GMOs

[UPDATE] Yogurt Maker's Non-GMO Stance Curdles Ag Groups

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 03:00:23 GMT

UPDATE - Dannon responded to the farm groups’ critisisms. New reporting appears in italics at the bottom of this story.

Dannon announced earlier this year it will be phasing out GMO ingredients from all of its products over the next three years. That’s all well and good, say six prominent farming organizations – just don’t claim doing so will improve sustainability.

The farm group sent a letter to Dannon head of U.S. operations, Mariano Lozano, questions the company’s decision to remove what it calls “safe and proven crop technology to feed the dairy cows that supply milk for its yogurt products.”

“[Eliminating GMOs] is the exact opposite of the sustainable agriculture that you claim to be seeking,” the letter states, in part. “Your pledge would force farmers to abandon safe, sustainable farming practices that have enhanced farm productivity over the last 20 years while greatly reducing the carbon footprint of American agriculture.”

That includes farmers using less pesticides, herbicides, fossil fuels and water, according to the letter. Taking away a technology like GMO is the equivalent to “turning back the clock” and using outdated technology to run farm businesses, it argues.

Randy Mooney, Missouri farmer and chair of the National Milk Producers Federation, went so far as to call Dannon’s strategy “marketing puffery.”

“[It lacks] any true innovation that improves the actual product offered to consumers,” he says. “What’s worse is that removing GMOs from the equation is harmful to the environment – the opposite of what these companies claim to be attempting to achieve.”

The letter was cosigned by the farmer leaders of the American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, American Sugarbeet Growers Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance.

According to U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance CEO Randy Krotz, when food companies mislead consumers, individual farmers and farm organizations will continue to assertively defend beneficial technologies.

In a statement from April, Dannon announced its “Dannon’s Pledge” initiative, made up of the following three components:

The company will work with dairy farmer partners and suppliers to implement sustainable practices and technology to improve soil health, increase biodiversity, decrease carbon emissions and manage water better.
The company will phase out GMO and synthetic feed over the next three years.
By December 2017, the company plans to label the presence of any GMO ingredients in its products.

Lozano says the initiative was largely inspired by Dannon’s organic sister companies, Stonyfield and Happy Family.

“While this commitment is ambitious, we believe it’s necessary to continue to serve Americans using a sustainable and transparent model,” he says.

The ag industry organizations’ letter to Dannon counters: “We strongly support open, honest and transparent engagement with consumers, and the right of customers to make informed choices about the products they buy. But we are troubled by the disingenuous approach embodied in the Dannon Pledge.”

Dannon wasted no time in assembling a response to the farm groups’ letter, arguing that sustainability can be achieved either with or without GMO technology; its marketing approach is merely following consumer trends.

“We believe there is growing consumer preference for non-GMO ingredients and food in the US and we want to use the strong relationships we have with our farmer partners to provide products that address this consumer demand,” the letter states, in part.

Lozano adds that more choice in the marketplace is not a bad thing.

“We believe strongly that the unparalleled range of choice that Danone’s U.S. affiliates provide, from organic, to non-GMO ingredients, and to conventional dairy is a reason to celebrate rather than criticize,” he says.

USDA Extends Comment Period on Roundup Ready Alfalfa

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 02:18:59 GMT

USDA announced today it was extending the comment period for the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) on Roundup Ready alfalfa by 15 days to March 3. The comment period was to have ended today. No reason for the extension was given.

USDA has also held public meetings on the EIS in Nevada and Nebraska earlier this year. A final meeting will be held in Riverdale, Md., February 24.

For more details on the extended comment period and the February 24^th meeting, click here .

Nestle Axes GMO Ingredients and Additives in Some U.S. Ice Cream

Thu, 12 Nov 2020 05:49:15 GMT

Nestle SA is eliminating artificial flavors and colors from some U.S. ice-cream products as the world’s biggest food company steps up efforts to remove additives from its portfolio.

The maker of Dreyer’s ice cream will alter more than 100 products via changes that include ditching high fructose corn syrup and genetically-modified ingredients from some of them, the Vevey, Switzerland-based company said in a statement Wednesday. Nestle -- whose brands also include Haagen-Dazs and Skinny Cow -- will use more real fruit and fresh milk from cows not treated with artificial growth hormone, and reduce the amount of sugar by 11 percent, on average, in certain items.

Nestle’s move follows similar reformulations of other products and reflects a wider trend in the food industry as consumers increasingly clamor for fare that’s less processed, with fewer ingredients. The Swiss company last year announced the removal of artificial flavors and colors in 10 chocolate candy brands in the U.S., including Butterfinger and Crunch. It did the same for products such as DiGiorno pizza, while also reducing salt.

“It looks like Nestle may be ahead of the game,” said Duncan Fox, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. “The millennial consumer wants fresh, natural products. Everyone wants less sugar, fat and salt, but it isn’t easy to achieve the same taste. Nestle, as the world’s biggest food company, will have the best relationship with the food-ingredient companies and a good research budget.”

General Mills Inc., which makes Cheerios and Lucky Charms cereal, said last year it would remove artificial flavors and colors from all of its cereals. Panera Bread Co. has also said it wants to serve “clean” food in its restaurants by the end of this year, and Kraft Heinz Co. last month stripped additives, preservatives and dyes from its iconic Mac & Cheese dinners.

Nestle shares fell 0.7 percent to 73.45 francs at 2:50 p.m. in Zurich.

Trusteed IRAs: why they are popular, who should consider them, what benefits they offer

Fri, 23 Sep 2022 20:01:45 GMT

Q: I’ve heard a lot about trusteed IRAs. How do they differ from traditional IRAs?

A: Simply put, trusteed IRAs offer potential tax benefits of traditional or Roth IRAs with the protection and control of a trust. They provide tax advantages that stretch into the future and offer the ability to control how, when and in what amounts assets are distributed. Trusteed IRAs have become more popular given some of the inherent limits of traditional IRAs and the growing prevalence of self-directed retirement accounts combined with the decline of pension plans. They also are more cost-effective than setting up a trust and are generally more compliant with tax laws.

Q: Who should consider a trusteed IRA?

A: There are several reasons why someone should consider a trusteed IRA, the most consequential of which is if an owner has an interest in controlling assets and realizing tax benefits beyond their lifetime. This can mean an owner is concerned with the financial discipline or sophistication of heirs.

Other reasons include if an owner remarries and wants to provide for a current spouse as well as children from a previous relationship and/or is concerned about IRA management in the event of incapacitation.

Q: I’m in the middle of estate planning. How can a trusteed IRA help with the process?

A: They can help process if only to preserve the potential tax-advantaged accumulation of IRA benefits to pass on to heirs. Under traditional or custodial IRAs, a beneficiary is required to withdraw at least the Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) each year. However, a beneficiary may withdraw additional amounts, for any reason, at any time—and incur possible fees or tax penalties.

Additionally, owners can restrict payouts to a beneficiary to the RMD, enabling it to operate as a spendthrift trust. At the owner’s death, the trusteed IRA would be automatically split into separate accounts for individual beneficiaries, with distribution terms defined for each account.

Another benefit is that estate plans don’t need to be rewritten or updated; trusteed IRAs can be added independent of an estate plan to protect IRA assets which legally pass outside of wills.

Q: Is a trusteed IRA better suited to farmers or owners of farm assets?

A: Not expressly, but a trusteed IRA can play an important role in legacy planning and preservation of farm assets over multiple generations. Given the growing generation gap among farming families, trusteed IRAs could be a way help preserve farm family values over generations from beyond the grave. Moreover, as farm economics continues to change, farmers may find value in the highly customizable nature of trusteed IRAs. In the event of a divorce in the family, for example, assets can be made to not leave the family’s bloodlines.

Q: Are there any downsides to trusteed IRAs?

A: Given that a trusteed IRA requires a corporate trustee, it’s harder to change ownership and family members cannot be named as trustees. Not all financial institutions offer trusteed IRAs so they may not be widely available to interested clients. Additionally, while they offer greater customization and more control, trusteed IRAs carry some limits. To have the highest level of customization and control, a trust would need to be created.

Please send questions, comments or requests to address a topic or issue to Rees Mason at rees.mason@ml.com.