The European Commission states that stricter environmental and climate tariffs on the import of food products from non-EU countries are not in violation of the legal provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO). With this, the European Commission gives a positive signal for the first time regarding the introduction of so-called “mirror clauses” in trade agreements.
Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski proposed to the 27 agriculture ministers on Monday in Luxembourg to now put this to the test – ‘case by case’. An accompanying test report by the European Commission was recently published. The European Commission will inform the ministers about the consultation that was held between January and March among stakeholders.
For a long time, farmers and livestock breeders have requested equal production criteria or additional tariffs on ‘cheap’ food products from non-EU countries, primarily to protect the European market. But the WTO does not allow the introduction of such ‘import penalties’ because they are considered ‘distortions of competition’ and ‘preferential treatment of domestic companies’.
However, now that the European Union is introducing new standards for animal welfare, biodiversity, and health with the Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategies, the EU plans to also require these new climate criteria for imported food. And if countries do not (or cannot) meet these, the EU may impose extra tariffs to establish a ‘level playing field’ again.
Austrian MEP Simone Schmiedtbauer (ÖVP/EPP) calls this an “interim victory.” For the first time, the European Commission is sending a positive signal for ‘mirror clauses’ in trade agreements. France has strongly advocated for this over the past six months.
“The European Commission is no longer opposed to the project. This is a milestone victory on which we will build our further efforts,” said the MEP. “It is high time the European Commission understands the demand of farmers’ unions that production standards for European farmers must also apply to imported agricultural products and food,” Schmiedtbauer explained in an article on the Austrian farmers’ union STBB website.
To test the legal feasibility in practice, a “case-by-case evaluation” should take place. Dutch Agriculture Minister Henk Staghouwer stated in a parliamentary letter last week that he also supports this trial ‘case-by-case’ approach.
He does point out, however, that it’s not just quality that determines price, but that different circumstances apply per country. “At the same time, other factors such as infrastructure, knowledge, and labor costs also influence the ultimate competitive position of companies. It must be considered what is possible under the WTO’s multilateral framework and which measures are desirable,” Staghouwer said in his letter to parliament.
“The same production standards for imported products – that is what local farmers demand, and they deserve it. This strengthens the competitiveness of European farmers and helps a regional approach to agriculture to achieve a breakthrough. Consumers, animals, the environment, and climate benefit from this, and last but not least, we farmers,” Schmiedtbauer said.