|
Eu and japan win trade sanctions for import duties { November 26 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/business/worldbusiness/26cnd-trade.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/business/worldbusiness/26cnd-trade.html
November 26, 2004
W.T.O. Authorizes Trade Sanctions Against U.S. for Import Duties
By PAUL MELLER
BRUSSELS, Nov. 26 - The World Trade Organization authorized the European Union, Canada and five other countries today to impose about $150 million in trade sanctions on the United States in retaliation for an import duties law that has been ruled illegal.
"It's been approved," said Amina Mohamed, the Kenyan ambassador to the trade group and chairwoman of the organization's dispute settlement body, according to The Associated Press.
The sanctions would be aimed at a wide range of American exports, possibly including steel ball bearings, cod, shoes and apples. Most would be imposed by Japan and the European Union, which have been the hardest hit by the United States' law.
Known as the Byrd amendment, after Senator Robert Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat who proposed it in 2000, the law gives American companies the proceeds from duties levied on foreign rivals deemed to be dumping products in the United States at below-market prices.
Seven trading partners of the Unites States complained that this punished the importers twice: once with the levy and again by giving a financial lift to their American competitors. The other countries seeking sanctions are Mexico, Japan, India, South Korea and Brazil.
The W.T.O. ruled that the Byrd amendment was illegal early last year. The United States has since tried to avert sanctions by appealing the decision, but to no avail.
The office of the United States trade representative said today that it was working to revamp the law. "We already notified the W.T.O. that we intend to comply with our international commitments," a spokesman, Richard Mills, said.
"We are working with Congress on these efforts," he said, but he insisted the United States would take whatever action necessary to protect the country against unfair competition from abroad.
"These issues don't affect the United States' right to implement our trade laws to make sure Americans are treated fairly," Mr. Mills said.
Although the amounts involved in this trade dispute are modest compared with other recent cases, the Byrd amendment decision is unusual in that it involved several countries taking action against one.
This could set a trend in future disputes, said Lourdes Catrain, a trade lawyer and partner in the Brussels office of the law firm Hogan & Hartson.
"This is very significant; it sends a very important message to the United States," she said. "Its trading partners are getting tired of the way the United States behaves."
The European Union is expected to apply punitive duties worth about $80 million on American produce to compensate for the losses incurred by European companies punished under the Byrd amendment.
It has drawn up a list of 80 products to aim the sanctions at. This long list was taken from a list of products drawn up in a recent dispute about illegal American import tariffs on steel.
The short list of goods to be subject to sanctions will not be drawn up until the European Union officially decides to impose them. That decision is expected to be made in early 2005, according to the new trade commissioner, Peter Mandelson, who took office at the beginning of this week.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
|
|
