Posted on 06/19/2004 8:30:52 PM PDT by take
Chinese exporters of furniture face tariffs from U.S.
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Commerce Department slapped tariffs of as much as 198 percent on imported bedroom furniture from China, a decision that could cut the $1 billion a year of those imports and may raise prices for consumers.
Most of the largest exporters of furniture, representing 80 percent of U.S. imports, will pay tariffs of 24 percent or less, with 82 of the companies paying an 11 percent tariff, according to the Commerce Department.
"The duties could have been a whole lot worse," Mike Veitenheimer, a vice president for furniture retailer Bombay Co., which opposed the duties, said in an interview. Still, the thousands of companies not singled out will pay the 198 percent, and they "are going to be put out of business."
The tariffs begin next week. Yesterday's decision is preliminary and there are still two more rulings needed to formalize the tax, which would last for five years or more.
"The illegal dumping by the Chinese has devastated the U.S. bedroom industry," said John Bassett, chief executive of Vaughan-Bassett Furniture.
Since President Bush took office three years ago, some 35,000 wood-furniture workers, or 28 percent of the work force, have lost their jobs, the U.S. companies say.
Opponents of the protection, including nearly half the U.S. furniture industry, say that the tariffs won't restore U.S. workers' jobs, although they might help shift production from China to Vietnam or other Asian nations.
The Bush administration said that yesterday's ruling shows that it's cracking down on trade it labels illegal.
"We've had a lot of Chinese cases and we expect to have more," said James Jochum, assistant secretary of commerce for import administration.
China has denied unfairly selling its goods.
"We sold furniture to the U.S. based on fair market practices," Cao Yingchao, secretary general of China National Furniture Association in Beijing, said before the decision. "We deny any charge that we sold our wooden furniture in the U.S. at below cost."
He said he would urge Chinese producers to appeal.
Bedroom-furniture imports from China increased 121 percent from 2000 to 2002, and another 54 percent in the first six months of last year from 2002. Furniture makers such as Bassett, Stanley and Hooker Furniture say that increase threatens to put them out of business.
Imports of furniture from China and other low-wage countries rose to 33 percent in 2001 from 1 percent in 1972, according to a study by Andrew Bernard, an economist at Dartmouth University. They are likely to increase to 57 percent by 2011, he said.
Why yes...it would be much better to outsource our food production...nothing like relying on others to FEED OUR POPULACE, with wholesome, uncontaminated food. That's not important to a country's sovereignty, or anything.
Gee, you've actually hit on one of my areas of expertise. NO, it's not better quality. It's not even close. I was in the furniture industry when this first started, and they started first with dining room chairs. We would get this absolute CRAP in that was supposed to match the tables that were still made here.
The tables, and other fine goods, used to have a 20-step hand-rubbed finishing process...that no amount of lacquer can replicate. The chairs looked like $10 flea market finds compared to the fine quality tables that were still made here.
Go to an estate auction some time; you will easily see the difference between what used to be considered quality...and the junk that's out there now. In fact, if you want quality wood furniture, I suggest you buy it on the secondary market...you will pay far less for better quality.
I guess you just must be happy with govt pork then. So be it.
At this "affordable" range, products comining in from China are a far sight better than what U.S. manufacturers were trying to pass off. You have seen particle board, faux wood grain put-it-together-yourself stuff haven't you?
The whole situation reminds me of the movie the Magnificent Ambers. Did you ever see the movie?
1. More productive? 2. More skilled? 3. Working longer hours? 4. Less protected? 5. Healthier? 7. Less able to be sick?
or your factory was:
1. More automated? 2. More efficient? 3. Less regulated? 4. Less safe?
Why were you able to run your Chinese factory with fewer personnel than the US factory? We know the workers were paid far less.
Starting with your last question first, the factory did not run with fewer personnel. In the administrative functions, staffing was at the same levels. On the factory floor, the number of people employed was more - as I explained, this because we did not install some of the equipment that was in use in the U.S.
For example, a can depaletizing machine. In the U.S. it was in use. One employee could feed cans at a rate of 300+ per minute. In China, the cans were removed from the pallet manually and it took about 5 workers to keep up with the task.
1. More productive? No, output was about the same.
2. More skilled?
We had to train in all positions, but generally it went like this. The highly the skill level required, the more training it would take in China than when trying to fill a like position in the U.S. For unskilled assembly, output results were the same. In the office positions, it was teach everything from proper filing to GAAC. 3. Working longer hours? No. Hours of work are the same. 8 hours shift, 4 breaks during the day for production.
4. Less protected? Depends on your difinition of protected, but as far as exposure to hazards substances and work place hazards, there was not compromise on employee protection. This is one area, by the way, where there was a significant savings. Supplies for worker protection - gloves, masks, respirator cartridges, etc - are far less costly even among the same brands as used in the U.S.
5. Healthier? Don't understand your question.
7. Less able to be sick? Don't understand your question.
or your factory was:
1. More automated? No, less automated.
2. More efficient? About the same.
3. Less regulated? Yes, far less regulated.
4. Less safe? Same safety standards put in place unless you consider OSHA paperwork a safety standard.
I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to get at with your lists. I'll bet though that you are under the common and mistaken impression that somehow the workers at foreign invested western factories are abused and have unsafe working conditions forced upon them. If so, you could not be more wrong.
In one year there were 40 brand new factories installed in the business park where our factory is located and all of them are clean and modern, none of the general managers of those factories would tolerate what I think you imagine goes on.
Well, if your OSHA lock out tag out plans are so great, then why can't OSHA figure out and understand its own regulations.
I had the pleasure of putting together our companies written plan - the physical part of Lock out tag out was in place and in practice. Only the documentation (how to store records for OSHA inspection) was out of order.
At the presettlement conference I had a few questions regarding the regulations and how to comply. I forget the specific questions now but the five OSHA personnel could not answer them. Their suggestion was that I hire a consultant. I told them I was perfectly capable of sorting this out just needed there clarification on a couple of sections of the regulations.
They left the room and came back and told me to use my best judgement - they could not figure it out. And I let them know I knew they did not understand it either. I asked them to put in writing that I could use my best judgement. Of course, they would not.
So I pressed them to call to the next office up or manager or whatever that I needed a clarification if they were not going to sign off on however I interpreted it. I even asked if they had a phone I could use and a telephone number and I would be happy to call.
Anyhow, to keep this short, I hope you are not trying to suggest that OSHA paperwork is not in many cases an unecessary and expensive burden.
Make up your mind:
85 - "Starting with your last question first, the factory did not run with fewer personnel. In the administrative functions, staffing was at the same levels. On the factory floor, the number of people employed was more - as I explained, this because we did not install some of the equipment that was in use in the U.S."
63- "Yes, we just used more workers. But, not more than we had in the U.S. That machine replaced workers in the U.S. "
77-" Why were you able to run your Chinese factory with fewer personnel than the US factory? We know the workers were paid far less."
How many hours a week do your Chinese workers work for quarters? Here in the US it is about 40% of their work time.
How many hours a week for food, in the US, it is a about 25%.
How many hours for taxes? here it is about 25-35%
85- '5. Healthier? Don't understand your question.
7. Less able to be sick? Don't understand your question."
Sick leave, government medical, etc - less costs to you.
85 - "I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to get at with your lists. I'll bet though that you are under the common and mistaken impression that somehow the workers at foreign invested western factories are abused and have unsafe working conditions forced upon them. If so, you could not be more wrong."
Sorry, I helped build some of those modern automated factories (petro-chem plants) in 3rd world countries. I know that a worker can be paid $1 per day or $100 per day, to press the 'same' button, and produce equal output.
Western factories are subject to western scrutiny, and such positions are highly desired. Local factories are not, and generally pay and conditions are less good.
Where do you get the 90% cost differentials between Chinese products and US products?
LOL - you must not be very experienced in working with governments, if you expect OSHA people to be competent, and know what they are doing. ROTFL.
If you are in this business a while, you will learn that they are in government because they are not competent.
And if you think the US government is incompetent, try working with other governments. ROTFLMAO!! they make our government people look like honest, uncorrupt, geniuses.
87 - bttt - well put:
"People should remember that a corporation is a legal fiction licensed by the state, in other words us, to shield investors from liability. This protection obligates put them in the debt of the society incorporating them. Claiming the limited liability of the corporation then saying that they have no duties to society is hypocritical. If business leaders and investors want to divorce themselves from their domestic responsibilities, they should forsake their domestic protections."
It is not a matter of making up my mind. It is a matter of being clear. In China we use more unskilled and semi-skilled employees to do the same job as our factory in the U.S. uses. The point being, in the U.S. we get over the higher labor costs through automation. We don't need to automate some positions in China. And the main point is, as a percentage of the cost of a the finished product, labor in either country is not significantly different. The lions share of the savings come in other line items.
Did that clear it up?
That was the first time OSHA had come into our factory and that I had dealt with that agency, yes. It was a surprise inspection. But, I did expect them to be at least as competent as I am in dealing with their regulations. On the areas that affected my plant, I knew my material. That they did not was not my problem. I made sure of that.
When dealing with government agencies, as I am sure you know, the best way to deal with them is to know their rules and regulations at least as well as they do. They can not give you the run around when you can site the regulation.
Can you comprehend that you can have proper workplace safety without excessive, costly, burdensome regulations and paperwork?
It is a given in this discussion that worker safety is not to be compromised. We are talking about over regulation and other onerous burdens placed on business in the U.S.
On this my friend you are very mistaken. Private enterprise and capitalism is very much alive and well in China. How many examples of private companies in China would you like provided to you?
Under the agreement of WTO to allow China in we allowed them to do this for eight years.
Now if I was China, I would do what the Japanese did. That was to steal all the technology then open up a store in America and under cut all their prices and put them out of business.
Do you trust them
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.