Page 28 of 28 FirstFirst ... 18262728
Results 541 to 558 of 558
  1. #541
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Fort Walton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    I don't think light-emitting devices made many appearances in this thread. A lot of space heaters, maybe.

    That's a shame, from my point of view, because the reason I was interested in the subject has to do with my feeling that in the US, the labeling system is not good for beekeepers, because it does not adequately distinguish between imported commodity honey and that which is produced here by conscientious American beekeepers. I'm not saying anything bad about beekeepers in other countries in general. But a lot of, for example, Chinese honey is not the best honey. There ought to be ways that the consumer can tell the difference.

    I guess I'll have to start another thread.

    Apologies in advance!

  2. #542

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by rhaldridge View Post
    I guess I'll have to start another thread.
    You were unable to find what you wanted in the 500+ posts in this thread?
    Good luck with that new one.
    Dan www.boogerhillbee.com
    Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards

  3. #543
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Fort Walton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Dan... did you find anything useful in this thread?

    My take on all this is that in the US, the present marketing requirements are not very helpful to beekeepers. Even the biggest beekeeper in the country, Richard Adee, apparently feels that way too, so maybe I'm not wrong. (Though I often am.)

  4. #544
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,426

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by rhaldridge View Post
    ...the reason I was interested in the subject has to do with my feeling that in the US, the labeling system is not good for beekeepers, because it does not adequately distinguish between imported commodity honey and that which is produced here by conscientious American beekeepers.
    It is in the interest of the "industry" for honey to be a simple commodity product.
    It is in the interest of anyone producing or selling something that is "better than the average" to differentiate their products from the commodity lines.

    I'm not interested in promoting US honey as "good" and foreign honey as "bad"....there is too much yin in the yang, and too much yang in the yin to split things in half in such a simplistic manner and have it be meaningful.

    The commodity market is a classic "race to the bottom"....see who can provide something that the public will accept as "honey" at the lowest cost and highest margin. I have no interest in competing in that market at all....it is about volume and market share, not about quality product.

    The US labeling system is useless to me....I go out of my way to buy "US Grade B Male Syrup", and I don't grade honey. You are free to differentiate your product however you like, and free to buy product from someone you trust to tell you the truth....but you probably won't find that at Wall Mart for $3/lb.

    deknow
    The irony is free. It's the sarcasm you are paying for....ironically.
    -Felicity Jones in "Chalet Girl"

  5. #545
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,791

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    It is in the interest of the "industry" for honey to be a simple commodity product.
    It is in the interest of anyone producing or selling something that is "better than the average" to differentiate their products from the commodity lines. -deknow
    Bingo. Well said, Dean.

  6. #546
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    24,487

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Amen Dean.

    This should be everyone's Mantra. "Sell your own Honey".
    Mark Berninghausen "Ships at a distance have every man's wish on board." Zora Neale Hurston

  7. #547

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by deknow View Post
    .i go out of my way to buy "us grade b male syrup"
    tmi...
    Dan www.boogerhillbee.com
    Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards

  8. #548

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by rhaldridge View Post
    Dan... did you find anything useful in this thread?
    No.
    I don't think starting another thread will bear any new fruit either.
    Good luck, again.
    Dan www.boogerhillbee.com
    Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards

  9. #549
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Fort Walton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    1,191

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by deknow View Post
    It is in the interest of the "industry" for honey to be a simple commodity product.
    It is in the interest of anyone producing or selling something that is "better than the average" to differentiate their products from the commodity lines.

    I'm not interested in promoting US honey as "good" and foreign honey as "bad"....there is too much yin in the yang, and too much yang in the yin to split things in half in such a simplistic manner and have it be meaningful.

    The commodity market is a classic "race to the bottom"....see who can provide something that the public will accept as "honey" at the lowest cost and highest margin. I have no interest in competing in that market at all....it is about volume and market share, not about quality product.

    The US labeling system is useless to me....I go out of my way to buy "US Grade B Male Syrup", and I don't grade honey. You are free to differentiate your product however you like, and free to buy product from someone you trust to tell you the truth....but you probably won't find that at Wall Mart for $3/lb.

    deknow
    This seems exactly right, and pretty much what I'm trying to get at with the new thread: http://www.beesource.com/forums/show...ts-good-enough

  10. #550
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,449

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by beemandan View Post
    We must also concern ourselves with convention. Are we dealing with current flow (positive to negative) or electron flow (negative to positive). These are important issues.....
    The debate continues.....NOT
    Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeel
    The current in your house I believe is alternating (AC), which meant, it alternates direction 60 times per second (DC in your car) ... It was decided before you. As for lights - I feel, the lights are all extinguished and we should conclude this thread. I would propose that we will have last chance to express opinion (if any) without any commenting, just a statement. And after that Barry will close the thread. Of coarse if you support this idea. I feel honored contributing to this monster! Thanks so much to all, who contribute!
    Серёжа, Sergey

  11. #551
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    24,487

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Unless you get overtly contentious and personal beesource doesn't work that way Sergey. Not usually anyway.
    Mark Berninghausen "Ships at a distance have every man's wish on board." Zora Neale Hurston

  12. #552
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    I'm glad that some bad persons and honey-processing companies were caught.

    ICE alleges imported honey scam
    U.S. individuals, processors charged with evading fees on Chinese product

    "Five persons and two domestic honey-processing companies were charged Wednesday in a federal probe targeting a multimillion dollar smuggling operation bringing Chinese-origin honey into the United States.
    The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-led investigation — known as “Project Honeygate” — uncovered what ICE said was the misdeclaration of Chinese-origin honey as other commodities as it was imported into the United States and shipped through other countries to evade anti-dumping duties.
    Altogether, the seven defendants are accused of evading duties totaling more than $180 million.
    “These businesses intentionally deprived the U.S. government of millions of dollars in unpaid duties,” said ICE Deputy Director Daniel Ragsdale. “Schemes like this result in legitimate importers and the domestic honey-producing industry enduring years of unprofitable operations, with some even being put out of business. We will continue to enforce criminal violations of anti-dumping laws in all industries so American and foreign businesses all play by the same rules.”
    The new charges represent the second phase of an ICE investigation that began in June 2011 when an undercover agent assumed the role of the director of procurement at Honey Holding I Ltd., which by then was cooperating with the investigation. Honey Holding, doing business as Honey Solutions of Baytown, Texas, and Groeb Farms Inc., of Onsted, Mich. — two of the nation’s largest honey suppliers — have both entered into deferred prosecution agreements with the government.
    Honey Holding agreed to pay $1 million and Groeb Farms agreed to pay $2 million in fines. Both companies have also agreed to implement corporate compliance programs as part of their respective agreements.

    Also charged were three honey brokers, the former director of sales for Honey Holding, and the president of Premium Food Sales Inc., a broker and distributor of raw and processed honey in Bradford, Ontario.

    In December 2001, the Commerce Department determined that Chinese-origin honey was being sold in the United States at less than fair market value, and imposed anti-dumping duties. The duties were as high as 221 percent of the declared value, and later were assessed against the entered net weight, currently at $2.63 per net kilogram, in addition to a honey assessment fee of one cent per pound of all honey.

    In 2008, federal authorities began investigating allegations involving circumventing anti-dumping duties through illegal imports, including transshipment and mislabeling on the supply side of the honey industry. The investigation resulted in charges against 14 persons, including executives of Alfred L. Wolff GmbH and several affiliated companies of the German food conglomerate. They were charged with allegedly evading approximately $80 million in anti-dumping duties on Chinese-origin honey. Authorities seized and forfeited more than 3,000 drums of honey that illegally entered the United States.
    The second phase of the investigation involves allegations of illegal buying, processing and trading of honey that illegally entered the United States on the demand side of the industry. Some of that honey was adulterated with antibiotics not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). None of the charges allege any instances of illness or other public health consequences attributed to consumption of the honey. The investigation is continuing.
    “Trade fraud can have significant implications for the U.S. economy and consumers,” said U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Chief Operating Officer Thomas S. Winkowski. “These products take jobs away from American workers and frequently violate U.S. health and safety standards, potentially endangering the public. CBP is committed to fighting these fraudulent actors alongside our government partners.”
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ed-honey-scam/

    So, in my opinion this thread will be relevant for a long period of time...
    Last edited by Boris; 02-22-2013 at 06:23 PM.

  13. #553
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,449

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Quote Originally Posted by sqkcrk View Post
    Unless you get overtly contentious and personal beesource doesn't work that way Sergey. Not usually anyway.
    Mark, I am glad you back!
    I remember, once Barry closed the thread... was it contaminated wax thread? but it was his decision... I do not mind to continue once people who have something to say is back!
    Серёжа, Sergey

  14. #554
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    Some details, related to my last post # 552

    "Founded in the 1940’s as Hignite Packing Company, Honey Holding dba Honey Solutions is one of the largest processors and marketers of industrial honey in the United States. At our primary facility located on six acres just outside of Houston, Texas, Honey Holding provides approximately 22 million #’s (10,000 m.t.) per year of honey coast to coast to America’s premiere bakers and food processors. To insure our customers’ continuity of supply, we complement our domestic Texas & Louisiana honey production with a myriad of foreign sources obtained from both highly respected (!?) international honey traders and directly from overseas beekeepers and their processors. This global sourcing combined with quality products processed to exacting specifications and delivered on company owned trucks & tankers has allowed Honey Holding to successfully service its growing customer base."
    http://www.honeylocator.com/locator/...ney-solutions/

    "Worldwide leadership in honey processing and best-in-class producer of wholesome food ingredients, industrial sweeteners, food service products, and value-added retail products.
    Our efforts are focused on food quality, safety, and sustainability while providing the value and service all customers should demand. We serve the U.S. consumer through our supply of pure honey to further manufacturers and directly with Control Label and our Company Brands of Groeb Farms and Miller’s. This is a responsibility we take seriously (!?) The Groeb Farms production facilities operate in strict compliance with risk-based quality control procedures and are certified by BRC, the definitive certifying body for global food safety."
    http://www.groebfarms.com/

    "In its own press release, DOJ today announced the two former executives of Groeb Farms "purchased Chinese-origin honey for processing" and "engaged in fraudulent practices despite the company's own audits and inspections that raised substantial concerns that the honey was illegally imported." The executives "also provided false information to the company's board of directors, customers and the public...
    ...Senior executives who were responsible for Groeb Farms' purchasing and mislead (!) the Board of Directors, customers and the public about transshipping are no longer with the company...
    ...We take full responsibility for and deeply regret any errors that were made in the past regarding the import of honey," said Rolf Richter, the new Groeb Farms CEO..."
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/groeb-...223800218.html

    Reminder: "Honey Holding agreed to pay $1 million and Groeb Farms agreed to pay $2 million in fines.
    Last edited by Boris; 02-23-2013 at 07:28 AM.

  15. #555
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    More details were released by the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois (names, fines, possible sentences and so on)

    Two Companies and Five Individuals Charged With Roles in
    Illegal Honey Imports; Avoided $180 Million in AntiDumping Duties
    CHICAGO ó

    "Five individuals and two domestic honey processing companies have been charged with federal crimes in connection with a nationwide investigation of illegal importations of honey from China that was mislabeled as coming from other countries to avoid antidumping duties or was adulterated with antibiotics not approved for use in honey. Altogether, the seven defendants allegedly avoided antidumping duties totaling more than $180 million.
    None of the charges allege any instances of illness or other public health consequences attributed to consumption of the honey.
    The charges represent the second phase of an investigation led by agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcementís (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). In June 2011, an undercover agent assumed the role of director of procurement at defendant HONEY HOLDING I, LTD., which by then was cooperating with the investigation.
    Honey Holding, doing business as Honey Solutions, of Baytown, Tex., and defendant GROEB FARMS, INC., of Onsted, Mich., two of the nationís largest honey suppliers, have both entered into deferred prosecution agreements with the government, subject to court approval, with Honey Holding agreeing to pay a $1 million fine and Groeb Farms agreeing to the payment of a $2 million fine. Both companies have agreed to implement corporate compliance programs as part of their respective agreements.
    The individual defendants include three honey brokers, as well as DOUGLAS A. MURPHY, former director of sales for Honey Holding, and DONALD COUTURE, president of Premium Food Sales, Inc., a broker and distributor of raw and processed honey in Bradford, Ontario.
    In December 2001, the Commerce Department determined that Chinese-origin honey was being sold in the United States at less than fair market value, and imposed antidumping duties. The duties were as high as 221 percent of the declared value, and later were assessed against the entered net weight, currently at $2.63 per net kilogram, in addition to a ďhoney assessment feeĒ of one cent per pound of all honey. In October 2002, the Food and Drug Administration issued an import alert for honey containing the antibiotic Chloramphenicol, a broad spectrum antibiotic that is used to treat serious infections in humans, but which is not approved for use in honey. Honey containing certain antibiotics is deemed ďadulteratedĒ within the meaning of federal food and drug safety laws.
    In 2008, federal authorities began investigating allegations involving circumventing antidumping duties through illegal imports, including transshipment and mislabeling, on the ďsupply sideĒ of the honey industry. The investigation resulted in charges against 14 individuals, including executives of Alfred L. Wolff GmbH and several affiliated companies of the German food conglomerate whose U.S. honey-importing business was based in Chicago, and others for allegedly avoiding approximately $80 million in antidumping duties on Chinese-origin honey. Authorities seized and forfeited more than 3,000 drums of honey that entered the country illegally.
    The second phase of the investigation, announced today, involves allegations of illegal buying, processing, and trading of honey that illegally entered the U.S. on the ďdemand sideĒ of the industry. The investigation is continuing.
    ďWe applaud the efforts of HSI, Customs and Border Protection, and other agencies involved in this complex, long-term investigation to enforce the laws that exist to protect U.S. consumers and the honey market,Ē said Gary S. Shapiro, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.
    ďThese businesses intentionally deprived the U.S. government of millions of dollars in unpaid duties,Ē said ICE Deputy Director Daniel Ragsdale. ďSchemes like these result in legitimate importers and the domestic honey-producing industry enduring years of unprofitable operations, with some even being put out of business. We will continue to enforce criminal violations of antidumping laws in all industries and ports of entry so American businesses and foreign producers of goods all play by the same rules.Ē
    Also announcing the charges were Gary Hartwig, Special Agent-in-Charge of HSI Chicago; William A. Ferrara, Acting Director of Field Operations for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Chicago, and Daniel Henson, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Field Office of the Food and Drug Administrationís Office of Criminal Investigations.
    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration operates a toll-free number for consumer inquiries: 1-888-INFO-FDA (463-6332).
    The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros.
    The public is reminded that indictments and informations contain only charges and are not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, courts must impose a reasonable sentence under federal statutes and the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines. Three of the five individuals charged have authorized the government to disclose that they intend to plead guilty to the charges against them.

    Details of the six separate cases follow:

    United States v. Groeb Farms, Inc., 13 CR 137
    GROEB FARMS, INC., of Onsted, Mich., described as the largest industrial honey supplier in the United States, was charged with buying 1,578 container loads of Chinese-origin honey between February 2008 and April 2012, knowing that it was illegally imported into the United States to avoid more than $78.8 million in antidumping duties.
    The company has entered into a deferred prosecution agreement in which it accepted and acknowledged responsibility for its conduct and that of its current and former executives and employees. The agreement requires the company to continue cooperating fully for two years, to pay a $2 million fine based on its ability to pay, and to dispose any illegally-entered Chinese-origin honey in its possession.
    The company admitted in a factual statement that two former executives purchased Chinese-origin honey for processing at its facilities and sold that honey to its domestic retail, foodservice, and industrial customers as mislabeled non-Chinese honey, and at other times, as Chinese honey, all while knowing that it had been illegally imported to avoid antidumping duties and, at times, honey assessment fees. The honey was variously described falsely as sugars and syrups instead of Chinese-origin honey, and as having originated in Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Thailand, and Vietnam, instead of China.
    The two former executives engaged in fraudulent practices despite the companyís own audits and inspections that raised substantial concerns that the honey was illegally imported. They also provided false information to the companyís board of directors, customers, and the public regarding Groeb Farmsí involvement in knowingly purchasing, processing, and selling illegally smuggled Chinese-origin honey.
    The corporate compliance program is designed to ensure that Groeb Farms maintains supply chain integrity and conducts reasonable inquiries to safeguard against any illegal activity.

    United States v. Douglas A. Murphy and Honey Holding I, 13 CR 138
    DOUGLAS A. MURPHY, 56, of Kingwood, Tex., and HONEY HOLDING I, LTD., doing business as Honey Solutions, a large industrial honey supplier based in Baytown, Tex., were charged together with violating the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for allegedly purchasing discounted Polish-origin honey containing the prohibited antibiotic Chloramphenicol from Alfred L. Wolff USA in 2006. Murphy was director of sales between 2003 and 2008 and was responsible for the purchase of wholesale quantities of honey, maintaining relationships with suppliers, and the sale of honey to U.S. customers.
    DOUGLAS A. MURPHY, 56, of Kingwood, Tex., and HONEY HOLDING I, LTD., doing business as Honey Solutions, a large industrial honey supplier based in Baytown, Tex., were charged together with violating the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for allegedly purchasing discounted Polish-origin honey containing the prohibited antibiotic Chloramphenicol from Alfred L. Wolff USA in 2006. Murphy was director of sales between 2003 and 2008 and was responsible for the purchase of wholesale quantities of honey, maintaining relationships with suppliers, and the sale of honey to U.S. customers.
    Murphy pleaded guilty today and, under the terms of his cooperation plea agreement, subject to court approval, he will receive a sentence of six monthsí imprisonment and a fine of $26,624 when he is sentenced on May 31.
    Honey Holding has entered into a deferred prosecution agreement in which it accepted and acknowledged responsibility for its conduct and that of its employees and agents. The agreement requires the company to continue cooperating fully for two years and to pay a $1 million fine based on its ability to pay. The agreement describes Honey Holdingís ďextensive cooperation, including its agreement to allow an undercover law enforcement agent to assume the role of [its] director of procurement in an undercover capacity since June 2011.Ē
    The company admitted in a factual statement that Honey Holding defrauded its downstream customers of approximately $26,624 by purchasing, processing, and selling the Polish-origin honey that was adulterated with the antibiotic.
    The company also admitted that it purchased Chinese-origin honey from at least seven shell and front companies that were controlled by various Chinese honey producers and manufacturers. These illegal honey imports avoided more than $33.4 million in antidumping duties.
    Honey Holding also agreed to establish a corporate compliance program to ensure that it maintains supply chain integrity and takes steps to safeguard against any illegal activity.

    United States v. Jun Yang, 13 CR 139
    JUN YANG, 39, of Houston, who brokered the sale of honey to Honey Holding among others, and who operated National Honey, Inc., which did business as National Commodities Company in Houston, was charged with brokering the sale of illegal Chinese-origin honey, which was misrepresented as originating in India, into the United States to avoid antidumping duties.
    Yang, through his attorney, has authorized the government to disclose that he will plead guilty, admitting responsibility for fraudulently avoiding antidumping duties totaling as much as $37.9 million on Chinese-origin honey that entered the country illegally as Malaysian and Indian honey between 2009 and 2012. Yang has agreed to pay a fine of $250,000 and restitution totaling $2.64 million, in addition to whatever other sentence is imposed by the court. The government has agreed to recommend a sentence of 74 months in prison.

    United States v. Urbain Tran, 13 CR 140
    URBAIN TRAN, 78, of Culver City, Calif., an agent of Honey Holding who brokered honey transactions for the company since 2006, was charged with two counts of brokering the sale and transportation of illegal Chinese-origin honey, which was misrepresented as originating in Malaysia and Vietnam, into the United States to avoid antidumping duties.
    Tran, through his attorney, has authorized the government to disclose that he will plead guilty under the terms of an agreement calling for a fine of $500,000 and restitution totaling $204,403, in addition to whatever other sentence is imposed by the court. Tran faces a maximum of 20 years in prison on each fraudulent sales and transportation count.

    United States v. Hung Yi Lin, 13 CR 125
    HUNG YI LIN, also known as ďKaty Lin,Ē 42, of Temple City, Calif., was charged in a federal grand jury indictment returned yesterday with one count of transporting 10 container loads of Chinese-origin honey through the Chicago area after it entered the country illegally. Lin owned and operated KBB Express Inc., of South El Monte, Calif., and served as the U.S. agent for at least 12 importers that were controlled by Chinese honey producers and manufacturers. She was initially charged in a criminal complaint and arrested on Feb. 9 in California. She was released on a $100,000 secured bond and will be arraigned on a later date in U.S. District Court in Chicago.
    According to the indictment, between 2009 and 2012, Lin schemed to falsify the contents of hundreds of shipping containers of Chinese-origin honey by misrepresenting them as sugars and syrups during the importation process. As a result, the honey, which had an aggregate declared value of nearly $11.5 million when it entered the country, avoided antidumping duties and honey assessments totaling $39.2 million, the charges allege.
    The charge carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

    United States v. Donald Couture, 11 CR 781
    DONALD COUTURE, 60, of Bradford, Ontario, the president, owner, and operator of Premium Food Sales, Inc., a Canadian broker and distributor of raw and processed honey, was indicted on four counts of violating the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In May 2009, Couture allegedly caused four container loads of his companyís honey that were rejected by one U.S. customer because of the presence of a prohibited antibiotic, Tetracycline, to be delivered to a second U.S. customer without disclosing that the honey contained the antibiotic. The honey was shipped through the Chicago area when it was transported from one customer to the other.
    An arrest warrant was issued in the U.S. for Couture. Couture was initially charged in a sealed complaint in November 2011 and the complaint was unsealed after he was indicted last week. Each count carries a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine."

  16. #556
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    The interesting finding.

    This info is from my last post:
    "DOUGLAS A. MURPHY, 56, of Kingwood, Tex., and HONEY HOLDING I, LTD., doing business as Honey Solutions, a large industrial honey supplier based in Baytown, Tex., were charged together with violating the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for allegedly purchasing discounted Polish-origin honey containing the prohibited antibiotic Chloramphenicol from Alfred L. Wolff USA in 2006. Murphy was director of sales between 2003 and 2008 and was responsible for the purchase of wholesale quantities of honey, maintaining relationships with suppliers, and the sale of honey to U.S. customers.
    Murphy pleaded guilty today and, under the terms of his cooperation plea agreement, subject to court approval, he will receive a sentence of six months’ imprisonment and a fine of $26,624 when he is sentenced on May 31."


    And this info is from the archive of the U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    SEC v. Douglas A. Murphy (!), David G. Kay and Lawrence H. Theriot, Civil Action No. H-02-2908 (S.D. Texas):

    "Previously, on October 6, 2004, a federal jury in Houston, Texas, found Murphy and Kay guilty of authorizing over $500,000 in bribes to Haitian customs officials during 1998 and 1999 to illegally reduce American Rice's import taxes in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The jury also found defendant Murphy guilty of obstruction of justice in connection with a parallel civil investigation of the bribery payments by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Murphy was American Rice's president (!) at the time of the violations . Kay was an American Rice vice president of operations and reported to Murphy. This criminal action, brought by the Department of Justice, arose out of a joint investigation with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
    The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil action against Murphy and Kay in the Southern District of Texas. The Commission's complaint alleges, among other things, that Murphy and Kay violated the civil provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The Commission's civil action has been stayed pending completion of the criminal proceedings.
    " http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr19293.htm

    Looks like Douglas A. Murphy, who was mentioned in the two different cases is the same person?
    From the Rice fraud to the Honey fraud???
    Last edited by Boris; 02-28-2013 at 12:33 PM.

  17. #557
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    New findings

    "PLENTY OF HORNE
    Milwaukee’s Global Honey Scam
    Milwaukee-owned honey far
    By Michael Horne, http://urbanmilwaukee.com/

    "A government sting uncovering massive illegal shipments of Chinese honey has the nation’s 2,000 commercial beekeepers abuzz, and has a Milwaukee venture capital firm facing millions of dollars in potential criminal and civil penalties.

    In February, 2013, the US Department of Justice criminally charged Groeb Farms, Inc., of Onsted, Michigan with the illegal purchase of 1,578 container loads of Chinese-origin honey from February 2008 to April 2012. Groeb, the largest honey packer in the nation, is owned by Horizon Partners, Ltd. of Milwaukee.

    In a deferred prosecution agreement, Groeb admitted the illegal importation of the honey to avoid paying “no less than $78,866,216” in anti-dumping duties and paid a $2 million fine. Charges will be dropped in 2 years if the firm no longer violates the law.

    Horizon Partners was not named in the criminal complaint against Groeb, but is a defendant in a federal civil class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in April by three honey producers on behalf of all members of their class.

    The suit notes that all violations occurred after Horizon’s 2007 purchase of Groeb, which had been a family-owned firm since 1973. According to the suit: “Horizon exercised its control over Groeb in such a manner as to commit fraud by knowingly, intentionally, and/or recklessly directing Groeb to purchase, package, distribute, and sell falsely labeled honey in order to increase profits for Horizon and its investors.”

    Groeb describes itself as “a global leader in honey processing and best-in-class producer of food ingredients, industrial sweeteners and food service products.”

    Horizon Partners was founded in 1988 by Robert M. Feerick, of the prominent Milwaukee funeral home family. He is Horizon’s CEO and also serves on the board of Groeb, and did so at the time of the fraud, according to court records.

    According to the Horizon’s website, “Horizon Partners, Ltd. is a private investment holding company which acquires and builds private companies. … Horizon gives management wide latitude in running the companies. Over time, Horizon provides management teams the opportunity to acquire significant direct ownership in its companies.”

    But according to the suit, Groeb’s managers, perhaps eager to acquire their “significant direct ownership” were “under constant pressure by Horizon and its executives to provide more profits,” which they thought they found in a complicated transshippment ruse that led to the criminal charges and the civil complaint.

    HOW TO LAUNDER HONEY
    US investigations dating to 1994, known colloquially as “Honeygate,” determined that China was dumping honey at less than market prices. While American honey costs about $1.20 – $1.40 a pound to produce, the Chinese can produce honey for as little as $0.22 a pound. This is due to a number of reasons, including prematurely harvested honey, which has a higher water content, and to other factors, like adulterating honey with cheap sweeteners. The Chinese also used US-banned chemicals to maintain hive health.

    As a result of this unfair advantage, the United States government imposed an anti-dumping duty on Chinese honey of as high as 221 per cent to retain the competitiveness of the domestic product.

    After the ban, official Chinese exports decreased, yet its honey production capacity increased, a red flag to prosecutors.

    WHERE DID THE CHINESE HONEY GO?
    In order to circumvent the duties imposed by the US, exporters shipped Chinese honey to second countries, which then shipped it to Groeb, accompanied by “fake and fraudulent bills of lading, invoice, packing list and country of origin certificates,” indicating the honey was from those countries.

    These nations include Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Mongolia, Thailand and Vietnam, “all countries with virtually no commercial beekeeping operations,” according to the civil suit. [Emphasis original.]

    The suit quotes Jill Clark, a sales executive for a honey company who told a magazine writer, “we saw a flurry of honey starting to come into the US from countries — Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines — that had never been exporting to the US before. … All of a sudden they had millions of pounds of honey to sell, at very cheap prices.”

    In India, for example, there were no honey exports in 2000, while the country was the supposed source of origin for 13,137 metric tons in 2009 — a remarkably short time for a 29-million pound honey industry to develop, and equal to the production of about 290,000 commercial hives.

    Malaysia, which also had no U S honey exports in 2000, was credited with 9,068 metric tons in 2009.

    U S customs duties thus evaded amounted in aggregate to some $200 million between 2009 – 2010. Of that, Groeb Farms purchases represented $78.9 million of the losses to the treasury.

    Groeb and others further complicated the scheme by “falsely and fraudulently describing honey as a product other than honey, including sugar and syrups.” The adulterated honey “contained inexpensive sweeteners and was sometimes blended with high fructose corn syrup and other additives,” according to the civil complaint. (It perhaps says something about the quality of Chinese honey that this subterfuge was not readily detected by taste.)

    MARKERS OF HONEY ORIGIN REMOVED
    Traditionally filtered natural honey will remove “bee parts, wax and debris, but will leave pollen in place,” according to the civil suit. The pollen in honey is a reliable indicator of its origin, which can be traced to the source plants and their growing environments.

    However, melissopalynologist Vaughn Bryant, who is, as his title indicates, an investigator of pollen in honey, undertook a test for pollen when he bought more than “60 jars, jugs and plastic bears of honey in 10 states and the District of Columbia” in 2011 for Food Safety News. His article, “Test Shows Most Store Honey is not Honey,” found that 76 percent of all grocery store samples, 77 percent of samples from big box retailers and 100 percent of all honey sold in drug stores had no pollen residue whatsoever. (The US FDA rules state that any product thus ultra-filtered is not, in fact, honey.) This astounding level of filtration was cited by manufacturers as evidence of the American consumer’s desire for clear honey, but the government saw it as an attempt by China to hide the source of the honey. In any event, it is clear that a tremendous amount of Chinese honey is in the marketplace. (Of the 300 million pounds of honey that must be imported to the US in excess of its 148 million pound domestic production, 35 percent is for the home market. The rest goes to “industrial use” in cereals, baked goods, sauces, beverages — hundreds of different processed products.)

    According to the civil complaint, beginning in 2009, after its purchase by Horizon, “Groeb began conducting 100 percent lot testing on all of its raw honey through a state-of-the art testing laboratory and employed specialty testing personnel to perform testing at its Florida facility. While Groeb easily could have tested for the presence of various pollens, it chose not to do so. Horizon knew this.”

    Groeb also claimed to be on the cutting edge of “traceability” of honey origins and claimed to conduct audits of its suppliers. “Those audits would have revealed to Horizon and the Board of Directors that Groeb was purchasing honey from China,” the complaint alleges. “As Groeb expanded and profits rose, Horizon either knew or deliberately chose not to inquire further to determine that Groeb was breaking the law and fraudulently importing, packing, and re-selling illegal Chinese honey.”

    As a result, the complaint says, “Horizon profited from, endorsed, and supported the illegal and fraudulent transshipping scheme. As a result of this conduct, the corporate veil must be disregarded and Horizon held liable to Plaintiffs for the damages outlined below.”

    The complaint asks for relief on the grounds of False Advertising, Unfair Competition and Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization as violations of the Lanham Act and the RICO Act.

    ABOUT HORIZON
    Horizon Partners, Ltd. is a Wisconsin corporation organized in 1988 by Robert M. Feerick with an address of 825 N. Jefferson St., Suite 300. Its principal office is located in Naples, Florida, where Feerick spends much of his time in a $1.7 million home, which he owns in addition to a Mequon condo.

    According to the firm’s website, “Horizon Partners, Ltd. is a private investment holding company which acquires and builds private companies. Horizon focuses on the acquisition of medium size companies that are privately held or divisions/subsidiaries of larger corporations. In general, the companies have a history of sales and earnings growth. On occasion, Horizon will consider turnaround situations. The purchase prices for such acquisitions are in the $3-50 million range.

    Horizon’s investment strategy is to build long-term equity value in its portfolio companies through strategic add-on acquisitions and improvements in operating performance.”

    In addition to Groeb, Horizon currently owns Climax Portable Machining and Welding Systems of Portland, Oregon, which provides portable machining services (acquired in 2005) and Xymox Technologies of Milwaukee, a manufacturer of membrane switches which it bought from Brady Corp. in 1993.

    The company provides a complete acquisition history on its website.

    ABOUT ROBERT M. FEERICK
    Feerick is a member of a prominent family of Milwaukee funeral directors; however, he does not practice the family trade. Here is his biography from the Horizon website:

    Mr. Robert M. Feerick is the Principal and Chairman at Horizon Partners, Ltd. Mr. Feerick is also the Founder of the firm. Mr. Feerick has a broad background in private equity capital investments and acquisitions. Prior to this, he was the Chairman of The Corporate Development Group. In this capacity, Mr. Feerick assisted numerous corporations and management groups in evaluating, structuring, and financing acquisitions and venture capital transactions. Previously, he was a General Partner at Frontenac Company. Mr. Feerick serves as Director of Climax Portable Machine Tools, Inc., Groeb Farms, Inc., Karl’s Event Services, Inc, Xymox Technologies, Inc., and Lantor International, Inc. He served as a Director of First National Bank of the Gulf Coast from October 2009 to June 2012. He was a Director of the Orval Kent Food Company, Inc., Universal Blanchers, LLC, Image Conversion Systems, Inc., and WinterQuest, LLC. Mr. Feerick received an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago and graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Georgetown University."

    http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/c...pr0220_02b.pdf

    http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.ahpanet...it_filed_c.pdf

  18. #558
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tamworth, NSW Australia
    Posts
    260

    Default Re: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isnít Honey

    So Dr. Fessenden got it half right with his now famous "buy your honey from someone you trust."

    The other half he needs to add is this: "Sell your honey to the people who are going to eat it." By that I mean, quit supplying a system that uses your real honey to keep your price down by diluting it with anything else that is cheap.

    Cheers,

    JohnS

Page 28 of 28 FirstFirst ... 18262728

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads