Posted on 12/19/2004 8:27:04 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
GENEVA: Chile yesterday became the eighth trading power to win World Trade Organisation approval to impose multi-million-dollar sanctions on US imports if Washington fails to repeal an anti-dumping law.
In addition, a deadline of December 27 loomed for the United States to fix the legislation before Australia, Indonesia and Thailand have the possibility to ask for similar powers from the WTO's disputes settlement body (DSB).
Seven other trading powers, including the European Union, had received the final WTO green light last month after the US Congress did not repeal the so-called Byrd amendment before an initial deadline of December 27, 2003.
Joining the seven, Chile said it would refrain from resorting to tit-for-tat sanctions if Washington repealed its illicit legislation soon.
"If that is not the case we shall notify the DSB of the products subject to the additional tariff," said Chile's ambassador to the WTO, Alexandro Jara.
Raimund Raith, speaking for the EU delegation at a meeting of the DSB, reminded the United States that it faced a challenge from some major partners.
"Altogether, the WTO members that may now retaliate at any time against the US represent 71pc of total US exports and 64pc of total US imports," Raith said, renewing his call for Washington to respond.
For its part, Washington insisted that it intended to comply with the WTO ruling and felt that Chile would not need to take action.
"A new Congress will convene in January and the US administration will work with that Congress to resolve this matter," the official said.
After seven months of arbitration, the WTO on August 31 allowed the plaintiffs to levy sanctions amounting to 72pc of the sums reaped by the illicit US anti-dumping law.
Under the 2000 Byrd amendment, the US government redistributes anti-dumping duties to US companies that allege dumping, or the selling abroad at less than the market price in the domestic market.
US companies gained about $561m as a result of the law in 2001 and 2002.
However, the trading powers challenging the US estimated Friday that more than $800 billion had been collected on foreign imports since the Byrd amendment kicked in, and that the one-billion-dollar threshold would soon be reached.
In January, Australia, Indonesia and Thailand said they had given the US until December 27 this year to make the necessary amendments.
Where are the people who fought me on this forum stating what a grand idea the WTO was? If it's going to continue on like this (and you know it will), they should rename it WTF.
It's all about transferring our wealth to other nations. It brings them up and brings us down.
This is nothing compared to UNLIMITED TEXTILES from China which starts in 13 days. This is insanity.Come the revolution...
It allows the Chinese to subsidize its exports thereby letting Wal-Mart and other discounters to fill up their shelves with cheap Chinese goods.
Lol
The US is the sheep with two wolves voting on what's for dinner. Why did anyone think this would work?
Well, for one thing, it forces free-market capitalism down the throats of Washington's socialist politicians. I got no problem with the WTO chucking laws we should have chucked years ago.
More on the WTO:
In 1996, two of the world's largest printing companies were fighting to win a contract to supply presses to the Dallas Morning News.
Goss, a company named after two Chicago brothers who started a printing business in 1885, badly needed the order to reverse a sharp decline in sales that would later lead it to file for bankruptcy and close its US manufacturing plants. But Tokyo Kikai Seisakucho (TKS), a Japanese rival was determined to win the sale at any cost.
What began as a standard commercial tussle nearly a decade ago has mushroomed into an international tit-for-tat that could have significant ramifications for future disputes under the World Trade Organisation.
Last year, Goss persuaded a US jury that TKS - whose biggest shareholders are the giant Mizuho and Mitsui banks, and Sompo Japan insurer - had used fraudulent and predatory tactics to win a $7.4m (€5.6m, £3.8m) contract with the Dallas newspaper and several other US papers.
Under a little-used law called the 1916 Anti- Dumping Act, which was aimed at stopping "predatory" pricing, the jury awarded Goss triple damages for the loss, or more than $30m.
But the 1916 act was challenged by Japan and the European Union after Goss filed its lawsuit against two Japanese and two German printing companies. All except TKS later settled out of court with Goss.
In 2000, the WTO deemed the law to be in violation of US international trade obligations. The US Congress last month finally repealed the law, but did not do so retroactively.
In response, Japan earlier this month passed legislation that would allow TKS to sue Goss's Japanese subsidiary for recovery of the money, declaring that any lawsuits filed under the 1916 act "have no legal validity".
Goss has appealed to several agencies of the US government for help, but so far Washington seems to have little desire to intervene. A US trade official said only: "We have been urging Japan not to follow through with this law and we'll continue to do so."
A senior congressional aide acknowledged that the US had no real means to prevent Japan from enforcing the new law. That is of little comfort for Goss, which says TKS's actions ended up destroying its US business even though it retains manufacturing plants in Europe and Japan. Goss closed the last of its US manufacturing plants in 2001. "You've got 2,000 highly skilled, highly paid jobs that are gone as a result of this process, and they aren't coming back," says Mr Brown. "The Japanese government should be ashamed."
***
But the WTO doesn't have any real effect. It can only make suggestions.
The European Commission is set to launch a special monitoring mechanism to impose ‘safeguard measures’ against sudden rise in import of textile and clothing from China in the quota free regime, beginning next year.
‘China, whose textile and clothing have been graduated for the new EU generalised system of preferences will be subject to a special monitoring mechanism so that an initiative for a ‘safeguard measure’ may be triggered in time,’ the EC in a recent proposal said.
According to WTO rules, the EU may adopt specific safeguard measures until the end of 2008 in cases where Chinese imports threaten development of trade in textile and clothing.
***
D'ya think the its OK for the EU to impose nontariff barriers? Apparently the WTO thinks this is fine. Isn't it great that a supranational agency can grant authority to the EU to impose safeguards for the EU, while at the same time encourage sanctions against the US for trying to do the same thing?
The only effect is that the price of beans will go up 12 cents. These... forget it. Time for a shower.
Why does this country even need the WTO?
Our country only needs the WTO to give authority to the socialist countries of the world who exercise veto power over us. In other words, countries jealous of the sucess of the US and the US economy now have a way to get back at us, without ever changing from socialism to a free competetive society.
One more piece of information, the WTO by their own description is "consensus based". Groups that operate on consensus demonstrate that the group not the individual is paramount. The United States government was created to protect the individual, but consensus based international organizations don't recognize individuals or the rights of individual countries ( unless of course those rights can be used to limit the rights of US citizens).
Consensus based organizations are about process and conflict resolution, not about equal justice or equal rights. Consensus is the outcome of the Delphi technique, not the just application of the rule of law or the rights of the individual.
The WTO doesn't seem to make much of a difference. We impose our own protections, the WTO allows other countries to do the same. Couldn't they have just as well done that on their own without the WTO? It seems to be nothing more than a layer of unnecessary bureaucracy.
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.