Tag Archives: WTO

Cattle Producers Sue USDA to Reinstate COOL

As previously covered on this blog, in 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) implemented country of origin labeling (COOL) rules, requiring meat labels to indicate where animals were born, raised, and slaughtered.  Meatpacking and livestock commodity groups in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico challenged the COOL requirements via appeal to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and … Continue Reading

Two States Move to Require COOL Labeling for Beef

As previously covered on this blog, mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) rules for beef products have long been the subject of controversy and challenge, culminating in a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that the COOL requirements violate U.S. trade obligations to Canada and Mexico, and Congress repealing COOL as of December 21, 2015. On February … Continue Reading

Will COOL Make a Come Back?

As previously covered on this blog, mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) rules for beef products have long been the subject of controversy and challenge, culminating in a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that the COOL requirements violate U.S. trade obligations to Canada and Mexico and Congress repealing COOL as of December 21, 2015. With a … Continue Reading

Tariff Trouble

WTO authorizes Canada and Mexico to impose over $1 billion in retaliatory tariffs on U.S. products related to country of origin labeling dispute. As previously covered on this blog, the U.S. has been dealing with the aftermath of a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements unfairly discriminate against … Continue Reading

COOL Cash Cow

USTR indicates that COOL damages are much lower than Canada and Mexico estimated. As previously covered on this blog, the U.S. government continues to develop strategies to cope with the aftermath of a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements unfairly discriminate against meat imports.  Because COOL requirements are … Continue Reading

COOL by Choice

Senate introduces voluntary COOL bill. As previously covered on this blog, Congress has been working to resolve the controversy surrounding country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for meat products.  In the wake of a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that mandatory COOL requirements unfairly discriminate against meat imports — and the WTO’s subsequent rejection of … Continue Reading

Senate Stalls

Senate still has not passed bill to repeal COOL requirements. As previously covered on this blog, the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a bill to repeal country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for meat products.  The COOL requirements have long been mired in controversy, culminating in a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that the … Continue Reading

Cooling Off

House votes to repeal COOL requirements for meat. As previously covered on this blog, U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) rules for meat products have long been the subject of controversy and challenge, culminating in a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that the COOL requirements violate U.S. trade obligations to Canada and Mexico.  The WTO … Continue Reading

Friday Follow-Up

House Agricultural Committee votes to repeal COOL requirements. As covered on this blog earlier this week, the World Trade Organization (WTO) rejected the U.S. appeal of a ruling regarding the propriety of its country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for meat products.  The WTO’s latest action means that its earlier ruling against the COOL requirements … Continue Reading

Un-COOL

WTO rejects U.S. appeal of COOL ruling. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) implemented country of origin labeling (COOL) rules, requiring meat labels to indicate where animals were born, raised, and slaughtered.  Meatpacking and livestock commodity groups in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico challenged the COOL requirements via appeal to the World Trade … Continue Reading
LexBlog

We and our analytics and advertising providers may use cookies and similar technologies to enhance the browsing experience, facilitate sharing of content, and generate statistics about use of the website. For more information or to change your preferences, click here.

I Agree