Softwood lumber talks

[NaughtyusMaximus]

United States imposes 29 per cent duties on Canadian softwood lumber.

This is going to kill BC. An estimated 30000 direct jobs in BC will be lost, and at least 4 times that in indirect jobs.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Don't worry, we have free trade!

 

[NaughtyusMaximus]

Apparently not.

"Pettigrew said he has called for a NAFTA panel on the matter and noted there is also a complaint before the World Trade Organization. The minister said he's confident Canada will win, but a ruling could take months or years. "

Meanwhile, there is a long list of BC lumber mills which have announced their closure TODAY.

 

[HappyPuppy]

They could always come down her to pick strawberries.

 

[sandorski]

It sucks. My bro works at a mill and right now everything is up in the air. Fortunetly, we live right on the Washington state border, so the locals mill future is more assured than others.

What pisses me off most is how a trade agreement with the Us seems to not be worth the paper it's written on! :|

 

[ChangLi]

I wonder how many American millworkers job's wert lost by NAFTA initially.....just curious?

 

[sandorski]

None, most likely. The US sawmill industry has been in decline for a long time, so NAFTA and the FTA had no specific effect on the industry. The US has been trying to impose duties on Canadian softwood lumber for 20+ years now. Everytime Canada has successfully defended it's position in various International trade tribunals.

 

[Jimbo]

<< What pisses me off most is how a trade agreement with the Us seems to not be worth the paper it's written on! >>



<< The U.S. Commerce Department ruled that Canada subsidizes its lumber industry by charging low fees to log public lands and allows its producers to sell its lumber in the U.S. at below-market prices. >>


sandorski: Your country has been dumping lumber all over the world and especially in the US since the late 70s by using this underhanded method. We finally call you on it, and now we are the bad guys?
Why don't you teach us a lesson and just do a full blown trade embargo?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

These things bother me. I was not sure that the free trade agreements were good, but we made them. Now it seems that we are all for free trade as long as we put tariffs on things. Steel, now wood. If you are not going to do it, don't lie about it and say we support it.

 

[sandorski]

Jimbo: No, it's not that the US is now calling us on it. Everytime the US made the same accusation, everytime Canada was cleared of it. There is no subsidy, there is only a US government that is willing to contravene trade agreements in a long battle to protect a weak industry.

If the US has a legitimate case, they are free to take it to the WTO or other Trade Tribunal. Instead, knowing that they have Canada over a barrel, they unilaterally impose tarrifs on trumped up charges.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Canada can dump all the lumber they want on the US. If they can produce it cheaper than we can, then let them sell it to us and save consumers money. There's plenty of other things to produce.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Ha ha. Its about time the those treaty violating people are punished.

 

[RGN]

yup, NAFTA was a GOOD thing. Everyone ALWAYS plays buy the RULES.

 

[Jimbo]

The Reagan, Bush, Clinton and G. W. Bush Administrations each found that Canadian lumber producers receive massive subsidies. Former President Carter recently noted: "Provincial governments grant an annual allowable cut to sawmill owners at whatever low price is necessary to maintain full employment in the timber industry... {this} is beginning to wreak havoc with the timber industry in the United States?." (Jimmy Carter letter to The New York Times 3/24/01)
The U.S. industry asks only that the provinces sell timber in an open and competitive manner, eliminating requirements that timber must be cut no matter the market conditions. Under WTO and NAFTA rules, the United States is permitted to impose duties to offset subsidies and dumping on imports that injure the U.S. industry. In response, the Commerce Department initiated countervailing duty and antidumping investigations on April 23 of this year.
Canada wrongly claims that a WTO panel has said that log export restrictions are not subsidies. This is incorrect. That panel dismissed Canada's claim on procedural grounds, only noting that some export restraints are not subsidies - something the United States never denied. The Canadian export restraints are clearly subsidies. In any event, the point is moot as Commerce used U.S. timber price benchmarks to measure the Canadian subsidies and did not, therefore, have to measure the impact of the Canadian export restrictions.
The U.S.Commerce Department is currently conducting a preliminary antidumping duty investigation. The results of that investigation are currently due on September 24. Within 45 days after the final determination, the International Trade Commission will issue a final determination.
I don't see this going on for years.

 

[Kilgor]

No need to bring facts to this thread Jimbo, links to a Canadian paper and Anti US remarks are all that?s needed.

 

[Jimbo]

<< No need to bring facts to this thread Jimbo, links to a Canadian paper and Anti US remarks are all that?s needed. >>


Doh!
I kill more threads this way.

 

[GL]

Tit for tat. Canada just announced it will be imposing tariffs on the evil subsidized American steel. I expect nothing less from the U.S.. NAFTA was negotiated by good ol' Mulroney in the best interests of the U.S. and when circumstances dictate that Canada eventually gets the upper-hand in certain areas, the U.S. lays the smack down.

As was mentioned, various international courts have ruled in favour of Canada each time but the U.S. doesn't listen. However, when the U.S. dictates another country's actions "you're either with [them] or you're against [them]".

I sure hope those B.C. woodworkers have some savings though - they'll be going through some rough times trying to switch industries.

The reason the U.S. industry is in decline is because Japan, which accounted for 50% of American softwood lumber exports until 1997 has been in decline. Coincidentally, 1997 marked the beginning of the boom years, so the U.S. was able to absorb some of the loss from Japan. Still, profits could be higher and what you see now is the lumber lobbying the Federal U.S. government for corporate welfare - which they've gotten.

Here's a good (American) source about the softwood lumber industry. It's objective and doesn't take sides but notes the difficulty with which the Canadian and U.S. softwood lumber industries can be compared.

I just hope the rest of the industries that get mixed up in this stupid trade pissing match between the U.S. and Canada are happy with the U.S. softwood lumber lobby.

 

[mithrandir2001]

<< Former President Carter recently noted: "Provincial governments grant an annual allowable cut to sawmill owners at whatever low price is necessary to maintain full employment in the timber industry... {this} is beginning to wreak havoc with the timber industry in the United States?." (Jimmy Carter letter to The New York Times 3/24/01) >>


One of my economics professors said that subsidies by foreign governments on exports should be embraced as a gift. The foreign nation is basically selling you something below cost. If the intent of their subsidy is to knock out domestic industry then that's a problem but it's otherwise something that is economically beneficial at the macroeconomic level.

 

[Balthazar]

<< It sucks. My bro works at a mill and right now everything is up in the air. Fortunetly, we live right on the Washington state border, so the locals mill future is more assured than others.

What pisses me off most is how a trade agreement with the Us seems to not be worth the paper it's written on! :| >>



Bastard Canadians....you know what, I dun even think the C should be capitalized....

(gotta warn ya', im feeling a bit brisk tonight. So if I get outta line just....hmmm, part of me wants to say "eat it" part of me wants to say forgive me for it....what to do what to do....)

 

[amdskip]

dang, this is really seperating the AT board between the US and Canada like I have never seen before:Q

 

[Balthazar]

<< dang, this is really seperating the AT board between the US and Canada like I have never seen before:Q >>



I know, whats this all aboot ay?

 

[Martin]

THis administration is quite hypocritical.


First they impose the tarrifs on softwood lumber, then they slap a 30% tarrif on steel imports.


Yeah, I guess free trade is good, as long as it doesn't hurt the US.

 

[sandorski]

I don't care if you raise Lincoln, Washington, or Jefferson from the dead and get them to make the same claim. The fact is, that Canada has won the arguement every time the issue has been brought before a trade tribunal. It's a bogus charge.

 

[Jimbo]

<< THis administration is quite hypocritical. >>


?Canadian Trade Minister, Pierre Pettigrew, noted that pressure for a quick deal came from both Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and President Bush.? You also forgot the LAST FOUR administrations (Dems and Republicians alike) that have all come to the same conclusions about how Canada subsidizes their own lumber industry at the expense of the U.S. timber industry. Why do you single out this administration?


<< Yeah, I guess free trade is good, as long as it doesn't hurt the US. >>


Perhaps you need to examine what you call free trade. If selling lumber at 25% of the going market rates to your own lumber mills, and then turning around and prohibiting the EXPORT of raw lumber, so no one else can mill it outside of your country, is FAR from free trade. If Canadian lumber is not being sold at firesale prices then why the export ban? BECAUSE IT IS A MASSIVE SUBSIDY! Canada offered to auction 13 percent of its timber at market rates, while the U.S. wanted 65 percent. If there is no SUBSIDY then why not would Canada agree to 65%? We essentially told them they could DUMP up to 35% of their lumber output here, but that was not good enough.


<< don't care if you raise Lincoln, Washington, or Jefferson from the dead and get them to make the same claim. The fact is, that Canada has won the arguement every time the issue has been brought before a trade tribunal. >>


Canada wrongly claims that a WTO panel has said that log export restrictions are not subsidies. This is incorrect. That panel dismissed Canada's claim on procedural grounds, only noting that some export restraints are not subsidies - something the United States never denied. The Canadian export restraints are clearly subsidies. In any event, the point is moot as Commerce used U.S. timber price benchmarks to measure the Canadian subsidies and did not, therefore, have to measure the impact of the Canadian export restrictions.

 

[sandorski]

Log exports? This dispute has nothing to do with log exports.