News

GI protections could be core principle in future trade agreements

More than half of U.S. Senators are urging the U.S. Trade Rep and Ag Secretary to protect U.S. food and wine names in future trade negotiations.

The Senators say countries outside of North America exploit protections meant for valid geographical indications (GI), are limiting competition, and blocking exports.  They want the USTR and USDA to make geographical indications a core policy objective in all trade-related discussions to secure market access for the food and ag value chain.

Dairy groups say this letter will be an essential component of trade agreements moving forward.

U.S. Dairy Export Council president and former USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack says, “This letter from the Senators I think takes it to a different level because it basically puts our government on notice of the significance and importance of this, and the need for it to be incorporated in agreements in sections and areas in other than intellectual property.” He says the issue could potentially be raised in ongoing trade negotiations with the United Kingdom, Japan, and China.

Jim Mulhern, head of the National Milk Producers Federation, says the European Union’s use GI restrictions is causing harm to the nation’s dairy industry. “This extension of what is a legitimate concept of geographical indications has been bastardized by the European’s to then take it into common food names that have been made for many, many years and it really is a very protectionist move,” he says.

A study by Informa Economics had found if the EU’s efforts are not stopped, U.S. cheese prices could fall by 14 percent leading to revenue losses of up to $20 billion for the sector, and more than $72 billion in lost farm revenue over 10 years.

The letter is also supported by the Consortium for Common Food Names, American Farm Bureau Federation, North America Meat Institute, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and Wine Institute.