Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

Tests Show Most Store Honey Isn’t Honey

144K views 557 replies 46 participants last post by  John Smith 
#1 ·
I've found this article just recently, and many facts surprised me.

For example:
"•76 percent of samples bought at groceries had all the pollen removed, These were stores like TOP Food, Safeway, Giant Eagle, QFC, Kroger, Metro Market, Harris Teeter, A&P, Stop & Shop and King Soopers.

•100 percent of the honey sampled from drugstores like Walgreens, Rite-Aid and CVS Pharmacy had no pollen.

•77 percent of the honey sampled from big box stores like Costco, Sam’s Club, Walmart, Target and H-E-B had the pollen filtered out.

•100 percent of the honey packaged in the small individual service portions from Smucker, McDonald’s and KFC had the pollen removed. "

From: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/11/tests-show-most-store-honey-isnt-honey/#.UQ1sbh3m1n5


Boris Romanov
 
#555 ·
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 —

"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 Enforcement’s (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 nation’s 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 “honey assessment fee” 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 “adulterated” 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 “supply side” 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 “demand side” of the industry. The investigation is continuing.
“We 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,” said Gary S. Shapiro, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.
“These businesses intentionally deprived the U.S. government of millions of dollars in unpaid duties,” said ICE Deputy Director Daniel Ragsdale. “Schemes 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.”
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 Administration’s 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 company’s own audits and inspections that raised substantial concerns that the honey was illegally imported. They also provided false information to the company’s board of directors, customers, and the public regarding Groeb Farms’ 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 months’ 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 Holding’s “extensive 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.”
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 “Katy Lin,” 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 company’s 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."
 
#556 · (Edited)
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???
 
#557 ·
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/chicago/2013/pr0220_02b.pdf

http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.ahpane...pa_documents/class_action_lawsuit_filed_c.pdf
 
#558 ·
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
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top