International Egg and Poultry Review
By the USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service - This is a weekly report looking at international developments concerning the poultry industry, this week looking at the trade dispute between the US and EU.European Union
The European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have been in a
trade dispute since 1997 regarding equivalency of poultry
slaughterhouse inspection systems. Initially, the EU banned poultry
imports from the US because the EU mandated high standards of
cleanliness at all stages of production in their sytem, while the US
approves the use of chlorinated water as a decontaminate at the end
of the production process. In light of the disagreement, the US and
EU entered into negotiations seeking a Veterinary Equivalence
Agreement. When no agreement was reached by April 30, 1997, the
US retaliated with a counter ban on all poultry imports from EU. The
EU then appealed to the World Trade Organization on August 18,
1997. The EU argued that the US ban is a violation of the Sanitary/
Phytosanitary Agreement of GATT.
As a result of EU requirements, the poultry ban has resulted in an
estimated loss of $50 million annually to U.S. poultry exporters. The
US ban on EU poultry is estimated to have halted $1 million worth of
poultry imports. A much broader trade war was averted including
other meat items with the Meat Equivalency Agreement of April 30,
1997. The frame work agreed to in April, 1997 allowed the signing of
the Veterinary Equivalency Agreement on July 20, 1999 between the
EU and the US.
The agreement covered more than $1.5 billion in US animal and
animal product exports to the EU and an equal value of EU exports to
the US. Specifically, Commission Decision 2003/863/EC established
model health certificates for the importation of gelatin and collagen
from the US. The concept of the equivalency agreement also allowed
veterinary inspection requirements to differ between the US and EU,
but ensured the US’s right to establish its own level of public health
protection.
The EU also committed in the 1997 agreement to undertake a scientific
study on the use of anti-microbial treatments. The results of this
study were released on October 30, 1998. The report recommended
that anti-microbial treatment should only be used as part of an overall
strategy for pathogen control throughout the whole production chain.
Although chlorine was rejected as an anti-microbial treatment, TSP
and lactic acid were deemed more acceptable.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has completed its risk
analysis of three different antimicrobial products for use in processing
poultry. The EFSA has agreed with the United States Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) findings that the use of the three antimicrobials
would pose no food-safety hazard to consumers. A committee vote is
expected sometime early in the summer of 2005. If the governing
committee approves the products and resulting new rules, some think
the new rules could take effect in early 2006. The new rules would
again allow US poultry into the EU market and possibly allow EU
poultry into the US when the retaliatory measures are lifted.
However, Finland and Sweden are in opposition to the new rules
since they believe anti microbial treatment is not necessary for poultry.
In a compromise, the EFSA is also proposing that packaged treated
meat that has not been marinated, minced, or otherwise handled
should bear a special label that it has been treated. Some EU countries
would like to impose mandatory labeling on treated meat. It is unclear
how many EU counties will start treating poultry once the new rules
are passed, however, it is noted that salmonella is bigger problem
outside of the Nordic region.
In 2005, EU broiler meat production is expected to grow by less than
1 percent to just under 8 million tons. Improved feed costs following
droughts in 2003 and recovery from avian influenza are factors in the
broiler meat production growth. Production growth is expected in
Belgium/Luxemburg, Poland and Spain. Additionally in 2005, the
decoupling of subsidy payments for cereal grains will likely increase
the profitability of Hungarian and Polish broiler meat producers due to
the availability of low-cost feed grains.
The EU exports mostly low value cuts as well as mechanically deboned
meat (MDM). Even though Polish MDM exports to mainly Russia
experienced a 13 percent increase, EU exports in 2005 exports are
expected to increase by less than 1 percent driven by the modest
increase in production and also in part by stiff international competition
and unfavorable exchange rates. The increase in Poland’s MDM
exports came despite delays in the implementation of EU’s Russian
import allocation. The EU has also faced strong competition from
Brazil into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab emirates, which are also
two of the EU’s main export markets.
As of January 1, 2005, animal health certification is required for all
products that transit the EU immediately or transit after storage in the
EU. The shipments do not need public health statements required for
products destined to the EU consumer. Animal health certification is
needed for product intended to go to EU free zones, free warehouse
and premises of operators supplying cross border means of sea
transportation and EU customs warehouses. Recently 10 new
members joined the EU. These members are Cyprus, Czech
Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia
and Slovenia. Bulgaria and Romania have not yet concluded their
accession negotiations. They are expected to join the EU in 2007.
Source: USDA/FAS and various other news sources
To view the full report, including tables please click here
Source: USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service - 24th May 2005