The current 100% import tariff on Roquefort has never proven to be a significant impediment for its consumption. But what would an increase to 300% do? We may have to find out, thanks to one of Bush's very last acts while in office, which tripled the rate and all but prohibited the import of this French gem.
Until Obama rolls back the tax -- we're optimistic that he'd do so for the sake of cheese -- it's up to us to get our fill until the new rate goes into effect in March. Here's why the rate has gone up, and why the American government has all but declared war on French food imports.
The act, which Bush solidified just a few days before leaving office, is a continuation of an attack on French imports that started in the late 90's under Clinton in order to pressure the French to lift their import ban on American beef treated with hormones. (Who can blame them?)
By the prices that would be required to support it, the new tariff could just as easily be considered an outright ban on Roquefort. "We expect that a 300% duty will have the desired effect on imports," implies U.S. trade spokeswoman Gretchen Hamel.
Bush may have had more on his mind than just admonishing the French for their resolute opposition to hormone-infested meat. The new tariff has been construed as a not-so-subtle political act denouncing the French government. We can't help but recall the cringe-worthy Freedom Fries debacle after the French emphatically withdrew troops from the American-led invasion of Iraq.
But what's worst is that this act is affecting French farmers the most. Although exports to America contribute only 2% to Roquefort's overall distribution, it represents no small chunk: our allotment weighs in at about 400 tons of cheese per year, all being produced in the small French town of Roquefort in the Midi-Pyrénées. In fact, Roquefort production is the town's primary source of income.
Roquefort's production has been protected since 1411! It's a shame that our government can't support one of the cornerstones of French food tradition merely because the French stand by their belief in hormone-free meat. But hopefully, with the help of the new administration, we won't have to examine these implications.
Related: The Cheesemonger: Why is Blue Cheese Blue?
Image: Flickr member doozzle licensed under Creative Commons.
It's not a French ban on U.S. beef - it's a European Union ban on U.S. and Canadian beef. And, for what it is worth, the WTO ruled that the ban wasn't based on scientific evidence and allowed the U.S. and Canada to "punish" the EU with these sorts of tariffs.
I'm not pro-hormone, but there is an argument that this is really about protecting EU beef producers - not for health reasons.
http://hpi.georgetown.edu/lifesciandsociety/pdfs/beef042099.pdf
view caw261's profile
You can sign a petition against the new tariffs here: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/support-roquefort-cheese
view jarobinson1's profile
I completely agree with caw261. Most tariffs are about protecting domestic producers from competition. However, Bush's attempt to pressure the EU only serves to punish American consumers of French products. I don't think either tariff should exist - if French (or other EU) citizens want to eat hormone-treated American beef, then their governments shouldn't stop them, any more than our government should stop us from eating delicious, delicious Roquefort cheese.
In the meantime, bring on the Gorgonzola.
view jarobinson1's profile
Hmmm...I wonder what the tariff is here in Canada? I'm going to have to see if Canadians are also pushing this kind of agenda.
I love roquefort. In fact, it was one of my pregnancy cravings. I couldn't get enough of it with pears. While I might occasionally substitute a great Ontario blue cheese such as Tiger blue if the prices of the French cheese went skyward, I'd still splurge on Roquefort once in awhile. Too good to pass up!
view Dana McCauley's profile
I am an American and I don't want to eat disgusting hormone-laden beef either.
But I do want to eat roquefort. Boo hoo.
view JudiAU's profile
It's a good cheese, but there are so many great American blues that I haven't actually bought Roquefort in years. MSNBC has an article out about exporting US raw cheeses to Europe, and highlights one of my favorites, Rogue River Blue, a cowsmilk that's aged under local grape leaves and pear cider, that takes on a piquancy that almost reaches Roquefort.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29304860/
And as long as we can still import Stichelton, I'm happy.
view cheflaura's profile
Gosh, and I had almost made it a whole week without being given another reason to be pissed off about the plague that was W.
asshat.
view splatgirl's profile
I second on supporting local cheese makers. Don't get me wrong I LOVE Roquefort, but we have great American blue here. I think Point Reyes blue is wonderful, and don't overlook Maytag blue. Supporting local farms makes sense for everyone.
view thill's profile
Living in Europe, I agree with the ban of hormone-treated beef. I am grateful to not have to feed my children such meat. I find the American trade position that such beef offers consumers choice ironic -- what sort of choice do North American consumers have as a result? Organic beef is hard to find, and often prohibitively expensive, so as a result North American consumers often have little choice but to eat hormone-treated beef. Europeans are spared that dilemma.
caw261 is linking to the American trade argument, but here is
"On 16 October, the WTO Appellate Body handed down a mixed ruling on the dispute. In their decision, the EU was granted the authority to continue their ongoing restrictions, while Canada and the US were also allowed to continue imposing trade sanctions totalling over US$ 125 million annually (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 31 October 2008, http://ictsd.net/i/news/biores/32483/).
The Appellate Body held that it was unable to determine whether the EU’s assessment of human risk brought the European trading bloc into compliance with the SPS Agreement, faulting the lower WTO panel for numerous evidentiary and procedural errors. Concluding, the Appellate Body recommended that the parties re-initiate WTO dispute settlement proceedings.
Following the WTO Body’s recommendation, on 22 December Brussels requested formal consultations with Canada and the US over the legality of both the EU’s longstanding ban as well as Canadian and American sanctions.
By requesting formal consultations, the EU is inviting scrutiny of its own trade policies, an unusual move at the WTO. But Brussels says that it is confident that the import ban is legally justified.
“We are convinced that our legislation on hormones is fully in line with WTO law: the restrictions on hormone-treated beef are based on solid scientific evidence showing risks for human health,” EU spokesperson Peter Power said. “We are thus very confident and hope that the US and Canada will engage constructively in these consultations and that we can find a solution to this long-lasting dispute.”
The 300% tariff scheduled to go into effect on March 23rd is typical US trade hardball, which makes it so disliked the world over. It does not address the issues. (no such tariff on the Canadian side -- not so far, anyway).
view mschatelaine's profile