Bill may add taxes on imports

Home Textiles Today ^ | 06/07/2007

[edcoil]

But not by an american corporation. Whey were forced to use local splitting revenue as opposed to Fuji.

However, this ruling was in 1998 and was true then and Kodak went through the hoops as opposed to Fuji.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thanks. I knew you’d be able to refute his falsehood.

[Mase]

I am always amazed at how we always loose in WTO decisions.

Always?

Always, except for:

• Semiconductors (China): In July 2004, the United States and China agreed to settle the first U.S.-WTO call against China when China elimi-nated discriminatory taxation of U.S. integrated circuits (semiconduc-tors). China is the world’s fastest growing semiconductor market, worth about $2 billion to American manufacturers and workers.
  
• Telecommunications (Mexico): A WTO dispute panel ruled that the Mexican government-run telephone monopoly cannot charge more for calls into Mexico. U.S. industry estimates this ruling has saved the United States more than $1 billion in excess payments since 2000 and should save several hundred million a year in the future.
  
• Hogs (Mexico): After Mexico unfairly imposed dumping duties on hogs, the United States successfully raised the matter at the WTO. Mexico subsequently rescinded its dumping duties in May 2003.
  
• Dairy (Canada): The WTO found in January 2003 that Canada was unfairly subsidizing dairy exports. Following this ruling, Canada pledged not to export subsidized dairy products to the United States and to curtail such exports to other countries.
  
• Apples (Japan): In December 2003, the United States won a significant WTO decision against Japan’s import restrictions on U.S. apples based on health and safety standards that had no scientific basis. The U.S. government is following up with Japan and the WTO to ensure full compliance with this decision.
  
• Intellectual property and patents (Argentina): Following WTO rulings issued in its favor, the United States negotiated an agreement with Argentina in April 2002 that requires that country to conform its intellectual property system to WTO requirements.
  
• Autos (India): The United States prevailed in a WTO dispute in December 2001 over India’s restrictions on imports of U.S. auto parts.
  
• Apparel (Egypt): In response to a successful U.S. challenge at the WTO to Egypt’s high duties on apparel products, Egypt cut its tariffs in January 2004.

Also, how could anyone forget these losses:

WTO Rules in Favor of U.S. Banana Concerns (April 7, 1999)
WTO rules in favor of U.S. in Mexico/HFCS soft drink tax case
WTO rules for US in Canada softwood lumber dispute
WTO Ruling Backs Biotech Crops

Other than those, I'm sure the WTO rules against the U.S. all the time.

[1rudeboy]

Snapshot of WTO Cases Involving the United States.

The best place to look is along the right-hand column, under "WTO Dispute Settlement Snapshot." It's a .pdf file, so I can't look at it at the moment, but if you do, you should find that the U.S. generally wins the cases it brings, and loses the cases others bring.

And edcoil, if you are talking about the Byrd Amendment (named after the Klan leader himself), why don't you try to defend it here? I love watching ostensible conservatives twist themselves into pretzels.

[1rudeboy]

Dude, you killed the thread. Great job.