Grocers Win Delay in Food Labeling Rules
By CHRIS CZIBORR
Score one for grocers in their battle to fight a food labeling law they say is too expensive.
The deadline for U.S. grocery stores to put country-of-origin labeling on fruits, vegetables and meat,originally Sept. 30,has been pushed to 2006. Congress finalized the rules last year, but food industry lobbying convinced Senate lawmakers last month to vote for a two-year delay in implementing the labeling rules.
The labeling delay applies to fruits, vegetables and livestock. Fish still will require country-of-origin labeling this September.
The delay could be a sign that Congress will kill the rules altogether or at least water them down.
“Normally a delay is not a good sign for legislation,” said Avi Crane, vice president of Santa Ana-based Calavo Growers Inc., a cooperative of California avocado farmers and importer during off-season here. “It got delayed when industry demonstrated to Congress the tremendous cost and complications of implementing this law that would ultimately be charged to the consumer.”
Calavo was a supporter of the labeling rules.
“In this case there is a strong enough desire among consumers that I suspect the rules would come back again as a more diluted regulation that will fit Congress’ intent and objectives.”
The cooperative imports about 15% of its avocados annually from Mexico. During the winter months, another 15% comes from Chile and New Zealand.
The National Farmers Union and American Farm Bureau Federation also backed the rules. They said labeling could be used to promote domestically grown food.
Grocers,who would’ve been responsible for compliance,have been against it, as have distributors.
“I’m for the delay because I believe it’s an additional cost that doesn’t benefit the consumer,” said Justo Frias, president of Santa Ana-based Gigante USA Inc., a Hispanic supermarket operator that’s part of Mexico’s Grupo Gigante SA de CV. “I’d prefer that it get scrapped altogether. Any costs of implementing the rules would just get passed along to consumers.”
The Agriculture Department estimates the rules, which were part of the 2002 Farm Bill, would have cost the food industry $3.9 billion to comply in the first year alone. Food industry representatives said they believed the industry would have to shell out another $600 million a year in the next decade.
On top of that, companies that failed to comply would’ve been fined up to $10,000 per violation and could’ve been subject to audits to ensure compliance.
Many distributors and grocers already have country-of-origin labels on most imported food. But the rules would’ve required even domestic products to have a “USA” label, which is something a lot of grocers and distributors don’t have.
Karen Caplan, president of Frieda’s Inc., a Los Alamitos distributor of specialty produce, said consumers care more about the price of a product than where it’s from.
“Quality and price are way above the need to know where it’s from among consumers,” Caplan said. “Country of origin is not high on the radar screen.”
Frieda’s has lobbied against the rules.
Fruit and vegetable growers, as well as cattlemen, are meeting to come up with voluntary guidelines for country-of-origin labeling, according to Caplan, who also is chairman of the board of the Washington, D.C.-based United Fresh Fruit & Vegetable Association. The food industry also is working toward providing nutrition labeling for produce and meat, she said.
John Motley, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based Food Marketing Institute, a trade group that includes Albertson’s Inc. and others, said he believes the Senate delay vote was a case of cooler heads prevailing.
“It was going to be complicated, costly and bureaucratic,people began to think there was a simpler way to do it,” Motley said.
