President-elect Donald Trump insists he is not scaling back plans for an across-the-board tariff on U.S. imports, rejecting a Washington Post report suggesting aides are crafting a pared-down proposal.
Trump repeatedly floated a universal tariff of up to 20% during the campaign. On Truth Social on Monday, Trump said the Post report “incorrectly states that my tariff policy will be pared back.”
The Trump transition team did not respond to Agri-Pulse’s request for clarification.
Some Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee, including Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R- N.Y., told Agri-Pulse in November that they favored a more targeted approach to tariffs. “We'll see what they propose. I haven't seen any specifics,” Malliotakis said Monday.
Johnson lays out strategy for passing reconciliation bill
House Republicans appear to be leaning into the idea of a one-bill budget reconciliation process, which Trump backs. The idea is to wrap a range of Trump’s policy priorities into one giant bill, including tax and spending cuts, border security funding and energy development.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., noted Monday that in Trump’s first term in 2017 the first reconciliation bill failed. Twenty Republicans later voted “no” on the following budget resolution. And at the time, Republicans had a much larger margin in the House than they do now.
“Guess what: We can’t lose two [members],” Scalise said. “When I shared that with the president, you could tell they understood. I mean there’s serious risk in having multiple bills that have to pass to get your agenda through.”
Scalise said there’s a risk of losing Republicans on the second package. Using a one-bill approach, he said they can get the process started in the next few weeks.
Keep in mind: Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., prefers a two-step process that would leave tax issues to a second reconciliation bill.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called it a “national security imperative” to address issues like the border as quickly as possible. “But Speaker [Mike] Johnson feels like he can’t do two bills. The Democrats did,” Graham said, referring to what Democrats accomplished in President Biden’s first two years. “So, we’ll see how this plays out, but there are so many threats out there, I think this delay equals danger.”
Consumer groups disappointed with new lead action levels in baby foods
Consumer groups say FDA’s new action levels for lead in processed baby foods don’t go far enough.
On Monday the agency released final guidance setting action levels at 10 parts per billion of lead for packaged baby foods with fruit, some vegetables, yogurts, custards, single ingredient meats and mixtures that include grain and meat-based mixes. Additionally, FDA set an action limit of 20 parts per billion for single-ingredient root vegetable products and dry infant cereals.
The levels are the same as what FDA initially proposed two years ago, eliciting frustration from some consumer groups.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest says it urged the agency to revise its approach to prioritize public health protection, “rather than setting levels that most of industry could meet.”
Similarly, Brian Ronholm, director of food policy for Consumer Reports, criticizes the guidance for seemingly catering to industry standards rather than consumer health.
"Given that there is no safe level of lead in children, the action levels outlined in this guidance are virtually meaningless because they're based more on industry feasibility and not on what would best protect public health,” Ronholm says in a statement. “It's not clear why they even solicited comments on the guidance since they pretty much ignored them."
Plant-based foods group says new labeling recommendations from FDA will hurt market
On Monday FDA also proposed nonbinding guidance urging more specific labeling for plant-food alternatives to animal products.
The recommendations suggest manufacturers prominently display more details about the ingredients used in a product rather than just saying they are “plant-based.” The guidance covers items like alternatives to eggs, poultry, meat, cheese and more, but doesn’t include plant-based alternatives to milk.
The recommendations create “unnecessary burdens for plant-based producers that may make it more difficult to keep their products on grocery store shelves,” says Madeline Cohen, associate director of regulatory affairs at the Good Food Institute, which promotes non-meat-based protein.
She says the guidance doesn’t identify any existing consumer confusion with the ingredients used in plant-based alternatives.
Keep in mind: The proposed guidance doesn’t set legally enforceable rules. Given the timing, it leaves the final decision on the issue to the incoming Trump administration.
FDA finalizes new guidance for animal feed ingredient reviews
FDA also has finalized new guidance for an interim animal feed ingredient review pathway intended to replace a now-ended partnership with the Association of American Feed Control Officials, a group that represents state-level regulators.
Under the newly finalized Animal Food Ingredient Consultation (AFIC) pathway, the agency will take on full responsibility for reviews of plant materials, grains and human food byproducts, replacing a previous memorandum of understanding that allowed the agency to work in tandem with state regulators.
American Feed Industry Association President and CEO Constance Cullman says her group “will work closely with the FDA to ensure that this program is efficient, inclusive and capable of accommodating the diversity of ingredients essential to animal nutrition.”
Final word
USDA is adding $650 million to the kitty for the Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops grants program and raising the payment limit from $125,000 to $900,000. The Farm Service Agency also has extended the deadline for applicants until this Friday. The deadline had been Wednesday.
The agency says it raised the payment limit in response to comments from stakeholders. FSA cites higher marketing costs related to specialty crops due to perishability, transporting and packaging, “which present greater financial challenges maintaining and expanding markets.”
The program now has $2.65 billion.
