Latest news with #NationalCattlemen'sBeefAssociation
CNBC
08-05-2025
- Automotive
- CNBC
U.S.-U.K. trade deal: From Ford to McLaren, steel to beef, impact to be limited, says freight CEO
The U.S.-U.K. trade deal announced by President Trump on Thursday will result in some wins across the autos, agriculture and industrial sectors, but the overall impact on trade will be limited, according to a freight CEO whose company handles shipments across the Atlantic Ocean route. For most U.K. importers, the deal terms disclosed to date would not affect the majority of products, Andy Abbott, CEO of niche ocean liner company Atlantic Container Line, tells CNBC. "A lot of this deal is smoke and mirrors," Abbott said. "What we heard today is just noise for most U.K. imports. It doesn't affect the majority of products." For one, he said the U.K. government is not weakening its food standards on meat imports, so any hormone-treated beef from the U.S. "is not on the table." The National Cattlemen's Beef Association called the deal a "tremendous win," in a statement on Thursday, but the US Meat Export Federation said it needed more details. In autos, U.K.-manufactured cars are on the upper end of the pricing spectrum from automakers including Lotus, Rolls-Royce, Bentley, McLaren, Jaguar Land Rover, and Mini. So, while the deal will soften the blow for luxury car companies, "I don't see anyone moving from a British car to a Ford because of a 10% tariff," Abbott said. A separate deal for the U.K. when it comes to steel tariffs could be good news for U.S. companies like industrial equipment maker Cummins, and high-tech steel importers in the aerospace and auto sectors, Abbott said. A fact sheet from the White House calls for an alternative to the tariffs on steel and aluminum for the U.K. It also detailed a plan for the first 100,000 vehicles imported from U.K. car manufacturers each year to face a 10% rate, and any additional vehicles a 25% tariff. And it estimates a $5 billion opportunity for farm exports, including $700 million in ethanol and $250 million in beef and other ag products. But with the 10% tariffs as a baseline, Abbott says most British products imported to the U.S. are likely to get more expensive. "The news today may prompt U.S. importers of U.K. products to raise prices sooner rather than later, as they assume no relief below the 10% tariff level is coming," he said. "Most have been swallowing the extra cost until now." United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on CNBC on Thursday that this deal is the framework other countries should look to as a model, with the U.K. the sixth-largest economy in the world, and is "the exact type of deal we should be making." But Abbott's view of the deal's impact matches that of trade and market experts, such as Josh Lipsky, Atlantic Council senior director, who told CNBC on Thursday that the deal was limited in scope, and a "very small win." "Forty days out from 'Liberation Day' and the first win is U.S.-U.K. ... it's not great news," Lipsky said. He said it's a win for the U.K. to say it was first to reach a deal, but aside from that, he said the 10% baseline tariffs still in place are a sign that higher tariff rates stay on for longer. Oxford Economics said in an analysis on Thursday that with the baseline 10% tariff untouched, "tariff rates will be in the double digits for the foreseeable future." It added that anyone hoping for a major de-escalation in the trade war wasn't given any reason to believe this would spur it, and that "the lack of specifics suggests those headline figures could be spread over many years, and will include some purchases that would have been made anyway." There had been a surge in trade from Europe to the U.S. since April after Trump announced a pause on reciprocal tariffs for countries other than China, but those volumes have pulled back to more normal levels, Abbott said. The European Union launched a trade dispute against the U.S. tariffs at the World Trade Organization on Thursday. "The car carriers are canceling sailings now due to reduced volume," said Abbott, who added that his company has not cancelled sailings because of its niche business carrying oversized cargo, as well as containers, and not cars. "We are now getting space inquiries from European car manufacturers for the first time since Covid," he said. Recent trade data has shown evidence of a likely drop at East Coast ports following what already occurred at West Coast ports, where Chinese freight shipments and vessel visits have plummeted. The impact of the vessel cancellations coming to the East Coast has not been felt yet, but Abbott said he is expecting a pullback in the middle of May. "Everything I am seeing indicates that the frontloading from Europe has slowed down after the short surge that followed the 'pause' announcement," he said. "In Europe, the numbers are skewed a bit because of the Easter and May Day holidays, but the volumes now are just 'decent' and not spectacular – very similar to 2024 on U.S. imports." Abbott said European importers are waiting to see if the pause is extended, and if not, another surge could begin. "I expect another surge again in early June," Abbott said. For ACL, shippers can depart the U.K. as late as June 21 and still arrive in time before the current pause ends. "Most are looking at that date as their deadline. So, I don't expect anything unusual to occur before then unless some new proclamation is made," he said. While many U.S. exports to Europe remain healthy, including construction equipment, Abbott said autos are an exception. "What is troubling is we are seeing a big cargo hold on automobiles bound for Europe. The car companies cannot swallow a 25% tariff, and most consumers won't shell out an extra 25% for a new car." Abbott says one auto segment he is closely watching is the transport of used cars. There is some evidence of Americans buying more used cars instead of spending more on imports. A key used car price index hit its highest level since 2023, according to data released this week. Abbott said many ex-rental cars and leased cars end up getting shipped to West Africa, and it is a trade pattern that could change. "We have seen no changes in booking volume yet, but there are a lot of concerns from the traders about higher prices and reduced available volume in the months ahead," he said.
Fox News
30-04-2025
- Health
- Fox News
EXCLUSIVE: Cattle industry chief warns flesh-eating fly menaces US herds as Mexico yields on pest fight
The nation's top cattle industry leader sounded the alarm Tuesday that a flesh-eating fly infestation advancing through Mexico remains a dire threat to U.S. ranchers, even as the Trump administration claimed a key victory in efforts to stop it. Buck Wehrbein, president of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) and a cattle feeder from eastern Nebraska, praised Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins for taking aggressive action against the outbreak of the New World screwworm, a parasitic fly whose larvae can burrow into the flesh of livestock and often cause fatal wounds. But Wehrbein warned that with just one day left before a U.S. ultimatum expires, "the crisis is far from over" and American cattle herds remain in jeopardy. "If this screwworm crosses into the United States, it could devastate our industry," Wehrbein told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview. USDA THREATENS TO HALT MEXICAN BEEF IMPORTS OVER FLESH-EATING FLY CRISIS' "These parasites literally eat livestock alive. We eradicated them from the U.S. in the 1960s, and we're not about to let them take hold here again." Wehrbein noted that the U.S. government spent millions of dollars to wipe out New World screwworm decades ago – only for the pest to reemerge in Central America and begin creeping northward toward Texas. The screwworm was first detected in southern Mexico late last year, prompting U.S. authorities to scramble resources to contain it. The USDA temporarily halted imports of Mexican cattle from late November until February after a screwworm case surfaced in Chiapas, underscoring how seriously officials view the threat to America's food supply. Now, U.S. agriculture officials are racing to build a final barrier against the flesh-eating fly before it reaches the border. For decades, the United States and Mexico have relied on a sophisticated sterile insect technique (SIT) program, using aircraft to release millions of sterile male flies to keep screwworm populations in check. But that strategy was recently thrown into chaos amid bureaucratic interference by Mexican authorities, who U.S. officials say blocked and delayed critical fly-release missions just as the outbreak intensified. According to the USDA and cattle industry representatives, Mexico "failed to uphold their end" of the bi-national eradication effort by refusing landing permissions, charging import duties on U.S.-funded equipment and limiting fly drops to six days a week, conditions that officials say allowed the pest to spread further. Wehrbein did not hide his frustration. "We were pulling our hair out," he said. "The science is there to stop this bug, but not if the planes are grounded over paperwork. Every day of delay gave the screwworm a bigger foothold." In an April 26 letter obtained by Fox News Digital, Secretary Rollins gave Mexico an April 30 deadline to resolve the issues or face a halt in the import of live cattle, bison and equine, a move that would strike a blow to Mexico's ranching economy and tighten U.S. supply chains already under pressure. "It certainly got their attention," Wehrbein noted. "No one wants to shut down trade. That's a last resort that would hurt producers on both sides. But Secretary Rollins and President Trump made it crystal clear that protecting America's herds comes first." Wehrbein said the NCBA met with senior Mexican embassy officials in Washington last week to emphasize the urgency. "Ranchers in Mexico and the U.S. are on the same side here. We need this pest stopped," Wehrbein said. "It shouldn't take high-level threats to get commonsense cooperation." On Tuesday, Rollins posted on X that Mexico has agreed to allow U.S. sterile fly planes to land, calling it "a HUGE win for our American ranchers!" Fox News Digital has reached out to Secretary Rollins' office for further details and confirmation but has not yet received a response. Wehrbein welcomed the announcement, saying it marked a turning point, but not the end of the threat. "Getting those fly planes back in the air is absolutely critical. It's a relief to see Mexico finally do the right thing," he said. "Frankly, it should never have taken this long. But at least now we have a fighting chance to contain the outbreak before it reaches our border." While the flight permissions appear to have been restored, it remains unclear whether Mexico will waive the import duties or allow seven-day operations, both of which the USDA had demanded. Rollins has also called for a senior liaison from the Mexican government to ensure faster coordination moving forward. Longer term, Wehrbein said the U.S. needs to reconsider how much it relies on outside partners for biosecurity. "This situation shows why we need our own domestic supply of sterile flies," he said. "If we had a facility here at home cranking them out, we wouldn't be at the mercy of another country's cooperation." A veteran of the cattle industry, Wehrbein was raised on a farm in eastern Nebraska and spent years working in Texas commercial cattle feeding. He now operates a feedlot just outside Omaha and has served in leadership roles at both the state and national level. This year, he was elected president of the NCBA, the country's largest and oldest organization representing cattle producers, and has become the group's key voice in HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP "We love this industry. We're proud to feed the country and the world," Wehrbein said. "But it takes vigilance, cooperation and leadership to protect it. The screwworm is a reminder that we're always one outbreak away from disaster, and we've got to stay ahead of it."
![[Editorial] Sensitive trade issue](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fall-logos-bucket.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fkoreaherald.com.png&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
Korea Herald
02-04-2025
- Business
- Korea Herald
[Editorial] Sensitive trade issue
Lifting US beef import restrictions could awaken anxiety about health The Trump administration is likely to put pressure on South Korea to further open its import market to US beef. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association is said to have recently submitted an opinion letter on unfair trade practices by US trading partners to the Office of the US Trade Representative. In the letter, the US livestock lobby proposed that South Korea should start importing US beef regardless of what age the cattle were at the time of slaughter. The association identified South Korea's ban on importing US beef from cattle aged 30 months or older as an unfair trade practice. It pointed out that countries such as China, Japan and Taiwan have already removed similar restrictions and argued that Korea should follow suit. The association urged the US government to engage in discussions with Korea to eliminate the age limit. The USTR has published the National Trade Estimate report on significant foreign trade barriers each year since 1985. Its 2025 report due later this month is expected to be significant in establishing grounds for reciprocal tariffs Trump has vowed to impose. The Trump administration said it would impose reciprocal tariffs for nontariff barriers. Considering this position, it is expected to lean on Seoul to further open its imports of US goods. Restricting the cattle age for US beef is not a new notion. This issue was mentioned in the 2024 NTE report as one of the trade barriers between South Korea and the US, but the previous Joe Biden administration did not raise the issue formally. The Trump administration is different. It seeks countermeasures on US trading partners for their nontariff barriers. South Korea's restriction on cattle age could be a pretext for levying new tariffs. When it comes to importing beef, cattle age at the time of slaughter is an explosive issue. It was the subject of massive protests against the Lee Myung-bak administration in 2008 over its decision to resume the import of US beef from cattle of all ages. South Korea had suspended US beef imports after bovine spongiform encephalopathy, commonly known as 'mad cow disease,' was identified in the US in 2003. Startled by large-scale protests, the Lee administration renegotiated and agreed to import US beef only from cattle aged under 30 months, among which no case of the disease had been detected. South Korea has become one of the two largest importers of US beef. Korean cattle ranchers remain wary. In a statement, the Hanwoo Association said that scrapping the 30-month age restriction could lead to the spread of mad cow disease. They pointed out that the US has reported seven cases, the most recent being in May 2023. The association vowed to take actions if the government and National Assembly move to import US beef from cattle aged 30 months and over. Opening the agricultural market of a country is directly linked not only to the livelihoods of farmers, but also to public health. Food safety is a highly sensitive issue that cannot be easily conceded on. When it comes to importing items directly related to people's health, South Korea must err on the side of caution. Public concerns are still great over beef from cattle slaughtered at 30 months of age or older. As seen in the rough time that Korea has had due to concerns over mad cow disease, pressure to import food that people feel uneasy about could even stoke anti-American sentiment. Korea currently imports more beef from the US than anywhere else. Were the US to demand that Korea import US beef from cattle aged 30 months or older, it would appear to be excessive. Importing US beef is a sensitive issue. It could invite strong backlash and lead to an acute division of public opinion. Disinformation about mad cow disease must not grow rampant again, but there should also be no place for rash negotiations.
New York Times
14-03-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Who's Afraid of Lab-Grown Meat?
Curious to try a lab-grown chicken sandwich? Don't look to satiate your craving in Mississippi, which earlier this week moved to ban so-called cultivated or cell-derived meat. The proposed ban, unanimously passed by the House of Representatives, carries a $500 fine and up to three months in jail for anyone growing or selling such products within the state. The bill, which Gov. Tate Reeves of Mississippi, a Republican, is expected to sign, is the latest in a series of legal maneuvers by states seeking to constrain the nascent cell-cultured meat industry — despite the fact that such products are currently unavailable to consumers in the United States. In contrast with alternative-meat products like Impossible Burger, which are made entirely from plants, lab-grown meat starts as cells taken from an animal. By nourishing them with a cocktail of nutrients, scientists can coax these cells to develop into animal muscle, connective tissue or fat — the basic components of meat. Proponents say cultivated meat can address the many environmental impacts of farmed livestock and provide meat eaters a protein that does not require the slaughtering of animals. Last year, Florida and Alabama became the first states to outlaw the cultivation and sale of meat grown in laboratories, and a number of other states, including Nebraska and Georgia, are considering similar measures. The bans are unconstitutional, proponents say, and won't survive court challenges, some already underway. 'It's a whole lot of political theater,' said Suzannah Gerber, executive director of the Association for Meat, Poultry and Seafood Innovation, a trade group. The opposition to cultivated meat has mostly taken hold in red states, but the trend defies easy categorization. Trade groups like the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the Meat Institute have come out against restrictive measures, and Republican lawmakers in Wyoming and South Dakota have quashed similar bills, with many describing the proposed bans as anathema to conservative values like limited government and free trade. 'If we let the government decide what foods we eat and what medicines we take, our bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as the souls who live under tyranny,' State Senator Bob Ide of Wyoming, quoting Thomas Jefferson, said shortly before voting against the measure in his state. For now, the measures are unlikely to have much real world impact. Although the prospect of mass produced lab-grown meat has prompted breathless headlines and drawn billions in investment, its commercial viability remains unproven. Only two companies, Upside Foods and Good Meat, are currently authorized to sell cultured meat in the United States; the companies briefly sold limited quantities to a few restaurants, none of which were in states that have passed the bans. Earlier this month, the Food and Drug Administration granted regulatory clearance to a third company, Mission Barns, for a lab-grown pork fat product. In addition to being under F.D.A. oversight, cultivated meat products are regulated by the Department of Agriculture. Some opponents of cultivated meat traffic in falsehoods about the health risks of cultivated meat, while others, like Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, have embraced the opportunity to defend domestic livestock producers. But cultured meat has also been swept up in the nation's culture wars. That's in part because proponents often describe lab-grown meat as a 'no kill' humane alternative to farmed animal products. Many also see it as a way to reduce the environmental impacts of raising millions of cows, pigs and chickens — and of the large quantities of antibiotics required to keep them healthy in crowded feeding sheds. 'There's no way we can sustain healthy food the way we're doing today with livestock production, because we just don't have the land and the resources,' said David Kaplan, an expert on cellular agriculture at Tufts University. 'We need alternative options.' Such sentiments inflame politicians who look unkindly on vegetarians and environmentalists, and for whom the consumption of a juicy T-bone steak is an act of patriotism. Last May, in announcing his decision to sign the state's ban, Governor DeSantis sought to cast his stance as a blow against liberals. 'Today, Florida is fighting back against the global elite's plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals,' he said during a news conference. The environmental benefits of cultivated meat remain theoretical, and studies suggest that certain production methods could be energy intensive, especially if implemented on a large scale. Cultivated meat begins with a small sample of animal cells, which can be collected from fertilized eggs or tissue biopsies from living animals. The cells are nourished with nutrients, multiplying rapidly in large tanks called bioreactors. A variety of technical hurdles remain. It is much easier to create ground meat products than intact cuts of meat, and producing cultured meat is expensive and has been done only on a very small scale. Experts say that companies will need to drastically ramp up production, and bring down costs, in order for these products to really compete with conventional meat. Americans, it would seem, are ready to give cultivated meat a try. In a 2024 survey by Purdue University, two-thirds of respondents said that they would be open to eating cultivated chicken or beef in a restaurant. According to Joseph Balagtas, director of the school's Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability, which conducted the survey, consumers consistently report that taste and price are the biggest factors influencing their food decisions. Ultimately, he predicted, the fate of cultivated meat will depend on whether companies can clear those two bars. 'If it tastes good and it's affordable, then consumers will eat it,' he said. Last year, Good Meat began selling its cultivated chicken at a butcher shop in Singapore, the first country to approve lab-grown meat. Josh Tetrick, a founder and the chief executive of Eat Just, the parent company of Good Meat, said that the company had sold less than 100 pounds in the last six months. 'Can companies like ours figure out a way to manufacture this at scale, defined as tens of millions of pounds, at a cost that makes sense?' he asked. 'That's the big question.' For now, industry executives are trying to thwart the state restrictions. Upside Foods filed a federal lawsuit last August challenging the Florida law as unconstitutional. The Good Food Institute, an alternative meat advocacy group that is providing legal assistance to Upside Foods, argues that the bans violate the commerce clause of the Constitution, which bars states from interfering with interstate trade. The laws, experts say, also violate the so-called pre-emption doctrine, which gives federal laws precedence over state laws when the two conflict. 'These laws are pretty flagrantly in violation of both,' said Madeline Cohen, the institute's associate director of regulatory affairs. Backers of the Mississippi bill have not publicly explained their antipathy to cultivated meat; state legislators did not hold a public hearing or comment before unanimously voting for the ban. Representatives Bill Pigott and Lester Carpenter, two Republicans who introduced the legislation, did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Reeves, the Mississippi governor, declined to comment, as did the state's agriculture commissioner, Andy Gipson. Still, Mr. Gipson has not been shy in criticizing cultivated protein as hostile to farmers. 'I want my steak to come from farm-raised beef, not a petri dish from a lab,' he wrote last year on his website. Cultivated meat proponents describe the dichotomy as a false one, and many livestock farmers agree, saying they do not see cell-derived products as a threat to their livelihood. 'We know Americans love our product and will continue to buy it,' said Sigrid Johannes, a spokesperson for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. Doug Grant, a Mississippi native whose seafood start-up, Atlantic Fish Co., is seeking to produce black sea bass in the lab, agrees. He said his product, should it gain regulatory approval, would not put him in competition with local producers, noting that overfishing has led to declines in the black sea bass population, and that the species is difficult to raise in aquaculture pens. 'Mississippi raises a lot of catfish, but no one is talking about doing cultivated catfish,' Mr. Grant said. 'I understand that people are scared of new things, but no one is forcing consumers to buy these products. If you don't like them, you don't have to eat them.'
Korea Herald
13-03-2025
- Business
- Korea Herald
Hanwoo industry says 'No' to lifting ban on beef from older US cattle
The Hanwoo Association, a nonprofit overseeing Korea's beef industry, has strongly opposed lifting the 2008 ban on imports of US beef from cattle over 30 months old, citing potential public unease over mad cow disease. In a statement released Wednesday, the association warned on behalf of Korean livestock farmers that scrapping the 30-month restriction could lead to the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, which in turn could dampen the consumption of both US and Korean beef, known as hanwoo in Korean. Their opposition was triggered earlier this week when the National Cattlemen's Beef Association called on the Office of the United States Trade Representative to ease the 30-month age-based restriction on US beef. A USTR report last year also described the 30-month limit as a transitional measure, suggesting the need for further import liberalization. Yet, Korean livestock farmers remain wary, the Hanwoo Association said, arguing that mad cow disease remains a highly sensitive issue in Korea. They pointed out that the US has reported seven BSE cases — the most recent in May 2023 — and said that Korea's high volume of US beef imports is due to strict adherence to the 2008 agreement, rather than in spite of it. Amid an economic slump, the association also voiced worries that lifting non-tariff barriers like the cattle age restriction would further strain struggling Hanwoo farmers. In 2008, Korea and the US reached an agreement to allow only US beef from cattle under 30 months old to assuage public fears over BSE. Korea currently imports more beef from the US than anywhere else. Among $3.95 billion worth of beef imports from abroad last year, US beef accounted for 56.8 percent of the total, according to the Korea Trade Statistics Promotion Institute. As of Thursday, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs stated that the Korean government has not received any formal complaints or demands from the US regarding the 30-month restriction, and no concrete discussions were currently underway.
