Skip to main content

Hereford Angus Cross cattle are pictured on the Bell L ranch near Airdrie, Alta., in this Sept. 30, 2012 file photo.

TODD KOROL/REUTERS

Canada is looking at slapping duties on iconic U.S. products ranging from California wine to ketchup after the World Trade Organization (WTO) found the country's meat-labelling laws offside for a third time in five years.

A WTO appeal panel ruled that a U.S. law requiring grocery stores to list the country of origin on meat products discriminates against Canadian and Mexican livestock, in a decision made public Monday.

The Conservative government warned that it will strike back with punitive duties unless the U.S. ends the "blatantly protectionist" regulations, which its says are costing the North American cattle and hog industry more than $1-billion a year.

Story continues below advertisement

Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz insisted Canada will use "any and all means" to get the United States to repeal its labelling country-of-origin (COOL) legislation.

"Should the U.S. not fix COOL . . . Canada will impose retaliatory measures," Mr. Ritz told reporters via conference call from Saskatoon, Sask. "They must be aware that Canada will not blink."

While the WTO has acknowledged that the U.S. has a right to impose country-of-origin rules, it has so far objected to the means.

Ottawa has already identified 38 target products for retaliation. The list includes U.S. cattle and hogs, as well as a number of symbolic products, including California wine, Vermont maple syrup, Florida orange juice, ketchup and breakfast cereal.

Canada and Mexico won a similar case in 2012, but the U.S. Congress responded with new labelling legislation that farmers and meat packers found even more onerous, prompting the latest appeal.

Canada will be in a position to get WTO approval to strike back as early as two months from now, or roughly the time it would take for the U.S. to complete a final appeal -- something Mr. Ritz acknowledged the U.S. almost certainly will do.

Trade experts said that while Canada would be within its rights to retaliate, a full-blown trade war is unlikely.

Story continues below advertisement

"It's in the interests of both sides to settle this," argued Toronto trade lawyer Lawrence Herman. "If the U.S. can't resolve a dispute with Canada, it doesn't look very good for all the other trade deals the U.S. is involved in."

But Mr. Herman pointed out there is virtually no chance of reaching a settlement before U.S. midterm elections in early November.

A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said Washington is considering "all options," including an appeal.

"While the WTO continues to affirm the right of the United States to require country-of-origin labelling for meat products, we are disappointed that the compliance panels have found that the country-of-origin labelling requirements for beef and pork continue to discriminate against Canadian and Mexican livestock exports," spokesman Matthew McAlvanah said.

The case has taken five years to get this far. The U.S. started enforcing its labelling rules in 2008, cutting Canadian meat exports in half, according to the industry.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies