I think it's commonly recognized that the US FDA doesn't recognize risk that can't be proven to exist, while the general European approach is to assume the possibility of risk unless there is proof that no risk exists. The FDA also has a much shorter timeframe of concern, with no apparent interest in whether unanticipated genetic mechanisms may exist that have cumulative effects over several generations...such as, for instance, changes to characteristics of a foodstuff that, in combination with other foodstuffs and the environment, have an other-than-gross-nutritional but still beneficial effect on consumers that the modified or cloned version no longer has.
That's most apparent in regard to GM plants, but I assume that there may be concern about cloned foodchain animals as well.
I believe Japan also has certain concerns not shared by the US in regard to GM foodstuffs. I don't know anything about their stance on cloning.
Food products that will be sold exclusively at retail in the US may not be legally required to be labeled other than as required by individual distributors/retailers, but my guess is that food products that may be exported, or that may be used in manufacture/preparation of subsequent food products that may be exported, probably should be labeled in some manner to avoid legal chaos for those products' other-than-consumer customers.