U.S. Slaps Duties On Canadian - Raising Trade Tensions

[danny W1M]

Will Justin have to pay for his subsidies?

[URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/us/politics/us-slaps-duties-on-canadian-jet-raising-trade-tensions.html"]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/us/politics/us-slaps-duties-on-canadian-jet-raising-trade-tensions.html[/URL]

219.63 percent of the plane’s sales price, is a pretty big duty ! a big duty lol

[furrowtickler]

Oh boy , the tears will be flowing in Quebec. Lol lol

[seldomseen]

What does Justin think will happen when we gives big piles of money to a company that builds something for export to the USA.

[Oliver88]

No fancy socks will save this mistake.

I'm sure Morneau and Trudeau will find magical $ to subsidize Bombardier even more.

[furrowtickler]

Yup through some pension fund .
JT's little buddy there just happens to be a huge pension fund manager for his daddy .
Hmmmm , why the big push for the cpp??

*** me people don't get the big picture at all. Why do you think this whole tax scam is pushing money into that direction??

[furrowtickler]

Cotton had this figured years ago

[chuckChuck]

There is some speculation that the commerce department is eying agricultural subsidies and supply management and may slap import duities on canola, wheat, and beef.

[danny W1M]

Could be, I've been saying for years, we should adopt the exact same ag policy/system/programs as the U.S.A. Then there'd be no problems.

[chuckChuck]

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38131611
Exclusive: WTO rules Boeing's state subsidies illegal
Simon Jack Business editor

In a landmark trade ruling, the World Trade Organization will this afternoon find Boeing has illegally benefitted from billions of dollars from the most anti-competitive type of subsidy.

These so-called "prohibited" subsidies are considered the most serious form of anti-competitive practice as they require an undertaking from the company in receipt of them to promise not to operate in other jurisdictions.

You can have the money if you promise you won't open plants elsewhere - in this case even in another US state.

This particular subsidy was offered by Washington State - home of Boeing's vast Everett and Renton plants - and covers the development of its wide bodied 777X aircraft.

Previous examples of this kind of ruling usually require immediate repayment - a sum that by some estimate could approach $9bn, a figure Boeing itself, however, hotly disputes.

Boeing has previously called for an Australian company, found to be in receipt of similar prohibited subsidies, to be forced to immediately repay them, but it's unlikely it will take such a hard line on itself.
Subsidy wars

This marks a victory for Airbus in a war without end.

Back in September the European aerospace giant, which employs 15,000 people in the UK, was on the receiving end when it was found that billions of euros in low interest loans amounted to illegal subsidies.

Boeing celebrated that moment as a comprehensive victory which would deal a mortal blow to Airbus and result in more US jobs.

The reality is that neither of these companies can exist without government subsidies.

The development costs of new aircraft are just too big, and the risks and rewards too great, for governments to stay out of it.

Boeing gets money from NASA and the US Department of Defence; Airbus from very, very cheap government loans.

For years this was the case and an uneasy truce reigned over the world aerospace market throughout the 1990s and beyond.

Then, in 2004, all hell broke loose and the lawyers on both sides have been at each others throats for 12 years - a nice little earner for them.
Bury the hatchet?

Could the end of this legal gravy plane be in sight?

Perhaps.

It's not just the US and Europe who are at it.

Canada's government subsidises Bombardier, and then there is the biggest threat to the Airbus and Boeing duopoly.

It is called Comac, the state-funded Chinese plane maker with the world commercial aviation market its number one target.

Its recent wide bodied aircraft combine features of both the Boeing 777 and Airbus A350 and caught many eyes at a recent airshow in China.

Perhaps this potential common enemy will one day prompt Boeing and Airbus to bury the hatchet.

The world's longest running and costliest trade dispute does shed some interesting light on the workings of the World Trade Organization.

This is a body the UK may get to know a bit better in the coming months and years if the UK leaves the EU without striking a replacement trade deal.

The big lesson is this: disputes take years, are rarely conclusively settled, and do not take the heat out of international trade disputes.

[bucket]

Good point Danny ....I have always pondered why the ag programs don't mirror the US programs.....

US farmers could have a bumper crop but with low prices still be looking at cheque from government that they can calculate quickly themselves based on market prices or at their local farm office. ...

In Canada it seems you pay a premium that takes a year and a half to calculate....then told you are SOL even with a bad production year...

The money to bombardier wasn't going end well anyway....it creates issues domestically....and now internationally.

[chuckChuck]

Boeing, Air Bus and other air craft manufacturers are also subsidized.

So why do some of you guys cheer on the US Commerce departments 200 % duty on Bombardier that will likely cost Canadian jobs?

The only reason you seem to have is that it hurts Quebec, The Liberals and Trudeau.

Do you really think the US Commerce Department will act in fair way when it comes to trade?

[danny W1M]

Trudeau is using tax money from western Canadians to subsidizes an aircraft company in Quebec to garner votes to get re-elected and stay in power. The money sure as hell isn't coming from the east. A province like N.B. has 40% of it's provincial budget funded by the federal government. That's also coming from the west, but atleast it's being used by all the people of the province, not just a private Company like BBDb.

Most people will never fly in these executive jets, that's partially why it's different than helping out the auto industry, everyone uses cars or trucks.

[Oliver88]

Could be, I've been saying for years, we should adopt the exact same ag policy/system/programs as the U.S.A. Then there'd be no problems.

Solid points regarding mirroring USA farm bills.
Match renewable fuels act, railway and funding for moving grain through waterways as well.

Bombardier has been a disaster waiting to happen being propped up with taxpayer $ for a generation.
Trudeau gave them $300 million in an interest free loan last year and lately bad mouthed Boeing.....Justin brought on this mess.

[chuckChuck]

Trudeau is using tax money from western Canadians to subsidizes an aircraft company in Quebec to garner votes to get re-elected and stay in power. The money sure as hell isn't coming from the east. A province like N.B. has 40% of it's provincial budget funded by the federal government. That's also coming from the west, but atleast it's being used by all the people of the province, not just a private Company like BBDb.

Most people will never fly in these executive jets, that's partially why it's different than helping out the auto industry, everyone uses cars or trucks.

Federal tax revenues come from all provinces. Ontario and Quebec have the biggest economies therefore pay the most taxes into the federal government. So your arguments that the subsidies to Bombardier come from western Canada is totally out to lunch. You need to get your facts straight.

This east vs west bullshit is getting old on Agriville.

All major aircraft manufacturers receive subsidies. And you want to cut support and loose Canadian manufacturing jobs while other countries subsidize their jobs?

Coming from farmers that also receive subsidies courtesy taxpayers this is amazing and hypocritical.

[grassfarmer]

Bombardier has been a disaster waiting to happen being propped up with taxpayer $ for a generation.

.....through both Conservative and Liberal Governments.

As for matching US Ag programs/rules - even if we did that the US would find a way to discount our products and give their producers the advantage - that's the nature of competitive trade. There are no level playing fields in the real world.