RES 158 Draft 01 2010-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4. The Board must require that "...All methods of sale shall provide accurate and adequate quantity information that permits the buyer to make price and quantity comparisons. The board may adopt such reasonable rules as may be necessary to assure that the measure of any commodity for sale reflects accurate information and fair measurement practices to all concerned" (HRS 486 -110). Therefore, fair measurement without full disclosure on the front label of the point of origin or the percentages from each point of origin is deceptive, and the consumer is disadvantaged by a lack of information as to the origin of the product. 5. HRS 486 -110 also provides that the consumer shall have enough information to allow price and quantity comparisons. Withholding sufficient information as to the country or point of origin disallows such comparisons; and 6. Part of the information that the package shall bear on the outside of the package in its "definite, plain, and conspicuous declarations" is the identity of the commodity in the package which should include all points of origin, and the net quantity of the contents in terms of measure which should include the percentage of each point of origin (HRS 486 -111). The current loophole in the law allows processors to disadvantage the consumer by hiding pertinent information. The net measure should be more than just the weight or measure of the total product. It should include country or region of origin by percentage. Therefore, the consumer is entitled to know the exact composition of the product rather than only ten to fifty percent of the product; and 7. Misleading a consumer is not allowed in Hawai`i, as HRS 486 -113 so states. While this section refers to the fill amount, its protection also extends to protecting the consumer if the labeling is misleading. Providing information about only ten percent of a product is deceptive and misleading. Therefore, the consumer needs to know the weight and percentage of each component of the product by country or region of origin; and 8. If the administrator is provided substantive information as to the content and point of origin of a product, in the case of blends, the source of such constituent parts, should be provided to the consumer to differentiate a specific consumer commodity from an imitation or "look- alike" (HRS 486 -118). Therefore, if the administrator is entitled to complete information, then so is the consumer. When ten percent or even fifty percent of a product is not identified by country or region of origin, the consumer may falsely believe that he or she is purchasing an entirely different product from what the label reads. This imitation or look -alike product may confuse the consumer into buying something he or she did not intend to buy. To correctly, accurately, and thoroughly label consumer products is the very least our consumers deserve; and 9. When 51% of the wholesale value is added by manufacturing, assembling, fabricating, or production outside of the State or Country (HRS 486 -11), a loophole is created that allows foreign products to use the name of "Hawai`i ", "Hawaiian ", or the "Hawaiian country or region of origin" in an effort to deceive the public and promote that foreign product. "Made in Hawai`i" becomes misleading because only 49% of the product may originate in Hawaii, with the remainder coming from a source outside of the State or Country. This should be remedied by full disclosure of the origins of the all components of the item. This problem also negatively impacts perishable agricultural products. The 51% added by processing disadvantages the Hawai`i grower, reduces the Hawai`i product purchased, confuses the consumer, and limits the revenue to the agricultural industry in Hawai`i. As a result, manufacturers have a loophole in this section. By adding 51% of the wholesale value, 5