Business

Why America’s ‘Beautiful Beef’ Is a Trade War Sore Point for Europe

Published

6 months ago

May 11, 2025

Why America’s ‘Beautiful Beef’ Is a Trade War Sore Point for Europe

Hendrik Dierendonck, a second-generation butcher who has become, as he describes it, “world famous in Belgium” for his curated local beef, thinks Europe’s way of raising cattle results in varied and delicious cuts that European consumers prize.

“They want hormone-free, grass-fed,” Mr. Dierendonck explained recently as he cut steaks at a bloody chopping block in his Michelin-starred restaurant, which backs onto the butchery his father started in the 1970s. “They want to know where it came from.”

Strict European Union food regulations, including a ban on hormones, govern Mr. Dierendonck’s work. And those rules could turn into a trade-war sticking point. The Trump administration argues that American meat, produced without similar regulations, is better — and wants Europe to buy more of it, and other American farm products.

“They hate our beef because our beef is beautiful,” Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said in a televised interview last month. “And theirs is weak.”

Questions of beauty and strength aside, the administration is right about one thing: European policymakers are not keen on allowing more hormone-raised American steaks and burgers into the European Union.

Further opening the European market to American farmers is just one ask on a laundry list of requests from the Trump team. American negotiators also want Europe to buy more American gas and trucks, to change their consumption taxes and to weaken their digital regulations.

Trade officials within the European Union are willing to make many concessions to avert a painful and protracted trade war and to avert higher tariffs. They have offered to drop car tariffs to zero, to buy more gas and to increase military purchases. Negotiators have even suggested they could buy more of certain agricultural products, like soy beans.

But Europeans have their limits, and those include America’s treated T-bones and acid-washed chicken breasts.

“E.U. standards, particularly as they relate to food, health and safety, are sacrosanct — that’s not part of the negotiation, and never will be,” Olof Gill, a spokesman for the European Commission, the E.U. administrative arm, said at a recent news conference. “That’s a red line.”

It is not clear how serious the Americans are about pushing for farm products like beef and chicken. But the topic has surfaced repeatedly. When U.S. officials unveiled a trade deal with Britain on Thursday, for instance, beef was part of the agreement.

But according to Britain, the deal would simply make it cheaper for Americans to export more hormone-free beef to the country and would not weaken British health and safety rules, which are similar to those in the E.U.

When it comes to the European Union, the United States can already export a large amount of hormone-free beef without facing tariffs, so an equivalent deal would do little to help American farmers.

But diplomats and European officials have repeatedly insisted that there is no wiggle room to lower those health and safety standards. And when it comes to meat-related trade restrictions more broadly, there is very little. Chicken, for instance, faces relatively high tariffs, and there is limited appetite to lower those rates.

That’s because Europe is protective of both its food culture and its farms.

Where America tends to have massive agricultural businesses, Europeans have maintained a more robust network of smaller family operations. The 27-nation bloc has about nine million farms, compared with about two million in the United States.

Subsidies and trade restrictions help to keep Europe’s agricultural system intact. The European Union allocates a big chunk of its budget to supporting farmers, and a mix of tariffs and quotas limit competition in sensitive areas. E.U. tariffs on agricultural products are around 11 percent overall, based on World Trade Organization estimates, though they vary hugely by product.

And the bloc could place higher tariffs on U.S. farm goods if trade negotiations fall through. Their list of products that could face retaliatory levies, published Thursday, includes beef and pork, along with many soy products and bourbon.

But it’s not just tariffs limiting European imports of American food. Strict health and safety standards also keep many foreign products off European grocery shelves.

Take beef. Mr. Dierendonck and other European farmers are banned from using growth stimulants, unlike in the United States, where cattle are often raised on large feedlots with the use of hormones. European safety officials have concluded that they cannot rule out health risks for humans from hormone-raised beef.

To Mr. Dierendonck, the rules also fit European preferences. The lack of hormones results in a less homogenous product. “Every terroir has its taste,” he explains, describing the unique “mouth feel” of the West Flemish Red cow he raises on his farm on the Belgian coast.

But farming beef without hormones is more expensive. And American exporters have to adhere to hormone limitations when they send steaks, hamburgers or dairy products to E.U. countries, which European farmers argue is only fair. Otherwise, imports produced using cheaper methods could put European farmers out of business.

“We cannot accept import products that do not meet our production standards,” said Dominique Chargé, a cattle farmer from the west of France who is also president of La Coopération Agricole, a national federation representing French agricultural cooperatives.

The result is that the United States does not sell much beef to Europe. It makes more economic sense for U.S. farmers to sell into markets that allow hormone-raised cattle.

One frequent American complaint is that European health standards are more about preference than actual health.

American scientists have called the risks of hormone use in cows minimal. And though E.U. officials and consumers frequently sneer at America’s “chlorinated chickens,” that rallying cry is a bit dated. American farmers have for years been using a vinegar-like acid, and not chlorine, to rinse poultry and kill potential pathogens.

Some studies in Europe have suggested that such treatments are not a replacement for raising a chicken in a way that makes it pathogen-free from the start. American scientists have concluded that the rinses do their job and are not harmful to humans.

“I don’t know that it’s really about the science,” said Dianna Bourassa, a microbiologist specializing in poultry at Auburn University. “In my microbiological opinion, there are no health implications.”

From the perspective of European farmers, though, whether the health risks are genuine is besides the point. So long as European voters oppose chemical-treated chicken and hormone-treated beef, Europe’s farmers cannot use those farming techniques.

“When you speak to our farmers, it’s about fairness,” explained Pieter Verhelst, a member of the executive board of a Belgian farmers’ union, Boerenbond. “The policy framework we start with is totally different, and those issues are mostly totally out of the hands of farmers.”

And European consumers do seem to support E.U. food and farming rules.

Farmer protests last year loudly opposed more beef imports from South American countries, in part over concerns that the cows might be raised with a growth hormone. An Obama-era trade deal died in part thanks to popular anger over “chlorine chicken” (“Chlorhünchen,” to derisive Germans.)

E.U. public opinion polling has suggested that policies that promote farming and farmers are very popular. In a 2020 poll fielded in-person across the bloc, nearly 90 percent of Europeans agreed with the idea that agricultural imports “should only enter the E.U. if their production has complied with the E.U.’s environmental and animal welfare standards.”

In Europe, including at Mr. Dierendonck’s butchery and farm, there’s a value placed on the old-fashioned, small-scale way of doing things, policymakers and farmers agreed. Mr. Dierendonck does buy some American beef for customers who ask for it — it’s easy to cook, he said — but it’s a small part of the business.

“I like American beef very much, but I don’t like it too much,” said Mr. Dierendonck, explaining that to him, the beef his European suppliers provide is varied, like a fine wine. “For me, it’s about keeping traditions alive.”

Related Topics:Agriculture and Farming beef Belgium Customs (Tariff)Donald J europe Featured food International Trade and World Market meat trump

Click to comment

Business

Amazon’s Zoox offers free robotaxi rides in San Francisco

Published

8 hours ago

November 18, 2025

Press Room

Amazon’s Zoox offers free robotaxi rides in San Francisco

Amazon-owned Zoox is offering free rides on its San Francisco fleet of boxy, driverless taxis.

The company said Tuesday it is providing the rides to people who download the Zoox app and join a waitlist. The sneak peek is part of a program in which riders provide feedback about the robotaxis before they become more widely available.

The preview shows that Zoox is moving closer to expanding its robotaxi service in San Francisco, a city filled with hundreds of self-driving cars from major rival Waymo. Zoox’s robotaxi service will be available in the SoMa, Mission and Design District neighborhoods.

“We have seen incredible interest in Zoox in this market and are excited about this first step to bring our purpose-built robotaxi experience to more people,” Aicha Evans, Zoox’s chief executive, said in a statement.

Headquartered in Foster City, Calif., the company has been testing autonomous technology in San Francisco since 2017. Zoox employees have been trying out the robotaxis, but this will be the first time the rides will be available to the general public in America’s tech capital. The company hasn’t said when it plans to start charging for its robotaxi service in San Francisco.

The robotaxi race has been ramping up in California, a hotbed for testing autonomous vehicles. Waymo, owned by Google parent company Alphabet, rolled out its service to highways and Bay Area airports. Ride-hailing company Uber teamed with Lucid Group and Nuro to launch robotaxis in the San Francisco Bay Area next year. Tesla said it would start testing robotaxis with drivers in the Bay Area.

Zoox’s boxy, aloe green vehicle, described by some people as a “toaster on wheels,” looks different from its rivals. Designed to fit four people, the electric vehicles don’t have a steering wheel or pedals and the doors slide open and closed. While people face each other during the ride, some who have tested the vehicles reported feeling motion sickness from moving backward. The robotaxis include wireless charging, an emergency call button and a touchscreen to control the music and the vehicle’s temperature.

The company has a fleet of about 50 robotaxis across San Francisco and Las Vegas. In September the company started allowing the public to hail its robotaxi service around the Las Vegas Strip. Zoox opened a massive facility in Hayward, Calif., and said it will be able to assemble more than 10,000 robotaxis a year as demand for its services grows.

People are using self-driving vehicles more, but robotaxis also have ignited concerns about job loss, safety and privacy. Santa Monica residents have complained about the beeping noises from Waymos. In San Francisco and Los Angeles, people have vandalized the cars and set them on fire. And after a Waymo ran over KitKat, a beloved cat, San Francisco residents have expressed more safety concerns about self-driving taxis.

Some companies have failed to launch robotaxis. Last year automaker General Motors shuttered the development of its Cruise robotaxis, citing high costs and increased competition. Cruise lost the permits it needed to continue testing in California because of public safety risks after a woman was dragged underneath one of its robotaxis in San Francisco.

Zoox issued voluntary software recalls to address potential safety concerns. In May an electric scooter rider in San Francisco sustained minor injuries after the person struck an unoccupied Zoox vehicle that braked at an intersection. When the rider fell next to the robotaxi, it began to move but then stopped. The company said in a blog post it updated its software to improve how it tracks nearby pedestrians and prevent movement when a person is very close to the vehicle.

The amount of time it will take to get off the waitlist in San Francisco will depend on demand and the availability of its robotaxis. Zoox said there isn’t a limit to how many people can join the waitlist, but it aims to remove it next year.

The company also partnered with Tartine Manufactory, a popular bakery in San Francisco that’s well-known for its bread and pastries. Zoox posted on social media that people who download its app and sign up for the waitlist from Nov. 15 to 22 will be able to get a free pastry while supplies last.

Zoox has been testing its robotaxis in other major cities, including Los Angeles, Seattle, Austin and Miami. Tech giant Amazon bought Zoox in 2020 for more than $1.2 billion.

Business

Sinclair pursues a deal with Scripps to spark more TV station consolidation

Published

1 day ago

November 17, 2025

Press Room

Sinclair pursues a deal with Scripps to spark more TV station consolidation

Television station owner Sinclair Inc. has taken an equity stake in fellow broadcaster E.W. Scripps, signaling its intent to become a behemoth in the shrinking field.

Sinclair disclosed its interest in Scripps, which owns stations in Fresno, Bakersfield, Buffalo, N.Y., and Billings, Mont., in a Securities & Exchange Commission filing Monday. Baltimore-based Sinclair, known for its conservative political bent, said it has acquired about 8% of Scripps’ equity by buying some of its publicly traded shares.

Sinclair disclosed that it has had “constructive discussions with [Scripps] for several months regarding a potential combination of the two companies.”

No deal has been reached.

Cincinnati-based Scripps, in a statement, suggested that it wasn’t interested in a tie-up with Sinclair, saying the Scripps board and management instead were “focused on driving value for all of the company’s shareholders through the continued execution of its strategic plan.”

“The board and management are aligned on doing only what is in the best interest of all of the company’s shareholders as well as its employees and the many communities and audiences it serves across the United States,” Scripps said.

Sinclair appears to be putting pressure on Scripps by making the stock purchases and the public disclosure. Scripps stock jumped 40% to $4.28 at the market close on Monday. The company is valued at about $363 million.

Sinclair shares also got a bounce, gaining 5% and closing at $16.87. The company’s market value is $1.2 billion.

Television station owners are hoping that President Trump and his appointments to the Federal Communications Commission will lift the government-imposed cap on broadcast ownership. Currently, stations are restricted from owning outlets that reach more than 39% of the U.S. population.

Sinclair currently owns or operates 185 television stations in 85 markets, according to its website.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has signaled a willingness to undertake a massive deregulation. The anticipated push has prompted a flurry of deals among broadcasters, who have seen their advertisers scatter and audiences decline as more consumers get their news through social media.

Sinclair, in its filing, made a nod to the changing political winds in Washington.

“Recent industry consolidation and intensifying competition reinforce [Sinclair’s] view that further scale in the broadcast television industry is essential to address secular headwinds and compete effectively with larger-scale big-tech and big-media players, as well as major broadcast groups,” Sinclair wrote.

In September, Sinclair prodded the Walt Disney Co. to punish late night host Jimmy Kimmel after the host made comments about the alleged gunman who was later arrested and charged with the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Utah. Sinclair owns several ABC affiliate stations and dropped “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for more than a week.

Sinclair demanded that Kimmel make a “meaningful personal donation” to Kirk’s political organization, Turning Point USA.

But Sinclair’s campaign crumbled after Disney’s brass returned Kimmel to his late night perch — without making concessions that Sinclair had demanded.

Critics have pointed to the alleged harms of TV station consolidation, including fewer on-the-ground workers and journalists reporting on the communities where the stations are based.

Sinclair’s filing contradicted such arguments, writing that “greater scale will also strengthen broadcasters’ ability to sustain their vital public service role in producing local news.”

The filing said consolidating Scripps could produce “more than $300 million in expected annual synergies.”

“The proposed combination would be structured to require no external financing as the combined company would maintain each company’s respective debt and preferred capital structures,” Sinclair wrote in the filing. “The transaction would avoid significant refinancing costs while meaningfully reducing leverage through the realization of synergies and lowering future refinancing risk.”

In its 2024 annual report, Sinclair said its dozens of stations produced “more than 2,400 hours of live news coverage per week across its station footprint, in addition to our various digital, social and audio platforms.”

Sinclair said in Monday’s filing that it was “committed to constructive engagement with [Scripps] toward reaching a definitive transaction agreement,” and Sinclair would like to consolidate its fellow broadcaster “within nine to 12 months.”

Scripps took a defensive stance in response to Sinclair’s overture, saying in a statement that “the board will take all steps appropriate to protect the company and the company’s shareholders from the opportunistic actions of Sinclair or anyone else.”

Elsewhere in the local TV business, Texas-based Nexstar, the nation’s largest TV broadcaster, is seeking government approval for its $6-billion deal to buy rival broadcaster Tegna.

Business

Fire survivors can use this new portal to rebuild faster and save money

Published

2 days ago

November 17, 2025

Press Room

Fire survivors can use this new portal to rebuild faster and save money

People who lost homes in the Palisades and Eaton fires can now go online to pick vetted residential templates that could save them money and be ready as early as next year.

Builders Alliance, a nonprofit organization formed in response to the fires, on Friday launched a portal that offers survivors a selection of homes, filtered by lot size, price range and other preferences.

“We’re trying to create an ‘easy’ button for homeowners,” said Lew Horne, the chairman of Project Recovery, a group of academics and real estate industry experts who had created a road map for recovery.

Construction crews work on rebuilding a home and properties after the federal cleanup in Altadena on Sept. 10.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Project Recovery’s March report — which was compiled by professors in the real estate graduate schools at USC and UCLA, along with the Los Angeles chapter of the Urban Land Institute, a real estate nonprofit education and research institute — said an alliance of builders could work together for economies of scale to speed up reconstruction and make it more affordable and predictable.

The web portal is the latest stop on the report’s road map. It makes it easy for those who lost their homes to choose among templates and pricing from builders who have been vetted by Project Recovery.

“We’re keeping a close eye” on the builders, Horne said. “Buyers are going to have a quality home at a quality price in a time frame they can count on.”

Horne is head of the Los Angeles chapter of the Urban Land Institute and president of real estate brokerage CBRE for Southern California. Other leaders of Project Recovery include Stuart Gabriel, director of the UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate, and Richard Green, director of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate.

Homeowners using the portal can match their address to home choices that include pre-designed turnkey residences at costs equal to or below average insurance proceeds, Horne said. Owners can also choose more custom builds.

The new Builders Alliance consists of 10 licensed homebuilders, ranging in size from small boutique firms to larger companies such as Richmond American Homes and Brookfield Residential.

Brookfield built more than 200 homes in the La Vina gated community in Altadena, 52 of which burned down, Chief Executive Adrian Foley said.

“Obviously, we were devastated by all of the loss that’s taken place here,” he said. “We wanted to lean in and do anything we could to help out.”

Foley said the consortium was devised to get large and small builders working together to “procure the right material costs and procure plans and specifications that would be appealing to the end user so we could collaborate to beat down costs, be more efficient, and hopefully drive a higher percentage of rebuilding.”

The consortium expects to complete some homes by the third quarter of 2026.

The foundation of the Builders Alliance portal is a digital representation that maps every residential parcel in the Palisades and Eaton fire areas. It uses AI technology and is powered by Canibuild, which provides site-planning software for the residential construction industry.

The portal’s map is trained on local zoning regulations and pairs each lot with extensive menus of designs and costs. Property owners enter their address and can filter options by preferences such as square footage, bedrooms, bathrooms and price.