Connect with us

Business and Finance

Australia plans to ban the export of live sheep. What will this mean for the industry?

Published

on

This month, the federal government announced the plan ban on the export of live sheep, which is to enter into force on May 1, 2028.

The announcement coincided with the release of the long-awaited film report by an independent panel appointed to investigate this issue.

Animal welfare advocates immediately embraced the news, after long campaigning for a ban.

But agricultural organizations expressed their opinion deep concerns about its potential impact on the sector. They too he argued a four-year transition window will not be enough time to adapt.

New Zealand has introduced a complete ban on the export of all live animals in 2023.
Graham Flett/AP

Australia just isn’t the first country to introduce a ban on the export of live animals, even though it reacted quite early.

Neighboring New Zealand has imposed approx Together on the export of live animals, which entered into force in April last 12 months.

In December, the UK also presented regulations banning the export of live animals intended for slaughter and fattening. The case is gaining momentum across the European Union.

So are such bans really the death knell for the sheep industry, as is usually argued, or are they simply an inevitable part of the needed transformation?

The deepening division between the city and the countryside

One of the earliest effects of this proposal was: increase tensions in Australia between state and federal governments, and between urban and rural communities.

Western Australia alone accounts for 99% of Australia’s live sheep exports. Groups opposing the ban do he framed it as one other example of the east coast of “inner city” Australia dictating terms to rural Western Australians.

WA Farmers president John Hassell speaks at a press conference wearing a T-shirt that says: hashtag keepthesheep
On Wednesday, representatives of many agricultural industry bodies met the Minister of Agriculture during breakfast after the adoption of the budget.
Mick Tsikas/AAP

However, the “West vs. the rest” narrative can itself be misleading. Questionnaire commissioned by the RSPCA, it was found that over 70% of Western Australians were in favor of a ban.

Will it really crush the sheep industry?

The extent of the impact of the ban will, of course, rely on the broader importance of live animal exports to the sheep sector and the ability of the industry to adapt. Adaptation could mean transferring this supply to the domestic processing market or the expansion of other enterprises.

Supporters of the ban argue that livestock exports are only a small part of the sheep industry. According to government data, Australia’s lamb and mutton export industry was value AUD 4.5 billion in 2023.

However, live sheep exports by sea accounted for lower than 2% of this trade and price roughly $77 million. To further emphasize the point, supporters of the ban identified that this trade only means 0.1% of Australia’s total agricultural exports.

Opponents of the ban, meanwhile, would say that these aggregated Australian figures significantly understate the economic importance of live animal exports to WA.

Despite a marked decline over the last decade, this sector still represents an estimated value 5.4% the state’s total sheep industry exports.

Live animal cargo ship loading in Fremantle
Live animal exports are disproportionately necessary to Western Australia’s sheep industry.
Ian Geraint Jones/Shutterstock

The livestock export market also offers other advantages to producers. The possibility of selling sheep to an alternate market may increase farmers’ bargaining power in contacts with domestic processors.

In Ireland, where processing capability is extremely concentrated, this is the case in the agricultural sector he fought vigorously to keep export trade alive.

Exporting live sheep can be an answer for farmers in dry periods when feed is scarce.

How much compensation should the industry receive?

The potential economic impact of the ban has been highly disputed, but most estimates confirm that there will be financial losses.

The independent panel gave particular weight estimates generated for the WA government. They estimate the cost at about $123 million a 12 months if there isn’t any substitution with other corporations, or $22 million a 12 months if farmers switch to crop production.

When spread across the farm, losses estimated in some studies may appear relatively small.

However, the current financial and climate challenges in the region are intense, and even a small reduction in revenue could push some corporations and their owners to breaking point.

The government has proposed a $107 million package to help with the transition, which incorporates $64.6 million to help sheep producers make the most of existing and emerging opportunities and $27 million to support the marketing of sheep products at home and abroad.

The support just isn’t only addressed to farmers. The government admits that the ban will affect all corporations throughout the supply chain – carriers, commodity traders, feed producers.

Bales of hay lying in the paddock
Feed producers are part of the extensive supply chain supporting the sheep industry.
Peter Kleinau/Unsplash

The effectiveness of this support is determined by the way it is implemented, the extent of its use and the effectiveness it may well mitigate the transformation.

The planned marketing support will have a way more indirect impact, with high uncertainty as to the extent to which the projected losses will actually be offset by increased demand.

Given the uncertainty about the actual costs that will be incurred, it’s difficult to assess the adequacy of payments. Federal Minister of Agriculture Murray Watt he sees them as generousindicating that $107 million is five times the lower end of the estimated range for annual losses.

The WA government, nevertheless, argued that the transition payments were completely insufficient.

However, there have been no export ban transition payments in New Zealand and it seems that none have been proposed in the UK either.

The situation in Australia reflects the historical importance of the livestock export sector to the sheep supply chain.

What’s next?

Sheep in the field look curiously towards the camera.
The sheep industry is moving towards a future without live animal exports.
Photography by Hideaki Edo/Shutterstock

As part of the sheep industry’s social license to operate, it seems prudent for businesses to plan for a future without livestock exports. At the same time, policymakers should work to increase the sector’s resilience to the significant financial and climate challenges it faces.

But politics is a fickle beast. In New Zealand, a recently elected coalition announced plans to reverse the country’s ban under Art sustained pressure from industry.

The Australian National Party has already made it clear that it too will push for a change in the situation.

While it is obvious that a majority of the population is opposed to the export of live animals, this majority could also be thinner than you may think. AND last survey in New Zealand support for a ban was just 51%.

Ultimately, this type of political uncertainty can only reduce incentives for businesses to adapt.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business and Finance

Here’s why you may be paying Trump’s tariffs

Published

on

By

tariffs,Trump


US retailers’ alliance with foreign suppliers could potentially result in higher prices for a variety of products due to Donald Trump’s victory within the White House and his proposed import tariffs, reports

In a report released November 4 by the National Retail Federation (NRF), American consumers I can expect lose $46 billion to $78 billion in purchasing power over the following few years on products similar to clothing, toys, furniture, home appliances, footwear and travel items as a consequence of tariffs. NRF Vice President for Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold issued an announcement explaining what the tariff is and the way it affects firms. “A tariff is a tax paid by the U.S. importer, not the foreign country or exporter. This tax will ultimately come out of consumers’ pockets in the shape of upper prices,” Gold said.

“Retailers rely heavily on imported products and manufacturing components so they can offer their customers a variety of products at affordable prices.”

Examples include a $50 pair of sneakers that can go from $59 to $64, or a $2,000 mattress and box spring set for $2,190.

The introduction of tariffs isn’t Trump’s first proposal. During his first term, his administration set a goal of imposing tariffs of as much as 25% on greater than $360 billion in Chinese products. The Biden-Harris administration kept most of those tariffs and added additional ones on Chinese electric cars and microchips.

Under Trump and Vance, the team plans to impose a 60% tax on Chinese-made goods and a 10-20% tax on $3 trillion value of foreign goods imported by the U.S. annually. During the campaign, Trump promised to scale back inflation, but US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned that because the tariffs would be mostly paid, they might only increase them. “A consistent theoretical and empirical finding in economics is that domestic consumers and domestic firms bear the brunt of tariffs, not the foreign country,” the Yale University Budget Laboratory said in a mid-October 2024 evaluation.

Trump, nonetheless, argues that the tariffs will profit the U.S. economy in some ways, similar to encouraging countries to barter more successful trade deals and limiting other countries from “dumping” their products within the U.S. at below-market prices, he says. Another reason is to motivate nations to scale back customs duties on shipments to their countries from the USA

The four-time impeached president-elect has accused other countries of imposing much higher tariffs on imports than the United States, and has also criticized trade agreements – similar to NAFTA – which have led to more foreign imports into the country than US exports to other countries. In 2020, the Trump administration replaced NAFTA with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

For now, it’s unclear when or if the brand new administration will begin tightening tariffs, as the method requires laws to extend fees, which could take as much as a yr.


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading

Business and Finance

The US dollar fell as voters headed to the polls

Published

on

By


The US dollar dropped in value on November 5 as crowds of American voters went to the polls to forged their ballots.

The dollar even fell in betting markets like PredictIt and Polymarket indicated The probabilities of Trump winning the presidential election are increasing, Reuters reports. With Donald Trump returning to the White House with a Republican-led House and Senate, extreme currency movements ought to be expected.

Trump’s immigration and tariff policies are expected to fuel inflation, while tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation could spur growth by pushing up longer-dated Treasury yields and pushing up the value of the dollar.

By contrast, a Democratic victory was expected to weaken the dollar as bets on Trump were withdrawn, and investors were concerned about the economic impact of upper taxes on the wealthy and stricter business regulations.

“We may be seeing some leveling off… my impression is that people are being cautious,” said Steve Englander, head of worldwide G10 FX research and macroeconomic strategy for North America at Standard Chartered Bank’s New York branch.

“Right now, the mood seems to be in favor of Trump,” Englander said. “On the other hand, for most of October and early November, Trump’s trading was characterized by a stronger dollar and higher yields.”

Globally, a Trump victory may lead to a weakening of the euro, Mexican peso and Chinese yuan, as these regions could face recent tariffs under his administration. Bitcoin rose 2.76% to $68,928, with Trump’s views seen as more favorable towards cryptocurrencies. Traders are closely watching the Federal Reserve’s two-day meeting that ends on Thursday, expecting the U.S. central bank to cut rates of interest by 25 basis points.

Elsewhere on Tuesday, the U.S. services sector rose to its highest level in greater than two years in October, with employment rebounding strongly. This suggests that the near halt in job growth last month was an aberration.


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading

Business and Finance

First Black-owned gift wrapping brand sold at Lowe’s, Hallmark

Published

on

By


Ardean Miller, pioneering entrepreneur Mah Melaninis breaking barriers because the founding father of the primary Black-owned gift wrapping brand, partnering with Hallmark and Lowe’s across the country. With a concentrate on cultural representation, she founded Mah Melanin to fill a niche available in the market for products that commemorate the wonder and variety of black culture.

“When I started Mah Melanin, I wanted to create something more than just beautiful gift packaging. I wanted to start a movement — a place where our stories are told, our beauty is celebrated, and our community is uplifted,” she says. “Partnering with these iconic retailers is a testament to the growing demand for products that reflect our experiences and heritage.”

Breaking down barriers and empowering communities

The partnership with Hallmark and Lowe’s represents a big step toward greater diversity and inclusion within the retail space, reflecting a broader cultural shift. This groundbreaking achievement highlights the growing recognition of the importance of culturally authentic products that encourage and empower.

Under her leadership, Mah Melanin has developed from a small start-up right into a nationally recognized brand. The company has gained endorsements from industry icons comparable to Teddy Riley, Master P and Denise Boutte, and has been noticed by major organizations including an NBA feature and a finalist on QVC’s “The Big Find.” These awards confirm the brand’s commitment to quality, creativity and resilience.

Inspiring the subsequent generation of Black entrepreneurs

He is devoted to not only the success of his brand, but in addition supporting the expansion of other Black entrepreneurs by offering mentorship, sharing resources and creating opportunities for collaboration. Through his efforts, he wants to construct a legacy that can encourage future generations to interrupt barriers and achieve greatness,” he adds.

Mah Melanin’s journey reflects a commitment to celebrating Black culture and amplifying Black and Brown voices through its products, making a profound impact available in the market and beyond.

Discover their products at MahMelanin.com and remember to follow the brand Facebook AND Instagram

Originally


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe Us To Receive Our Latest News Directly In Your Inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Trending