Lemme get this straight: *export* countries are threatening a trade war against their largest *consumer*?!BWAAAA HA HA ha!
Bring It On!
Posted on 01/16/2004 8:21:25 AM PST by jgrubbs
Canada joined seven other countries Thursday in seeking authorization from the World Trade Organization to initiate trade sanctions against the United States after it failed to repeal the so-called Byrd Amendment, a law that turns countervailing duties over to U.S. companies.
The Byrd Amendment has already been declared illegal by the WTO. The U.S. failed to meet a Dec. 27 deadline to repeal it.
It is a major reason why U.S. lumber companies were so eager to seek trade sanctions against Canadian lumber, as they can benefit not only by pushing up the cost of Canadian lumber sold in the U.S. but also by receiving the duties collected.
"The WTO has ruled that the Byrd Amendment does not conform with international trading obligations," said International Trade Minister Jim Peterson. "It is our view that it effectively provides a distorting double advantage to U.S. industry and, if left in place, could lead to billions of dollars in Canadian-paid duties being handed over to U.S. companies."
However, despite the WTO ruling, the U.S. Congress is unlikely to repeal the law during an election year, say Washington lobbyists.
If Canadian legal appeals to defeat U.S. softwood duties fail, the U.S. treasury department would then turn over the $1.6 billion US already collected in softwood lumber duties to the U.S. companies that initiated the trade action.
Under a December U.S. proposal for a softwood settlement, American companies said they would return 52 per cent of the duties to Canada, keeping the remaining 48 per cent themselves.
That deal failed to get support in Canada and on Monday Peterson told his U.S. counterpart, Commerce Secretary Don Evans, that the deal was off.
The other WTO members seeking sanctions are Brazil, Chile, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico and South Korea.
Buying votes with taxes paid in substantial part by U.S. consumers. Sounds like Byrd all right.
Congress may not abdicate or transfer to others these Constitutional powers. We oppose, therefore, the unconstitutional transfer of authority over U.S. trade policy from Congress to agencies, domestic or foreign, which improperly exercise policy-setting functions with respect to U.S. trade policy, and the unconstitutional transfer of authority over copyright and patent policy from Congress to agencies, domestic and foreign.
We favor the abolition of the Office of Special Trade Representative, and insist on the withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and all other agreements wherein bureaucracies, institutions or individuals, other than the Congress of the United States, improperly assume responsibility for establishing policies which directly affect the economic well-being of every American citizen. We also favor more vigorous efforts to protect the copyright and patent rights of their owners in both domestic and foreign markets.
Taken from the Constitution Party's Platform in regarts to Tariffs and Trade
(large, evil grin)
It hardly could get more blatant.
Turning over duties collected directly to corporations?
Lemme get this straight: *export* countries are threatening a trade war against their largest *consumer*?!BWAAAA HA HA ha!
Bring It On!
| Lemme get this straight: *export* countries are threatening a trade war against their largest *consumer*?! BWAAAA HA HA ha! Bring It On!
|
Attrition in trade wars will always favor the U.S.
Absolutely -- being friendly with Canada didn't last long -- just a few days and not enough time to award any Iraq contracts. Is it me or do these foreign leaders not get it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.