It's an interesting debate, because the purer a dairy product is, the less it would be a dairy product under that kind of approach, which is why we're saying it doesn't make a lot of sense to make that distinction. This is an issue of pure protein. The milk protein concentrate that you're talking about at 87.5% is 100% dairy. It's pure dairy; it just has less water. There's only milk protein in there. So why is something that's 70% pure milk protein--a little bit more water, maybe a little bit more minerals--from milk more of a dairy product than one that has more milk protein? This is why the debate doesn't make sense.
To a large extent, one of the debates that the panel and the tribunal did not address is that all of these products were put in classification 0404, which deals with natural milk constituents. If protein is not a natural milk constituent, if butterfat is not a natural milk constituent, somebody will have to tell us what that particular section in 0404 is supposed to cover. Basically, what's left are minerals, water, and sugar. That's all you've got left--that's milk.
So at one point it doesn't make a lot of sense, the way they're approaching it. To accept that in a tariff line that talks about hide powders and peptones and other proteins--not milk, but other protein substances.... It makes more sense for pure milk protein to be there than in a section of natural milk constituents.
But that's my own view. I still haven't figured out why the tribunal came out with that decision.