Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WTO rules against U.S. on cotton (What Next your Freedom)
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040619-015759-4398r.htm ^ | Jun. 19 2004 | John Zarocostas

Posted on 06/20/2004 5:50:35 PM PDT by take

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:42:28 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Geneva, Switzerland, Jun. 19 (UPI) -- A World Trade Organization dispute panel on Friday, acting on charges by Brazil, ruled that U.S. cotton subsidies provided to producers, users, and exporters of upland cotton, violate trade rules, trade diplomats said.

The ruling, comes at a critical juncture in the troubled Doha global trade talks, bogged down because of differences over agricultural issues, and could have a major impact in galvanizing political support to advance the talks forward, diplomats and trade experts said.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bankgovernment; cafta; fee; freedom; nafta; trade; treade; world; wto

1 posted on 06/20/2004 5:50:36 PM PDT by take
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: take

So when do we bring charges on the French for Airbus subsidies?


2 posted on 06/20/2004 5:53:42 PM PDT by boris (The deadliest weapon of mass destruction in history is a Leftist with a word processor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: boris

Why we are dealing with Communist and Social governments that own these businesses?


4 posted on 06/20/2004 5:56:56 PM PDT by take
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: take

The WTO has gradually worked against the US, but now they are pulling out all the stops, sensing that they have the Bush government on the ropes because of the liberal media attacks and Democrat lies about Bush offending all our allies.

I think we have to put it to them; back off, or we will pull out. We have been Mr. Nice Guy for too long; I think we've been backed into a corner.


5 posted on 06/20/2004 6:33:58 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: take
"The poorest people and poorest government have been facing the richest in this battle. We want to see the end of these subsidies and we want a support fund for cotton producers in poor counties."

scratchin my head. not sure I am reading this right, but...
They want us to quit subsidizing our farmers and instead, subsidize THEIR farmers ?
6 posted on 06/20/2004 8:00:57 PM PDT by stylin19a (I'm not sure if my problem is speeling errors or tryping errors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

There is no rational economic justification for the USA to continue subsidizing high-cost cotton farmers . . . Protectionism for reasons other than national defense make no sense (other than for political gain - a lousy reason to mess with markets and re-distribute wealth through trade policy).


7 posted on 06/20/2004 10:20:43 PM PDT by JustTheTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: take

Somehow, I just can't take anything these supra-national organizations do seriously. Does anybody really think they're anything more than an excuse for fat "representatives" to go on junkets and sleep with cheap foreign prostitutes? Is *anything* they do likely to *really* affect anything in this country (unless we get a treasonous foreign-agent President who's willing to sign executive orders drafted by the U.N., in which case whatever he does is likely to get rescinded anyway whenever we get an American back in the White House?)

I dunno, I just really think the "International organizations" have shot their wad, particularly after the failure of the U.N. in Iraq. But maybe I'm fooling myself...


8 posted on 06/21/2004 1:29:29 AM PDT by fire_eye (Socialism is the opiate of academia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fire_eye

Senate, House Split on Corporate Tax Bill

The World Trade Organization declared it an illegal subsidy



By MARY DALRYMPLE




WASHINGTON (AP) - Corporate tax bills passed in the Senate and in the House are widely divergent, starting with their most essential ingredients and extending into the many extras that hopped on for a ride.

The House gave corporations a rate cut; the Senate opted for a tax deduction spread among manufacturers of all sizes. The House tacked on a tobacco buyout and a state sales tax deduction; senators inserted restrictions on overtime rules and billions of dollars in energy production incentives.

Some businesses and many lawmakers want to see the bills passed as quickly as possible, and the bills must be reconciled before anything can become law.

The supporters urge quick passage to end escalating sanctions imposed by the European Union in retaliation for a U.S. tax break benefiting exports. The World Trade Organization declared it an illegal subsidy, and the corporate tax bill yanks it out of the nation's tax code.

In its place, the House and Senate proposed a combination of tax cuts for American manufacturers and simpler tax rules for multinational corporations. While lawmakers negotiate, punitive tariffs imposed on some U.S. exports to Europe, which now stand at 8 percent, will increase 1 percentage point each month.

"And remember," said Michael Baroody, executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, "the EU just expanded with 10 additional member countries from Central and Eastern Europe, and they also now are penalizing various U.S. exports."

The House voted 251-179 on Thursday to pass its version of the bill. Democrats gave Republicans their winning edge, with 48 of them voting for the bill. Some backed a new federal income tax deduction for taxpayers in states that use sales taxes instead of income taxes to fund government operations.

Other Democrats backed $10 billion in payments to tobacco farmers over five years to end price supports started during the Great Depression.

The House bill's combined tax cuts and spending would reduce money flowing into the U.S. Treasury by $155 billion over the coming decade, but much of its cost is covered by the repeal of the tax break for exporters and other changes closing down tax loopholes and cracking down on tax evasion.

The Senate's bill is even larger than the House - but its entire cost is covered with changes that bring new revenue into the federal government.

In many cases, House and Senate lawmakers steered toward similar goals but found different paths.

Lawmakers from both chambers wanted to help manufacturers. The Senate wants to let manufacturers of all sizes take a deduction from manufacturing income, while the House opted to gradually cut the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 32 percent.

The House and Senate take on tax shelters from different angles. Lawmakers agreed to prevent companies from leasing public assets like subways and trains to generate huge tax deductions. The House's version only looks forward and recoups about $20 billion; the Senate's broader crackdown covers foreign leased assets and brings in about $40 billion.

The House and Senate also try to stop taxpayers from taking inflated deductions when donating their cars to charities. The House would ask donors to get the vehicle appraised, while the Senate would ask charities to report the car's sale price to donors.

The bills come close to matching in new rules for taxes imposed on multinational corporations. Relatively small differences exist in sections of the two bills that are devoted to extending expiring tax breaks. Both bills contain a collection of tiny tax changes, in some cases identical, for specific businesses, including bows and arrows, tackle boxes, whaling, timber production, aircraft and liquor.

In other places, each body added wholly extraneous things not found in the other bill. That leaves House lawmakers to tackle energy production incentives and overtime rules found in the Senate's bill. The Senate must contemplate the tobacco buyout and sales tax deduction added in the House.

The vast array of add-ons has caused some, including a few conservative Republicans, to turn their noses up at the entire collection.

Keith Ashdown, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said future generations will bear most of its cost. "With the nation at war and sky-high deficits, this is not the time to take a bazooka to the budget," he said.

__

On the Net:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov


9 posted on 06/21/2004 6:15:24 AM PDT by take
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a
They want us to quit subsidizing our farmers and instead, subsidize THEIR farmers?

Check your pronoun reference. "They" is some yob from "Action Aid International." I won't even bother to look it up, but I'll wager that you'd find the words "social justice" on its web-site.

10 posted on 06/21/2004 6:20:03 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

The US pulling out of the WTO will never happen - pulling out might mean WTO collapse - we are funding 25% of their operating costs.


11 posted on 06/21/2004 6:28:55 AM PDT by jwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

That is how I read it too. The aim of the WTO is to make all countries equal. Which does us no good as we have further to fall.


12 posted on 06/21/2004 6:43:12 AM PDT by PersonalLiberties (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson