LONDON — U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade negotiators are pushing for the U.K. to adopt American standards in a move that would derail Britain’s post-Brexit relationship with the European Union, two people familiar with the talks have told POLITICO.

The U.S. is also pushing hard for the recognition of American accreditation bodies in the U.K., three other people with knowledge of the demands confirmed. The joint moves would have knock-on effects for safety-critical sectors like food, forensics, manufacturing and NHS testing, experts fear.

“It’s this invisible infrastructure that no one really knows about but which keeps everyone safe — and that’s now under threat,” a person briefed on the talks told POLITICO. They, like others cited in this piece, were granted anonymity to speak freely.

American negotiators have turned up the heat in trade talks with the recent suspension of the Technology Prosperity Deal, amid frustration over the pace of wider negotiations. U.K. negotiating asks on steel and Scotch whisky tariffs have also gone unanswered.

Trump threatened a fresh wedge in the relationship over the weekend, vowing to impose tariffs on Britain and other European allies pushing back at his desire for the United States to own Greenland.

The standards push comes as the Trump administration hollows out American watchdogs, with sweeping cuts to the Food and Drug Administration and the dismantling of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

While food standards remain a red line for the U.K. government, some figures familiar with the talks fear the U.K. could cave in on other U.S. demands.

“My concern is that these red lines that have been red lines from the outset and for years are under increasing threat of being breached,” the person cited above said.  

British negotiators have so far refused to back down, but U.S. negotiators “keep circling back” on these issues, another person who was briefed on the talks by both governments said.

Peter Holmes, an expert on standards from the UK Trade Policy Observatory at the University of Sussex, warned that accepting U.S. demands could lead to a “race to the bottom” with the U.K. regarded as a “wild west market” internationally.

A U.K. government spokesperson said: “Our historic agreement with the U.S. has already delivered for the pharma, aerospace and auto sectors, while our deal with the EU will see the removal of trade barriers including SPS, saving hundreds of millions on U.K. exports.”

“We have and always will be clear that we will uphold our high food, animal welfare and environmental standards in trade deals, and negotiations will continue with both the EU and U.S. on strengthening our trading relationship,” the spokesperson added.

A spokesperson for the United States Trade Representative said the claims came from “anonymous and irrelevant sources” with “no insight into the trade discussions between the U.S. and U.K.”  The spokesperson did not contest any specific aspects of this report.

They added that the two nations had successfully implemented “numerous aspects of the U.S.-U.K. EPD,” including “mutually expanding access of U.S. and U.K. beef in each other’s markets.” 

“The U.S. and U.K. continue to work together constructively on finalizing remaining aspects of the EPD, including the U.K. commitment to ‘improve market access for agricultural products’ from the United States,” the spokesperson said.

Impact on Brexit reset talks

Giving in to the U.S. demands would upset Britain’s ability to trade more closely with the EU as part of ongoing Brexit “reset” negotiations with the bloc that include alignment on food standards and carbon emissions in manufacturing.

The U.K. government has “very clear red lines around all of this because they are going to do certain things with the EU,” the second person quoted above explained.

“You would have thought these matters had already been well ventilated and resolved,” the person added, explaining that in talks the U.S. side “keep saying ‘why can’t you do more food standards? Why aren’t you coming closer on our side of it? Are you really sure what you’re doing with the EU is the right thing to do?’”

Negotiations with the U.S. are “pretty much [in] stasis at the moment,” the same person continued. As London’s Brexit reset talks with the EU progress this year, “the possibility to have the kinds of changes that the U.S. is putting forward become much diminished when those agreements with the EU start to get over the line.”

Recognition of accreditation bodies

Multiple people briefed on the trade talks claim the U.S. proposals go beyond the terms of the original U.K.-U.S. Economic Prosperity Deal agreed last May between U.S. President Donald Trump and Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer. 

In addition to headline commitments to cut tariffs on cars, steel and pharmaceuticals, the wide-ranging deal included a promise to address “non-tariff barriers,” including a pledge to treat conformity assessment bodies — such as testing labs and certification groups from the other nation — in a way that is “no less favorable” than the treatment of its own. 

This is an increasingly common commitment in U.K. trade deals and typically means that accreditation bodies would have the power to accredit a whole range of certification and testing providers from the other country.

However, U.S. negotiators are now pushing for the recognition of disparate American accreditation bodies, which would give them the authority to approve certification, testing and verification organizations in the U.K., three people briefed on the talks confirmed.

Accepting this demand would mean that the U.K.’s national accreditation body, UKAS, would no longer meet the basic requirements of membership in the European Co-operation for Accreditation, under which national accreditation bodies recognize each other’s accreditations. 

This would put the proposed U.K.-EU agrifood deal and plans to link U.K. and EU Emissions Trading Schemes “at massive risk,” should those deals require the EU to recognize U.K. emissions verification bodies and food control laboratories, the first person cited above explained.

An industry figure familiar with the ETS linkage talks said an acceptance of the changes would amount to a “watering down” of the entire carbon pricing system, adding that “every single company falling under UK ETS” would be “absolutely furious.”

It could also jeopardize any future alignment with the EU in other areas such as manufactured goods, a second industry figure briefed on the negotiations said. 

The U.K. government has indicated a willingness to go even further in its relationship with the EU, with U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer saying he wanted the U.K. to seek “even closer alignment” with the single market. 

Beyond plans outlined in the Common Understanding last May, “there are other areas where we should consider if it’s in our interests to … align with the single market,” he told the BBC in a recent interview. “Now that needs to be considered on an issue-by-issue, sector-by-sector basis, but we’ve already done it with food and agriculture, and that will be implemented this year.”

‘Race to the bottom’

The U.S. operates a decentralized standards system in which accreditation is carried out by a competitive network of organizations, most of which are commercial. This is in direct contrast to the U.K.’s current model of accreditation, whereby a single, non-profit accreditation body, UKAS, oversees certification and product testing in the public interest.

The UK Trade Policy Observatory’s Peter Holmes warned that adopting the U.S. system could lead to a “race to the bottom”, with UKAS pitted against American accreditation bodies. “They might have to cut corners and give up their legally-required public service obligations,” he said. 

Accepting U.S. accreditation bodies would make the U.K. a “wild west market where you can’t trust anything that’s on sale in the U.K.,” he added.

The U.K. government has repeatedly rejected the possibility of changes to British standards, including the possibility of accepting American chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef. 

“We will not compromise on food standards,” Trade Minister Chris Bryant said in an interview with CNBC this month. “That is the beginning and end of everything I have to say on that subject. Food standards are really important. There is no compromise for us to strike there.”