Here's another example, though, that is entirely nonsensical and in the same category. In our rules, B.01.100(1) of the FDR mandates that, literally, the word “simulated” has to be used on our products, and the words “contains no meat” or “contains no poultry” have to be used on the products.
In the U.S., they take a much more sensible approach. Simply, the rules have to be in place such that consumers are not misled.
We take a very granular, hyper focused approach that is clearly red tape, when our focus should just be on consumer confusion. Again, we're adding barriers in a Canadian context, whereas the U.S. just cares about consumer confusion.