SAFETY Act Mandates Federal Defense of 'Feta' and 'Prosciutto' Names in Global Trade

The Safeguarding American Food and Export Trade Yields Act of 2025 (the SAFETY Act) is a bill drafted specifically for U.S. food and beverage exporters. Simply put, this bill tells the federal government to draw a line in the sand regarding international trade names. It mandates that the U.S. actively defend the right of American producers to keep using common, everyday product names—like Feta, Prosciutto, or India Pale Ale—when they sell their goods overseas.

The Common Name Rulebook

Section 2 of the SAFETY Act is all about defining what a “common name” is and making sure the government fights to protect it. For most food and beer, a common name is just what it sounds like: a name regularly used on packaging. For wine, the bill is careful to exclude any name that is already a protected geographical indication, or “appellation of origin,” under federal rules. This means the bill isn’t trying to steal the name ‘Champagne’ (which is protected) but is focused on names like ‘Chateau’ or specific grape varieties that are widely used.

To make sure everyone is on the same page, the bill explicitly lists examples of protected common names. For your next charcuterie board, this includes American cheese, Feta, Gruyere, Prosciutto, and Salami. For your weekend beer run, the list covers India Pale Ale, Stout, Pilsener, Lager, and Hefeweizen. If you’re a domestic dairy producer, this bill solidifies your right to keep calling your product Feta, even when shipping it to a country that might prefer that name be reserved only for cheese made in Greece. The Secretary of Agriculture is tasked with deciding if a name qualifies, using “reliable sources” like dictionaries, journals, and even trustworthy websites to check for common usage.

Mandating Trade Warfare Over Cheese

This is where the rubber meets the road for international trade. The SAFETY Act doesn’t just define names; it creates a new, specific mandate for the U.S. Trade Representative and the Secretary of Agriculture. They must now actively negotiate agreements—bilateral or multilateral—to guarantee U.S. producers can use these common names in foreign markets, both now and in the future (Sec. 2). Essentially, the bill requires the U.S. government to make the defense of these product names a priority in every trade talk. Furthermore, they have to report their progress to Congress every six months, which means this isn't a one-and-done deal; it’s an ongoing assignment.

For American exporters—whether you’re a craft brewery selling IPAs overseas or a small farm selling Prosciutto—this is a big win. It provides a strong legal shield against other countries trying to block your products by claiming they own the rights to the name 'Feta.' On the flip side, this puts the U.S. squarely at odds with countries that strongly protect geographical indications (GIs). Many European nations, for example, argue that names like 'Feta' should only be used by producers in their specific region. This bill essentially tells those countries: we’re not backing down. This means while the bill protects U.S. market access, it also guarantees ongoing trade friction over food names, which could complicate negotiations on other, unrelated trade issues.