Born in the USA: Italy's curious bresaola pitch to dodge US tariffs
At the heart of the story is the bresaola, a prized Italian cured meat made from salted, air-dried beef, which holds Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) status.
Around 90% of the beef currently used in the production of this famous Italian specialty comes from South America – primarily zebu cattle from Brazil and Uruguay – chosen for their quality and reliable supply.
In the broader context of ongoing trade tensions, EU farmers' opposition to the Mercosur agreement, and US pressure on the EU to reduce its trade surplus, Lollobrigida floated an idea that quickly went viral.
' If the US gives us beef to make bresaola, we can then re-export it. That's a binding agreement which allows us to import more meat from the US,' he said earlier this week.
The suggestion drew a mix of confusion and ridicule, prompting Lollobrigida to later clarify that the proposal did not originate from him personally, but was shared with him by industry stakeholders.
"I'm just relaying it," he told Italian media. Against EU rules
But there's a catch. Legal experts warn that such a move may be incompatible with EU law.
Mariagrazia Alabrese, professor of agri-food law at the Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies in Pisa, told Euractiv that Italy cannot unilaterally enter into such an agreement with the United States.
Under the EU Treaties, she explained, trade policy is an exclusive competence of the European Union. " If all 27 EU member states started striking individual deals, the idea of a single market would collapse," she said.
Under current trade agreements, she added, o nly meat from approved countries and facilities complying with EU restrictions – for example, on hormones and treatments like chlorine washes – can be used in food production within the bloc, even if the product is exclusively for export.
' T he EU simply cannot import that kind of US beef,' she concluded, arguing that a bilateral EU-US agreement would still have to comply with all existing EU food safety laws.
However, for Davide Calderone, director of the Italian meat processing association ASSICA, Lollobrigida's suggestion is nothing new– and is feasible.
" If we import the meat under a re-export condition, a dedicated procedure would need to be established – approved at EU level – to ensure that none of it enters the internal market,' he said.
He called the use of American beef an "opening" at a time of complex negotiation on tariffs.
"It might also benefit US producers by giving them access to the Italian market", he concluded.
(cs, adm, aw)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
5 hours ago
- Euractiv
FIREPOWER: Trump sparks NATO surveillance aircraft rethink
Take a free trial of Euractiv Pro to get FIREPOWER in your inbox. Good afternoon and welcome back to Firepower, This week, we look at a very concrete example of how US defence policy impacts European security. A Pentagon rethink of its planned purchase of surveillance aircraft is forcing NATO to reconsider its own options. We also dig into how much SAFE money EU countries are seeking - spoiler alert: more than is available. There's also a debrief on what we know (and don't know) about the EU-US trade deal's implications for the defence sector, and Germany's record €108 billion annual defence budget proposal. Plus, updates on the first EU country to ban arms trade with Israel. Exclusive: NATO taking another look at surveillance aircraft pick NATO is rethinking its choice to buy a fleet of Boeing E-7 surveillance aircraft by 2035 to be the alliance's eyes in the sky in Europe and replace the ageing AWACS, Firepower has learned. That comes after the Pentagon announced plans to cancel US orders for the E-7, citing high production costs and concerns about the jet's future survivability. As a result, a spokesperson for NATO's procurement agency, the NSPA, told Firepower that the plan as 'as a whole is being assessed'. The Pentagon's rejection of the E-7 for the US military raises questions about whether the Trump administration will still agree to contribute financially toward purchasing 14 of the aircraft for NATO – or if the bill will be left to the seven participating European allies . Lower total E-7 orders thanks to American cancellations would also likely drive up the price per aircraft for the remaining customers, including NATO. The NSPA plans to give an update 'towards the end of September' that will 'include the division of cost across the participating nations'. The spokesperson said that NATO and participating countries are 'evaluat[ing] the available options'. Buy local instead? The current scramble to figure out the E-7's future shows just how much Europe's security policy still hinges on political decisions in Washington. It remains unclear at this stage if the remaining NATO countries might be interested in picking a European aircraft instead of the E-7. Saab, which previously pitched its GlobalEye to the military alliance, told Firepower they remained confident their aircraft remains an 'excellent' option. Douglas Barrie, an aerospace analyst at the IISS think tank, told Firepower that other options include sticking with the existing AWACS for now and following the US in their future choice sometime in the mid-2030s, going for a new 'clean-sheet design' or taking a 'wait-and-see' approach, since the potential E-7 cancellation hasn't passed the US Congress yet. On your radar: EU countries want almost €200 billion from SAFE; UK still sidelined This week, 18 EU countries have put in initial requests for SAFE funds by Tuesday's initial soft deadline . Firepower dug into what capitals are asking for, and some initial ideas of how to spend it. According to our sources and estimates, the club of 18 actually asked for a good bit more than the €150 billion total available for loans, when considering the top end of the requests they sent in. Gone are the days where the Commission was not sure they'll spend the whole pot. The Commission put the total requested at € 127 billion on Wednesday. But submissions included a minimum and maximum range, and Euractiv understands that the Commission's figure was based on the low end of their requests. The EU executive is not stopping there, though. It is sending out a letter to nudge the club of countries which have not given in their request to do so fast. The SAFE programme is also making waves across the pond, with EU Defence Commissioner Kubilius telling Firepower that he saw 'strong interest among American industry' during his recent US visit. Canada has reportedly shown interest in participating . However, the process is not that easy, as the UK's efforts to negotiate access demonstrate. The Commission could send a proposal next week to the EU countries as a basis to start negotiations with the UK, but don't expect those to start in peak holiday season, we're told. Israel-EU tensions rise Slovenia became the first EU country to impose a full ban on weapons trade on Israel on Thursday. The ban also prohibits the transit of any weapons through Slovenia on their way between Israel and elsewhere. Meanwhile on the European level, Israel's potential exclusion from key parts of the EU Horizon Europe research fund now hinges in large part on Germany and Italy. Neither have taken a position on the Commission's proposal, which would cut funding to Israel for dual-use technologies that have potential military applications. Israeli state-owned arms maker Rafael notably attracted attention by posting a video on X where a drone killed a person in Gaza. As the EU Observer highlighted , that could cause Israel to get kicked out of the EU programme. Germany, Europe's largest arms exporter to Israel and the buyer of Israeli-made air defence systems, wants more time to consider its position. A decision to back the Commission would move the needle towards a qualified majority – but that's unlikely to come before Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul returns from a visit to Israel later today. A decision on whether to partially exclude Israel from Horizon Europe could be taken later this summer, one diplomat said.
Euractiv
6 hours ago
- Euractiv
The Brief – 1 August 2025: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Good Friday afternoon, and welcome to the penultimate GBU before Euractiv newsletters have a two-week summer break. Many dear readers will have already swapped desks for deck chairs; others might be en route , joining the throngs on Europe's busiest traffic weekend of the year. The month of mass transit gives many of us a chance to test the limits of free movement – whether impeded by border checks or infrastructure in need of upgrades. Transport Commissioner Apostolos Tzitzikostas warned this week that billions of euros must be spent to ensure the bloc's roads and rail are fit for defence forces. And whether for leisure or strategic purposes, the continent's grand rail vision is losing momentum, held up by a patchwork of regulatory standards, poor cross-border connections, and the high cost of laying new tracks. On top of which, passengers are lured away from the green transport mode by flights that are often much cheaper, and do away with the complicated business of changing between national networks. But for all the convenience it brings, boarding a plane weighs increasingly on our consciences, as our travel choices are one of the main contributors to personal carbon emissions. Those flying within the EU, however, needn't let the burden of climate guilt spoil their vacation: in fact the bloc's Emissions Trading System means that the CO2 cost is already factored into tickets, Niko Kurmayer explains. The system isn't perfect – other pollutants than CO2 are not yet covered – but it goes some way in accounting for a notoriously un-eco travel option. Deal or no deal? The hotly anticipated EU-US trade "deal" that President Trump and President von der Leyen agreed in Scotland last Sunday generated enormous commentary throughout the week. Panned by most EU pundits as capitulation of the highest order, the general revulsion at von der Leyen's bootlicking was widely seen as the abdication of European values, international trade laws, and an outrageous disregard for national sovereignty in matters of defence. Then again, others have pointed to the imperative of avoiding the crushing 30% tariffs that Trump was poised to launch. It could have been worse, they note, and many sectors let out a tentative sigh of relief. If ostentatious obeisance is what it takes to avoid a ruinous trade war, so be it. But the devil's in the lack of detail, and as Thomas Moller-Nielsen writes, it's hard to judge the "biggest trade deal ever' when so many aspects of the agreement remain unknown. Despite Trump's crowing celebrations as if all was done and dusted, this is really just the start of negotiations. And the stakes are high, with key sectors – such as steel and digital markets – the focus of hard-nosed bargaining. With so much still tba, Trump delayed the new tariffs by a week (now due 7 August, rather than today). Let's see where we are next week. Pendulum swings on Gaza Europe's attitude towards Israel grew notably cooler this week, as the blockade on aid deliveries has led to severe starvation in Gaza. Having been extremely hesitant to take action against Israel, the dial is now moving as European leaders face public outcry and more countries announce plans to recognise the Palestinian state. Within the Commission's ranks, executive vice-president Teresa Ribera has been most outspoken as she denounced the EU leadership's inaction over the "catastrophic humanitarian situation" in the Gaza Strip. Former foreign policy chief Josep Borrell went further on Friday, accusing EU leaders of being complicit in the "genocide of Palestinians". But despite expressing 'great concern over the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza,' Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz has so far resisted pressure to suspend EU research ties with Israel. Meanwhile, France, Germany and Spain have started airlifting aid into Gaza – though this is far less effective than opening up secure land deliveries. European defence procurement 18 countries have applied for funds under the EU's SAFE programme, which aims to mobilise €150 billion in loans for defence procurement. After initial hesitation (partly because defence spending is a national competence that has historically been beyond the Commission's remit), a total of €127 billion was claimed – a figure that will likely rise once the United Kingdom and others are accounted for. Countries have until November to submit their proposals to Brussels, with breakdowns of what exactly they will do with the loans. Want to get The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly in your inbox? Subscribe to The Brief.
Euractiv
6 hours ago
- Euractiv
France says it can't stop destruction of US contraceptives
France says it has no authority over the fate of a large, still-usable stockpile of USAID-funded contraceptives that are set to be destroyed on French soil. In a statement to AFP on Friday, the French health ministry said it had 'no means to requisition' the contraceptives, which belong to USAID, the US international aid agency. 'Since contraceptives are not considered essential medicines and this is not a case of supply shortages, we have no means to requisition the stock', the ministry said. On 23 July, press reports revealed that the US administration planned to destroy a stockpile of contraceptives worth an estimated €10 million, which had been stored in Geel, Belgium. The products are now being transported to France for incineration by specialist waste companies. The contraceptives were part of USAID's global reproductive health programmes, which were drastically scaled back after the Trump administration cut the agency's operational budget earlier this year. Consequently, many of its aid activities, including the distribution of contraceptives, have ceased to function, rendering its role in this field largely defunct, according to NGOs familiar with the matter. Calls to stop the incineration On Thursday, Sarah Durocher, president of France's Family Planning Association, said that part of the stockpile may already have left Belgium. 'We were informed 36 hours ago that the removal of these boxes of contraceptives had begun', she said on Thursday. Durocher has called on incineration companies to refuse to destroy the stock and 'to oppose this senseless decision.' Several NGOs have tried in recent weeks to negotiate with the US government to purchase or repurpose the contraceptives, some of which remain usable until 2031. "We were informed by the US administration that our offer had been rejected, and we learned then that the government had decided to destroy the products - meaning that offers from our partners were also declined", International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) told Euractiv. The cost of incinerating the contraceptives is estimated at €150,000, a price the US government appears willing to pay rather than opt for donation or resale. "We've been aware of these stockpiles since April and have worked tirelessly to find a solution and negotiate with the US, but our efforts have been blocked at every turn. This leads us to believe that the decision is not about money, but is instead driven by an extreme ideological stance. It's about power and control", IPPF added. The French delegation of the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament has called on the European Commission to intervene and prevent the destruction, questioning its legality under EU treaties and legislation. While the Commission confirmed that it had taken note of the letter and was monitoring the situation, it did not answer Euractiv's question on whether it would intervene in this case. The European Commission should be more outspoken about the senseless destruction of life-saving contraceptive supplies", IPPF concluded. (bms, de)
