Posted on 04/01/2005 4:02:14 PM PST by nextthunder
EU to slap extra 15% duty on range of US goods
BRUSSELS: The European Union plans to slap an extra 15 percent import duty on a range of US goods over Washington’s failure to apply an international trade ruling against an anti-dumping law, the EU executive said on Thursday.
The duty would hit imports including paper, agricultural, textile and machinery products from May 1, and affect slightly less than $28 million in trade, the European Commission said.
“The Commission took this latest step in the dispute over the Byrd Amendment in light of the continuing failure of the United States to bring its legislation in conformity with its international obligations,” it said in a statement.
The level of EU retaliation would be revised annually to adjust to the level of damage caused to EU companies, it said. While the Commission’s plan needed the formal approval of EU ministers, this was expected to be a formality, officials said, adding there were no plans to meet US officials before the additional duty came into force.
Neither was there a meeting planned between EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson and US Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick — until recently US trade representative — who is scheduled to be in Brussels early next week, they said.
In November, the World Trade Organisation gave approval to the EU, Japan and others to apply an initial $150 million in trade sanctions after Washington failed to conform with a WTO ruling to repeal a subsidy programme for US companies.
Known as the Byrd Amendment, the programme distributes funds raised by anti-dumping duties on imports to the companies that initially requested government anti-dumping protection.
More than $1 billion has been doled out to US ball bearing, steel, seafood, candle and other companies under the Byrd Amendment over the past four years. Canada is expected to announce similar measures against the United States, its top trading partner, later on Thursday.
Mostly textiles: Most of the products to be hit with the EU’s extra duty relate to textiles — trousers and overalls made of synthetic fibres, for example. The only agricultural item is sweetcorn.
Five areas of stationery are also targeted, while in the machinery sector the products listed are crane lorries, along with spectacle frames and mountings. reuters
"I replied to the "we don't make nothing here anymore" with the fact (proof even) that we were the largest exporter."
"Can't refute the facts, so they make stuff up"
-----
Statistics are very scary to the mathematically challenged.
At this point on these threads, we have usually heard from some protectionist quoting Mark Twain on there being "lies, damned lies and statistics."
It's as good a defense as any other they make up.
My other favorite is when they say they personally didn't see American made goods at WalMart. Or, I know a guy who said. Or 3 of my friends got laid off, there are no jobs out there. I saw a great line on an old thread, "The plural of anecdote is not data"
What are they really saying?
Dumping is OK, don't do anything about it, if you do, we see this as unfair trade and will slap a 15% tariff on you?
Bring it on. In fact, up the ante to 20% on a wider range of products. See if they follow suit. What Germany and France need right now is a trade war. That will help their economies!
Despite some of the highest productivities, low taxes, more hours, cheap land/water we will never achieve a fair trade if we allow these twerps to continue their games. They used to manipulate their currency (As the Italians did all the time before the Euro), play with tax codes (technically no tariff), safety rules, emission standards and more in the hope of exporting, exporting, and exporting while minimizing the imports.
Despite our dollar being at a fair rate today (No longer the over inflation it once had), we will not make any significant gains if we let others talk of free trade as they export their Evian but behind close doors give the US no chance in government contracts, and even manipulate laws to discourage imports. Yes, many in the US will be pis*** off since they can’t get their products or services they like, but we must put our Dickhe** hats on. The MAJOR reason for our trade imbalance is due to a plethora of little paper cut rules, laws and bureaucratic hurdles set up to cut us out in the Asian and European markets.
Red6
Actually, IMO, the opposite is more likely to happen in a free trade environment, with the more intelligent and harder working entrepreneurs making acheiving greater success. You don't get the equal results you envisage without arbitrary controls like price fixing. So to me, if we to make an analogy with education, free trade is more analogous to private schools, which are market driven, while controlled markets are analogous to public schools, which are driven by politics. However, I do understand your point that cheaper labor found in developing countries can displace expensive labor found in developed countries like the US. Probably the garment industry is a good example.
Regarding the Monty Python quote, I believe he is himself quoting George Orwell. Also, I have not been aware that "Monty Python" is known for dishonesty.
But I had actually meant with my question "What think you of the concept of a free market?" to ask what you think of the free market concept when applied on a national rather than international level. In other words, should we have a free market within the US?
What I am saying, I guess, is that competition does not produce mediocrity or "dumbing down," but excellence.
There is a lot of information at the U.S. Antidumping Database Webpage
Pricing information is difficult to obtain. I researched some allegations a while back and companies were shipping into the US through Customs with a higher declared value and then selling them at very different (lower) prices. Also, the purchaser is unlikely to complain if they are paying less. I do know of some specific cases and they are in the anti-dumping database. One of them resulted in the last US producer of a specific product going under.
The lower prices usually result from either government subsidies that enable the foreign producer to sell low and the other is where a company will lower and raise prices with demand to keep a certain level of production to keep their total costs at a minimum regardless of profit. They have a certain fixed cost at every production level. In one scenario they continue to produce without orders, bring them here and hold them in bonded warehouses so they are not paying tariffs, and then unload them as soon as the market begins to pick up again. In another they just sell them dirt cheap e.g., buy one get one free, in order to make sales when there is a depressed demand. Either way, they are selling below cost.
In many industries there are significant barriers to entry such as being very capital intensive. Once competition is eliminated in theses industries it is less likely that a startup will fill the void. For example, would you build a steel mill if there were short-term profits to be made but in the long run a flood of cheap imports will put you under? You would have to have a certainty of sustained profits for a long time to offset the required capital investment. Many industries run on very slim profit margins so a movement of a few percenatge points in price would be all it would take. Some items could be $1/2 million per unit and they operate on a five percent margin. If someone drops the price by 10 percent, no one else can realistically meet it. An order of twenty units would be $10 million so a ten percent savings would be $1 million - easily enough to sway a purchaser. So the price movements don't have to be drastic to have the desired effect.
Sounds like a great example. What was the good, who was the US producer and how much did the dumper raise prices after the US company went under?
Mark
This defense is known as "insulation". The fact that what Twain said is true is irrelevant to Mase and 1rudeboy, just dismiss it and claim victory.
I have requested time and time again for these yapping dogs of free-trade to show us how the quality of life in the US has gotten better under free-trade and they haven't. Where is the economic utopia that the proponent of free-trade said would be here? The quality of life, excluding the progress of technology which is always up irrespective of economic policies, is going down in the US, not up. The standard of living in the US was better in the 1980's then it is today, yet we didn't have all these agreements in place until the early to mid 90's. Go figure.
>> You don't get the equal results you envisage without arbitrary controls like price fixing.
Who said anything about price fixing? I am referring to tariffs, which served this nation well for about 200 years.
Maybe it'd be easier if you showed us how the quality of life in the US has gotten worse under free-trade.
Where is the economic utopia that the proponent of free-trade said would be here?
Who promised utopia? When? Where? Link pretty please.
The quality of life, excluding the progress of technology which is always up irrespective of economic policies, is going down in the US, not up.
Proof please. Link?
The standard of living in the US was better in the 1980's then it is today, yet we didn't have all these agreements in place until the early to mid 90's.
Link?
Go figure.
You first.
Just another protectionist no-fact hit and run perhaps?
Just another yapping dog of free-trade protectionism.
Have you found any proof that the 13% or the 25% number you quoted was correct? Or did you just make it up?
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.