25. SCVPH is one of the scientific committees providing the EC with scientific advice on food safety on issues transferred to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
26. EC, Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Veterinary Measures Relating to Public Health Assessment of Potential Risks to Human Health from Hormone Residues in Bovine Meat and Meat Products, April 30, 1999, http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scv/out21_en.pdf.
27. Also see EC summary, "Hormones In Bovine Meat," http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_c onsumer/library/press/press57_en.pdf.
28. EC, Review of Specific Documents Relating to the SCVPH Opinion of 30 April 99 on the Potential Risks to Human Health from Hormone Residues in Bovine Meat and Meat Products, May 3, 2000, http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scv/out33_en.pdf.
29. EC, Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Veterinary Measures Relating to Public Health On Review of Previous SCVPH Opinions of 30 April 1999 and 3 May 2000 on the Potential Risks to Human Health from Hormone Residues in Bovine Meat and Meat Products, April 10, 2002, http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scv/out50_en.pdf.
30. EFSA was created in January 2002 as part of a comprehensive program to improve EU food safety and ensure consumer protection and confidence, providing scientific advice and communication on food-borne risks.
31. EFSA, Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain On a Request from the European Commission Related to Hormone Residues in Bovine Meat and Meat Products, EFSA-Q-2005-048, June 12, 2007, http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178622336805.htm.
32. EFSA, "EFSA Concludes Review of New Scientific Data on Potential Risks to Human Health from Certain Hormone Residues in Beef," Press Release dated July 18, 2007, http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale1178620753812_1178622723847.htm.
33. USDA, Foreign Agriculture Service, Historic Overview and Chronology of EU's Hormone Ban, GAIN Report E23206, Nov. 7, 2003, http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200311 /145986773.pdf.
34. "United States " Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones Dispute," WT/DS320, First Written Submission of the United States of America, August 8, 2005.
35. World Health Organization (WHO), Evaluation of certain veterinary drug residues in food (32nd JECFA report), WHO Technical Report Series, No. 763, 1988 (et seq.), http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_763.pdf. JECFA is an international scientific expert committee that is administered jointly by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and WHO. Its mission is to evaluate the safety of food additives, contaminants, naturally occurring toxicants, and residues of veterinary drugs in food.
36. Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), Report of the 8th Session of the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, July 1995 (et seq.), http://www.codexa limentarius.net/download/report/213/AL95_3 1e.pdf. CAC develops food standards, guidelines and codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.
37. European Commission, Proceedings of the Scientific Conference on Growth Promotion in Meat Production, November 29, 1995 (Office for Official Publications for the European Communities, Brussels).
38. A subcommittee of the European Medicines Agency (EMEA), which coordinates the evaluation and supervision of medicinal products throughout the European Union.
39. UK's Veterinary Products Committee, "VPC Report " Risk Associated with the Use of Hormonal Substances in Food Producing Animals," July 2006, and "Sub Group on Hormonal Growth Promoters" October 1999, available at http://www.vpc.gov.uk/Public/reportsWG.html.
40. Also see USDA, UK scientific report questions EU position on beef hormones, GAIN Report UK6022, July 7, 2006, http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200607/146208214.pdf.
41. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, "A Review to Update Australia's Position on the Human Safety of Residues of Hormone Growth Promotants (HGPs) Used in Cattle," July 2003.
42. As reported in "United States " Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones Dispute," WT/DS320, First Written Submission of the United States of America, August 8, 2005. The EU-commissioned group also concluded that that limitations on the use of such hormones "are a reasonable safeguard of public health."
43. WTO, "EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) " Complaint by the United States " Report of the Panel," August 18, 1987, WT/DS26/R/USA, paragraph 8, available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases _e/ds26 _e.htm.
44. USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Mission To The European Union, "WTO Hormone Case," last updated August 2007, http://www.useu.be/agri/ban.html.
45. USDA, FAS, EU Presentation on Hormone Ban Directive (2003/74/EC), GAIN Report E23217, Nov. 13, 2003, http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200311/145986807.pdf.
46. NCBA, NCBA Statement On WTO Report On EU Ban of Hormone-Treated Beef," October 16, 2008, http://cattlenetwork.com/Content.asp?contentid=261213.
47. See, e.g., "Coalition Statement on EU's Latest Pronouncement on Hormones," May 14, 2002 by AFBF, AHI, AMI, and NCBA, http://www.meatami.com/ht/d/sp/i/1482/pid/1482.
48. USDA, Foreign Agriculture Service, Historic Overview and Chronology of EU's Hormone Ban, GAIN Report E23206, Nov. 7, 2003, http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles /200311/145986773.pdf.
49. WTO, "European Communities " Measures Concerning Meat And Meat Products (Hormones)," WT/DS26/21, July 15, 1999, http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/fileview er?id=65564.
50. 64 Federal Register 40638, July 27, 1999. Canada's level was set at C$1 1.3 million.
51. USTR, "WTO's Appellate Body Vindicates Continued U.S. Imposition of Sanctions after the EU Claimed Compliance in the EU-Hormones Dispute," October 16, 2008.
52. See, e.g., Clemens, Roxanne, "The EU-U.S. Hormone Dispute: The Negotiations Continue," Iowa Ag Review, Center for Agricultural And Rural Development, Spring 2002, http://card.iastate.edu/iowa_ag_review/spring_02/IAR.pdf.
53. Cattlenetwork, "Cattlemen's Capitol Concerns," September 2005.
54. One such example is a letter from Senator Grassley to Pascal Lamy of the European Commission, Nov. 18, 2004, http://useu.usmission.gov/Article.asp?ID=1DF3BEE3-5EF5-4E1A-AEBF-6A27659FCD2C.
55. The 2003 law permanently banned one hormone and provisionally banned the other five hormones, pending more detailed scientific assessments.
56. It is aimed primarily at maintaining pressure on the EU to resolve the meat hormone dispute (and another U.S.-EU dispute over banana trade) by penalizing a wider range of foreign products and countries.
57. USTR, President's 2008 Policy Agenda, Trade Enforcement Activities, March 2008. Section 306(b)(2) of the Trade Act provides that the USTR is not required to revise a retaliation list if the USTR, together with the affected United States industry, agrees that it is unnecessary to revise the retaliation list.
58. A compilation of responses from food and textile groups, and some non-agricultural stakeholders, is at http://www.insidetrade.com/secure/dsply_docnum_txt.asp?f =wto2002.ask&dn=wto2008_7151.
59. 74 Federal Register 4264, January 23, 2009, http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a090123c.html.
60. 73 Federal Register 66066, November 6, 2008, Annex I and Annex II list of products; and USTR, "USTR Seeks Public Comments on Possible Changes to Product List in EU-Beef Hormones Dispute," Oct. 31, 2008.
61. European Commission, "WTO Dispute Settlement: EU Prepares WTO Action over Trade Sanction Law," Trade Issues, January 15, 2009.
62. Inside U.S. Trade, "Ashton Holding Off on Escalating Fight over Hormone Ban Retaliation," February 6, 2009; "Obama Officials to Review Hormone Retaliation Change, Feed Ban Rule," Inside U.S. Trade, January 28, 2009.
63. U.S. Mission to the EU, "U.S. Announces Delay of Trade Action in Beef Hormones Dispute," March 13, 2009; USTR, "USTR Ron Kirk Announces Delay of Trade Action in Beef Hormones Dispute," April 22, 2009.
64. "Two Major Hurdles Remain For U.S.-EU Beef Hormones Deal," World Trade Online, April 24, 2009, http://www.insidetrade.com/secure/display.asp?dn=INSIDETRADE-27-16-3&f=wto2002.ask.
65. 74 Federal Register 40864, August 13, 2009.
66. WTO, European Communities " Measures Concerning Meat And Meat Products (Hormones), Joint Communication from the European Communities and the United States, WT/DS26/28, September 30, 2009; 74 Federal Register 40864, August 13, 2009; 74 Federal Register 48808, September 24, 2009; and USTR press releases.
67. WTO, European Communities " Measures Concerning Meat And Meat Products (Hormones), Joint Communication from the European Communities and the United States, WT/DS26/28, September 30, 2009.
68. Council Regulations No 617/2009 of 13 July 2009 opening an autonomous tariff quota for imports of high-quality beef, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=O J:L:2009:182:0001:0001:EN:pdf.
69. For other information, see USDA, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Mission to European Union, "High Quality Beef Quota," http://www.fas.usda.gov/posthome/useu/hqb.html.
70. USMEF, "New EU Quota Has Positive Impact," Cattle Buyers Weekly, September 21, 2009.
71. 74 Federal Register 48808, September 24, 2009.
72. "EU Agriculture Council Approves TRQ for Hormone Beef Deal," World Trade Online, July 14, 2009; "EU-U.S. Beef Dispute: Talks Inching Towards Deal?" AgraFacts, March 18, 2009.
73. "U.S., EU Explore Basis of Possible Beef Hormone Settlement," Inside U.S. Trade, February 27, 2009.
74. Invoking MFN status implies that level treatment or equal trade advantages should be accorded to all "most favored nation" trading partners.
75. "A Challenge Over EU-US Beef Accord," Washington Trade Daily, June 22, 2009; and ICTSD, "New Issues Arise in EU-US Beef Trade Dispute," June 24, 2009. Also see comments by Uruguay at a WTO meeting: see WTO, "Minutes of Meeting" (meeting held June 19, 2009), WT/DSB/M/270, August 28, 2009.
76. ICTSD, "EU, U.S. Strike Provisional Deal to End 13-Year-Old Beef Dispute," May 13, 2009; and AFBF, statement by Bob Stallman, American Farm Bureau Federation, regarding the EU beef hormone agreement, May 7, 2009.
77. See CIT, Gilda Industries Inc., v. the United States, Slip Op 08-5 1, May 14, 2008, and other related case reports since 2004 at CIT's website (http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/). Toasted breads are imported to the U.S. under U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) code 1905.40.
78. "U.S. Appeals CIT Decision Ordering Refund of Duties Paid in Hormone Dispute," International Trade Daily, August 19, 2009.
79. "U.S., EU Explore Basis of Possible Beef Hormone Settlement," Inside U.S. Trade, February 27, 2009.
80. See CRS Report RS20088, Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization (WTO): An Overview.
81. "U.S. Appeal Brief in Hormone Retaliation Case Due Next Month," Inside U.S. Trade, September 11, 2009; and "Importers File Suits Refund of Retaliatory Duties Paid Under Beef Hormone Dispute," World Trade Online, August 14, 2009. See also U.S. CIT, Cheeseworks v. United States, Court No. 09-00298, Case 1 :09-cv-00298-N/A.
82. This is consistent with the approach recommended by the U.S. Meat Export Federation. See, e.g., "USMEF: U.S. Pork, Beef Exports Defy Expectations," High Plain Midwest Ag Journal, December 16, 2008, http://www.hpj.com/archives/2008/dec08/dec22/USMEF-USporkbeefexportsdefy.cfm.
83. Based on trade data reported by the U.S. International Trade Commission, http://dataweb.usitc.gov. U.S.-reported product exports to EU-27 countries, U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) 0201 (fresh/chilled beef) and HTS 0202 (frozen beef).
84. Global Trade Atlas data for HTS 0201, HTS 0202, and HTS 0206.
85. "USMEF: U.S. Pork, Beef Exports Defy Expectations," High Plain Midwest Ag Journal, December 16, 2008, http://www.hpj.com/archives/2008/dec08/dec22/USMEF-USporkbeefexportsdefy.cfm.
86. USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, "Official Listing of Approved Sources of Non-Hormone Treated Cattle," http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dD ocName=STELPRD3107503 (last updated January 14, 2010).
87. A listing of the eligible U.S. plants is at https://sanco.ec.europa.eu/traces/output/RM_US_en.pdf (last updated September 28, 2009). Cattle management groups may include approved farms, ranches, and feedlots.
88. "U.S., EU reach provisional deal in beef dispute," Meatingplace Online, May 6, 2009.
89. EC, Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/97 of 27 May 1997, opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for high-quality fresh, chilled, and frozen beef and for frozen buffalo meat, Official Journal L 137, May 28, 1997, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31997R0936:EN:HTML. Other affected country suppliers are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, New Zealand, Paraguay, and Uruguay.
90. USDA, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Mission to European Union, "High Quality Beef Quota," http://useu.usmission.gov/agri/hqb.html.
91. USDA, FAS, EU-25 Livestock and Products, U.S. beef faces strong competition on the European market, GAIN Report E35 178, Sept. 8, 2005, http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200509/146130828.pdf.
92. See, e.g., Clemens, Roxanne, "The EU-U.S. Hormone Dispute: The Negotiations Continue," Iowa Ag Review, Center for Agricultural And Rural Development, Spring 2002, http://card.iastate.edu/iowa_ag_review/spring_02/IAR.pdf.
93. "U.S., EU Look to Resolve Beef Fight by Increasing Hormone-free TRQ," Inside U.S. Trade, October 13, 2006.
94. "U.S., EU Moved Closer to Beef Market Access Deal Last Year," Inside U.S. Trade, January 23, 2009.
95. "U.S., EU Explore Basis of Possible Beef Hormone Settlement," Inside U.S. Trade, February 27, 2009; and "U.S., EU Look to Resolve Beef Fight by Increasing Hormone-free TRQ," Inside U.S. Trade, October 13, 2006.
96. "U.S., EU Explore Basis of Possible Beef Hormone Settlement," Inside U.S. Trade, February 27, 2009.
97. "EU Outlines Three Options for Compliance in WTO Hormone Dispute," Inside U.S. Trade, February 12, 1999.
98. CRS calculations from USITC trade data for U.S. imports for selected products and countries subject to retaliatory tariffs due to U.S.-EU beef hormone dispute (Appendix B).
99. See, for example, hearing of the House Committee on Ways and Means on the Implementation of the United States- Australia Free Trade Agreement, June 16, 2004, Statement of Leo McDonnell, Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund-United Stockgrowers of America. Also see related bills S. 2328 and H.R. 4288 (Agriculture Export Enhancement Act of 1998, 105th Congress), H.R. 4761 (Uruguay Round Agreements Compliance Act of 1998, 105th Congress), and H.R. 3050 (To prohibit imports into the United States of meat products from the European Union until certain unfair trade barriers are removed, 104th Congress).
100. Subcommittee on Forestry, Conservation and Rural Revitalization, U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, hearing on S. 2709, Trade Injury Compensation Act of 2000, September 25, 2000, http://agriculture
101. For example, see H.J.Res. 80 and H.Con.Res. 26 (101st Congress) and S.Res. 277 (104th Congress).
102. Two 106th Congress bills were H.R. 2106 and H.R. 4478 (as part of the Small Business Trade Protection Act).
103. See CRS Report RL3 0732, Trade Conflict and the U.S.-European Union Economic Relationship, and CRS Report RL3438 1, European Union-U.S. Trade and Investment Relations: Key Issues, European Union-U.S. Trade and Investment Relations: Key Issues.