US meat bodies protest over new tax proposal
The Obama Administration indicated an intention to impose meat inspection taxes on meat businesses in its 2013 budget proposal for the US Department for Agriculture (USDA). There are two proposed taxes: a food safety services user fee, to recover part of the cost of providing meat inspection services; and an additional fee collected from plants that need additional inspections or services, due to a failure to meet required standards.
Meat, agriculture and food industry organisations – including the American Meat Institute, the American Association of Meat Processors, the American Sheep Industry Association, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the National Chicken Council, the National Farmers Union and the National Meat Association – have objected to the proposal on the grounds that it would represent annual costs of $13m for processors, potentially harming their business viability and forcing them to increase the cost of meat.
In a joint letter to Debbie Stabenow, chairwoman of the US Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, the organisations stated: “These proposed fees represent a food safety tax on consumers and not just a fee on processors. We urge you to reject the Administration’s request for these new food safety taxes.
“Meat, poultry and egg product inspection is a public health and safety program required by federal law and has been funded through tax dollars for over a century. Food safety inspection benefits everyone and therefore should be paid for through appropriated funds, which previous Congresses have agreed with.”
The letter added that the tax would mean that government would have less accountability and less incentive to manage the costs, results and efficiencies of its food inspection service.
“We urge Congress to continue to oppose proposals to assess new user fees, either in whole or in part, to fund federally mandated meat, poultry or egg product inspection. In this fragile economy, a new food safety tax could put jobs at risk and raise prices for consumers,” the letter continued.
AMI spokesman Eric Mittenthal told GlobalMeatNews: "[We will] continue to stress the meat and poultry statutes which currently provide that, other than for overtime, the cost of inspection should be borne by the United States, and that makes sense because ensuring the safety of the food supply is a public good."
