The USDA is right. Biofoods don't need labels.

Should a federal agency issue a regulation that will impose up to $3.5 billion in costs next year, and billions more in the coming decade — while delivering essentially no benefits? That sounds crazy. But a few weeks ago, the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed to do exactly that. The proposal is the outgrowth of the long-standing national battle over whether to require labels for bioengineered (or genetically modified) foods. The USDA's analysis of costs and benefits deserves careful attention, even if it raises serious questions about its own proposal.In the summer of 2016, Congress required the USDA to impose such labels. Last month, the department responded by inviting public comments on the rule, called the Proposed National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard.The department was candid about the high costs of its proposal. In the first year, companies — mostly food manufacturers — would have to spend $600 million to $3.5 billion in compliance costs. (The range reflects uncertainty about some assumptions behind the estimates.) After an initial period of learning and adjustment, the annual costs would range from $132 million to $330 million. In the history of federal regulation, that may not qualify as monstrously expensive, but it's a lot.