Animal Policy International urges the EU to apply animal welfare standards to all imports

Our response to the European Commission’s call for evidence on animal welfare legislation

Animal Policy International has submitted evidence to the European Commission’s consultation on its revision of animal welfare legislation, calling for EU reforms to extend to all animal products sold on the EU market, including those imported from abroad.

This revision will take place in the context of the EU’s Vision for Agriculture and Food, in which the Commission signalled an important commitment to extend EU animal welfare standards to imported products - this commitment now needs to be followed through on.

Right now, the EU allows the import of products made under conditions that would be illegal within its own borders. This not only fuels systems that inflict immense suffering on animals but also undermines the EU’s own citizens' expectations and farmers.

Our submission highlights five reasons why the EU needs to act now:

1. EU citizens and producers overwhelmingly support restricting low welfare imports

According to the 2023 Eurobarometer, 93% of EU citizens believe imported animal products should be required to meet EU animal welfare standards. Many reasonably assume this is already the case. Meanwhile, European farmers are calling for “mirror clauses” to prevent their higher welfare products from being undercut by imports that don’t meet EU standards.

2. Without reform, the EU will continue to offshore cruelty and undermine its own rules

Trade is growing fastest with countries that have lower animal welfare protections. For instance:

• China’s egg exports to the EU rose 44.3% and poultry by 71.8% in one year.

• Argentina, which lacks species-specific welfare laws, saw a 34% increase in egg exports.

3. There are strong legal grounds and precedence for requiring imports to meet EU standards
   

The EC–Seal Products case demonstrated that concerns over animal welfare can justify trade restrictions under the public morals exemption in WTO law. The EU already applies this through Regulation 2019/625 which requires imported meat to comply with EU slaughter welfare rules. 

Internationally, California’s Proposition 12 sets a powerful precedent: it bans the sale of products from animals raised in extreme confinement, even if produced out of state. It shows that welfare-based import standards are legally defensible and enforceable.

4. Low welfare imports are unfair to EU farmers
   

The EU’s own analysis shows that the beef, poultry, and sheep meat sectors are especially vulnerable to being undercut by imports from countries with weaker welfare rules. For example:

• Ukraine still produces 95.5% of its eggs in cages, compared to 62% cage-free in the EU.

• Chile widely uses sow stalls, which have had restrictions around their use in the EU since 2013.

• China and Argentina allow barren battery cages and unrestricted beak trimming.

5. Major exporters can and do adapt to EU welfare standards
   

Evidence shows that aligning import standards is both feasible and effective:

• Thailand’s CP Foods committed to supplying 10 million cage-free eggs annually.

• Ukraine’s MHP is already shifting to EU-aligned systems, with the country aiming for full compliance by 2028.

• Brazil’s pork industry has demonstrated the technical capability to meet EU standards when required.
  

Unless import standards are reformed, EU citizens will continue to unknowingly buy products from systems they’ve rejected as cruel, contradicting the goals of EU law and undermining public trust.

The EU has a powerful opportunity to lead by example, set a new global benchmark, and create a fairer food system. It’s time to close the loophole, and make sure higher welfare applies to all products, regardless of where they’re from.

📄 Read our full submission here.