USA Talk of Tariff on Wheat because of CWB

[rosco]

Now our well paid and professional markters have been dumping our wheat into the USA and failing to obtain a premium for it. I'am starting to believe the story after the 10th time of hearing about it in the past few years.

[TOM4CWB]

Kernel;

I have been told the CWB will be gone in the next round of WTO trade negotiations.

If the CWB Directors don't wake up and smell the coffee... not only will the CWB's monopoly be gone, but the whole CWB will be dismantled.

THE Ontario Wheat Producer's Marketing Board has already made the transition to transparent marketing... and to a large extent so has the Australian Wheat Board...

If the strategic plan doesn't include a competitive CWB with marketing choice such as OWPMB has already done, the CWB management, staff and Board of directors has been negligent in looking after the CWB's long term interests.

Politically, there are simply not enough grain farmers left in western Canada, for the feds to use up all the good will it has taken over the past 10years to maintain it... the election of a majority of Alliance MP's in Sask. proves this point.

So why would the Feds not fix the CWB problem with the US so we can get on with our business????

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie;

I thought this article is revealing ....what is happening in both Canada AND the US, with CWB pricing policies:???

"NDWC REJECTS ASSERTIONS OF NORTH AMERICAN MILLERS ASSOCIATION


9/19/2002


Bismarck, N.D., Sept. 19, 2002 - The North Dakota Wheat Commission rejects claims made earlier this week by the North American Millers Association. A press release issued by the trade association, which represents the wheat, corn, oat and rye milling industry, falsely states that "the U.S. durum crop was insufficient to meet demand in 15 out of the last 15 years" and that "(t)he hard red spring wheat crop was insufficient in 12 of the last 15 years."

In fact, an analysis of U.S. Department of Agriculture supply and demand data (see attached tables) indicates there has been a surplus of wheat at the end of each of the last 15 years averaging 45 million bushels for durum and 208 million bushels for hard red spring.

"NAMA is failing to take into account the effect of carryover stocks and the imports themselves on the supply and demand situations for spring wheat and durum," points out NDWC Administrator Neal Fisher, an industry-wide expert economist. "It is impossible to accurately depict the situation without these components in the equation," he explains. "But for the unfairly priced imports from Canada, spring wheat and durum prices would have been higher, U.S. farmers would not have made the reductions in acreage that they have in recent years and customers would have a greater supply of quality U.S. spring wheat and durum to select from."

NAMA's claim of insufficient supplies is also based on misleading numbers for domestic demand. USDA's domestic use estimates include not only domestic mill grind and wheat used for feed and seed, but also the wheat equivalent of imported products such as pasta. The latter certainly should not be included in any equation that examines a U.S. producer's ability to meet domestic milling needs. In the instance of durum, for example, domestic usage averages 84 million bushels while domestic mills are grinding only 60 to 70 million of those bushels.

"It is true the domestic milling industry has to compete with the export market for wheat supplies, but that is a prime example of the American free enterprise system." Fisher notes. He says American farmers want to supply both with the quantity and quality of wheat their customers need. "They're just asking for a fair chance to compete for the business."

Years like 1998 shed additional doubt on NAMA's assertions that a lack of quantity and quality in the U.S. crop is somehow the reason for imports. This was the year when U.S. durum farmers produced a crop of 138 million bushels, the largest since 1982. Yet, durum imports from Canada reached a record 20 million bushels.

Fisher says, "I can understand why NAMA members would want to retain unfettered access to under-valued Canadian supplies. In the short-run, it's an attractive business opportunity. The disastrously low prices that have plagued producers for the past five years attest to that. In the long run, however, the U.S. milling industry is becoming increasingly dependent on a monopoly state trading enterprise, which can be risky when the monopoly decides to pull out of the market, leaving customers fearing for supplies. People who believe in free and open trade should do business with free and open markets."

NAMA also suggests that "the (U.S. International Trade) Commission reported that in its five-year study of wheat purchase contracts, U.S. millers paid higher prices for wheat from Canada in 59 of 60 months." Instead, the December 2001 ITC report actually states, "Canadian durum prices were above U.S. prices for all comparable months except one." The report continues, "Direct comparison between contracted and delivered prices for U.S. and Canadian wheats was not possible owing to differences in reported contracting terms."

"What all this really means," Fisher says, "is that there was no apples-to-apples comparison of U.S. and Canadian wheat prices." The ITC report was based only on questionnaires completed by U.S. firms that buy Canadian wheat. The U.S. Trade Representative sent a questionnaire directly to the Canadian Wheat Board, but the CWB refused to provide any sales data. The NDWC is hopeful this time that the ITC and Department of Commerce will be able to conduct a more in-depth investigation."

Ellen Huber
Public Information Specialist
N.D. Wheat Commission
4023 State Street
Bismarck ND 58503-0690
Phone: 701-328-5111

If the CWB is REALLY getting higher prices, why wouldn't the CWB give complete record access to the US ITC and PROVE the NDWC wrong???

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie;

This article is also revealing;

ND PETITIONS FOR 14.7% - 25.5% DUTY ON CANADIAN WHEAT BEING IMPORTED INTO THE U.S.


9/19/2002


"The North Dakota Wheat Commission has filed antidumping and countervailing duty petitions with the U.S. Department of Commerce and International Trade Commission against the Canadian Wheat Board. If successful, the legal action would create antidumping duties of 9% on Canadian durum, 12% on Canadian spring and countervailing duties of 14.7% to 25.5% to offset Canadian subsidies and eliminate the dumping of Canadian spring and durum wheat into the US market. 2001-02 imports of Canadian durum into the U.S. are reported at 19.0 million bushels (517.2 TMT) and Canadian spring wheat at 53 million bushels (1.4 MMT).

The North American Millers Association (NAMA) was disappointed with the move to restrict wheat trade with Canada, but added that they do believe that State Trading Enterprises (STEs) should be challenged through the WTO process."

[charliep]

I will leave for discussion other than to say we are a sovereign nation and have the right to chose whatever grain marketing system we want. This will be the tenth time the US has challenged Canada on wheat with the nine previous unsuccessful.

On the other side, western Canada will likely bring in well over 3 MMT of US corn. As with 2 years ago, it would be relatively easy to show that this corn is being sold in Canada at well below cost of production and therefore countervailable. No one says anything here.

The question for us is why Canada has open borders for imports - there will be large volumes of US feed grains, malt barley, milling wheat entering Canada this year - and yet we continue to restrict access to the US market. This is an internal matter we don't need help from the US on.

[charliep]

IN the last go round, the ITC found that the CWB priced higher than the local product in 59 out of 60 months on durum.

So for those who are feeling there must be something to these US trade challenges besides politics, the facts bear otherwise.

I think the strategy in play here by certain groups in the US is to wear out the officals and the appetite for govt and farmers to continue to pay for these challenges. It's a bully strategy.

Tom

[TOM4CWB]

Thalpenny;

Just a comment on the following:

Fisher says, "I can understand why NAMA members would want to retain unfettered access to under-valued Canadian supplies. In the short-run, it's an attractive business opportunity. The disastrously low prices that have plagued producers for the past five years attest to that."

Thalpenny, there is a real ring of truth to what has been said in the above paragraph, especially in the light of the 2003 marketing blunders the CWB already made by selling our grain... that you did not own... at bargin basement prices...

Kind of gives a new meaning to;

"Where the lowest price is the Law"... When my neighbours are paying with their personal freedom and destruction of many families lives starting Oct. 31 in prision.