Report: Trump planning executive action on 'unfair' product dumping

Report: Trump planning executive action on 'unfair' product dumping

By Olivia Beavers - 04/09/17 05:55 PM EDT

Report: Trump planning executive action on 'unfair' product dumping
© Getty Images

The Trump administration is drafting a possible executive order that would call for investigations into foreign companies for “unfair” product dumping, and could also lead to tariffs on a broad range of products, according to a Sunday Axios report.

The New York Times reported last week that the White House may implement a new measure focusing on anti-steel dumping. Axios reports that White House could be casting a wider net, including taking aim at steel and aluminum and household appliances.

The plans are reportedly still in the works and the White House is trying to decide how aggressive to be with the order. Some Trump officials, according to Axios, predict that investigations could trigger new import duties.

Trump has frequently pledged to put policies in place that would encourage companies to hire American workers and use American products. But business groups worry that such penalties could hurt companies that rely on cheaper imports and raise prices for consumers.

This measure would work toward Trump’s campaign promise to keep and protect American jobs while combatting unfair trade agreements, a White House official told Axios.

"The administration will use the results of that investigation to determine the best path forward, which could potentially include everything from no action at all to the levying of supplemental duties," the White House official said. "But whichever action we take will be informed by the results of the investigation and not by predetermined conclusions."

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is reportedly leading the efforts on this order.

Axios reports that April is a loose roll-out date, but it could come much later.

"Trade negotiations and discussions should happen in the board room, not in the press room,” a spokesman for Ross told the news outlet.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...unfair-product

Good! Fixing these bad trade deals is a major task and working on the unfair product dumping while the trade agreements are being restructured is good action to get some benefits for Americans rolling in faster.

Trump considers investigation of international trade partners

By Damian Paletta April 9 at 8:53 PM

President Trump is considering an executive action that would launch a formal investigation into the way U.S. trading partners use subsidies and a tactic known as “dumping” to skew imports and exports, a White House official said Sunday evening.

If signed, the executive action would call for a review of foreign trading practices and could, depending on the results, be followed by retaliatory trade measures from the administration.

The executive action would additionally reflect a tension within the White House between the economic populists, who have argued for more aggressive and adversarial moves against foreign countries, and the growing influence of pragmatists, who have called for a more measured approach.

During his campaign, Trump repeatedly attacked other countries over their trade practices, arguing some countries were contributing to the U.S. trade deficit — the gap between the cost of the nation’s imports and its exports — by using subsidies and other practices to undercut U.S. firms and lure away jobs.

Through export subsidies, foreign governments provide funds to help their manufacturers lower the price of their exports to make them more attractive to international buyers — a practice often viewed as a violation of World Trade Organization rules.

Trump has argued that the U.S. trade deficit with China and Mexico is disproportionately large, and he has taken particular aim at Beijing, accusing China of manipulating its currency to boost its exports. During the campaign, he promised to formally label China a currency manipulator once he takes office, but he has declined to follow through on that threat.

Should the administration want to take that step, it will have an opportunity to do so soon. Within days, the Treasury Department is expected to release its semiannual currency report. Outside analysis and former Treasury officials do not expect the Trump administration to use the report to formally label China a currency manipulator, but the language the administration uses will be closely studied for clues about how it plans to engage with China about currency issues.

Trump and his advisers reached an agreement with Chinese President Xi Jinping at a meeting last week to launch a 100-day plan to improve trade relations between China and the United States — a much more tepid step than Trump promised during the campaign.

But the executive action under review could eventually lead to more aggressive U.S. trade actions against China, a sign that some voices within the White House believe more is needed.

It could focus specifically on the steel and aluminum markets, as U.S. officials have said that China’s trade practices in these area have had a major impact on U.S. manufacturers’ ability to compete.

A White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the investigation that would be prompted by the executive action, said, “The administration would use the results of that investigation to determine the best path forward, which could potentially include everything from no action at all to the levying of supplemental duties. But whichever action we take would be informed by the results of the investigation and not by predetermined conclusions.”

The Trump administration has said its primary goals include boosting U.S. manufacturing and exports, drawing companies back to the United States, and punishing those that move overseas and try to ship products back to America.

Foreign countries use many tactics to try to win a trade advantage. U.S. manufacturers, Democrats and Republicans have long accused China of using a tactic known as dumping to hurt U.S. companies. Dumping is the practice of exporting an item at a below-market price to undermine industries in other nations.

Trump has signed numerous executive actions since taking office, and many of them have launched reviews or studies. Their final impact is still undetermined.

In his first 80 days as president, Trump has signed two executive orders that direct the government to review the causes of U.S. trade deficits and more strictly enforce anti-dumping provisions. He has also formally withdrawn the United States from the Obama-era 12-nation trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Yet the administration has yet to fulfill other promises made on the campaign trail, including renegotiating the U.S. free trade agreement with Mexico and Canada and branding China a currency manipulator. Congress has yet to confirm one of the White House’s primary trade negotiators, Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.732e06ccdbce

Mon Apr 10, 2017 | 4:11am EDT

Trump considers trade order that could lead to duties: official
By David Lawder | WASHINGTON

U.S. President Donald Trump is considering an executive order to launch a trade investigation that could lead to supplemental duties in certain product categories, a Trump administration official told Reuters.

Trump has made reducing U.S. trade deficits a key focus of his economic agenda to try to grow American manufacturing jobs. He has taken particular aim at renegotiating trade relationships with China and Mexico.

The new order, if issued, would seek to determine whether U.S. trade deficits for those product lines are the result of dumping of imported products below cost and unfair subsidies by foreign governments, the official said late on Sunday in Washington.

That could eventually lead to additional import duties, but any decisions on such punishments would depend on the probe's findings, not "pre-determined conclusions," said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the order was still being considered. The official did not specify which product lines could be investigated.

"The administration would use the results of that investigation to determine the best path forward, which could include everything from no action at all to the levying of supplemental duties," the official said.

The Axios news website earlier quoted an official saying such an executive order would likely target steel and aluminum, two industries that are battling for more protection from Chinese imports. Axios said it also may target household appliances, where South Korean manufacturers with Chinese factories have gained market share.

The Trump administration official did not provide any details to Reuters on timing of the executive order, which would be separate from a March 31 Trump order authorizing a 90-day Commerce Department study of trade abuses and their effect on U.S. trade deficits.

News of the additional order comes two days after Trump's first meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Florida, where the two leaders agreed to launch a 100-day plan for trade talks aimed at boosting U.S. exports to China and reducing the U.S. trade deficit with China.

Trump during his election campaign had threatened punitive tariffs on Chinese imports and to declare China a currency manipulator. He has not followed through on either threat thus far.

The U.S. steel industry has already won extensive anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties on imports from China and other countries and the aluminum industry is seeking similar protections. U.S. appliance maker Whirlpool Corp. has also won anti-dumping duties against Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics brand clothes washers made in China.

But U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and Trump's nominee to be the top U.S. trade negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, have said they would work to find new trade remedies to stop unfairly traded imports.

Among options they are expected to explore are trade actions under Section 301 of the Tariff Act of 1930, a provision used extensively in the 1980s to raise tariffs and import quotas on certain Japanese products including steel and motorcycles.

Section 301 has largely gone unused since the World Trade Organization was launched in 1995.

(Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Randy Fabi)

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN17C0DT

Maybe just enforcing our trade laws would make a big difference. Looks like there are all types of laws and rules we could rely on to fix a major portion of these inequities until the trade deals are renegotiated. That would be ... lovely!!!!

JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!

We have lots of laws if only they were enforced would remedy many of our ills in this country.

It's the will to enforce those laws that is seriously lacking and has been for at least 40 years.

It looks like Trump is having his people pour through them to find every advantage he can to solve as much of these problems as possible without having to go to Congress. Congress just can't do what needs to be done. It's the strangest most befuddling situation I've ever seen.

I'm not sure what constitutes product dumping. What products?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nntrixie

I'm not sure what constitutes product dumping. What products?

---

According to the first article, the concerns mentioned steel, aluminum and household appliances.

Quote:

---

The New York Times reported last week that the White House may implement a new measure focusing on anti-steel dumping. Axios reports that White House could be casting a wider net, including taking aim at steel and aluminum and household appliances.

---

Yes, I read you article, I see.

So, it's unfair for a government to subsidize manufacturers so they can sell their products in a foreign country, undermining that country's manufacturers.

Is it anything like the subsidized corn the American farmers 'dumped' into Mexico, putting small Mexican farmers out of business. The same farmers who then headed El Norte to work?

Pot and kettle.

While I really do want something done about our trade deals. What concerns me more than quantity is quality. What we get from China is cheap (as in poor quality), unsafe (as in containing totally toxic materials) or diluted items.

I do realize much of the reason we have these things selling is that Americans are willing to buy - even when they don't need them.

Exactly, except our prices don't reflect the subsidies. Our farm prices are based on free market regardless of the amount of subsidy they receive from the government. Farm prices are based on the commodities market. That's why our subsidies don't violate the WTO or these free trade agreements. China and other countries that own and heavily subsidize do so and then cut the price and "dump" it into our market at price levels they know our companies under our laws, WTO and free trade agreements can't compete with.

I don't understand exactly what you are saying or maybe I didn't make myself clear.

Our government subsidized corn to be exported to Mexico. I don't really see any difference. The prices of the corn sold in Mexico did reflect the subsidizes. It had to be less than the local farmers were selling for. That's what I call undercutting local farmers.

That corn sent to Mexico didn't sell for the same price there, it does here. The poor people of Mexico couldn't/wouldn't have bought it.

Also, we evidently pay Mexican farmers to not grow crops. One instance, I know of.

Our commodities are based on how much the government is willing to subsidize them, in all the many forms, Think Ethanol, think crop insurance, think the tax benefits, think school lunches, think food stamps. Also how many times they are sold or resold on the commodities market. Not a lot to do with free market. That's what keeps the price of oil up and much of our food stuff.

While traveling through an area where they raise a lot of cotton, two years in a row, I saw them plowing under acres - hundred, I could see of cotton that had not been picked.

I read, or saw don't remember which, a documentary about a cotton farmer. He said he couldn't afford NOT to grow cotton. because of all the subsidies, crop insurance, etc., by the government, he would always come out OK no matter the circumstances.

I remember Pres. Bush lobbying for money for corporations. Those corporations who remained in the US AND 'those who have moved offshore, so they can stay competitive'

Boy would I like to see something done about Chinese and other foreign imports, but unless something changes, does it matter which mob puts the squeeze on you - Chinese or our own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nntrixie

I don't understand exactly what you are saying or maybe I didn't make myself clear.

Our government subsidized corn to be exported to Mexico. I don't really see any difference. The prices of the corn sold Mexico did reflect the subsidizes.

Also, we evidently pay Mexican farmers to not grow crops. One instance, I know of.

Our commodities are based on how much the government is willing to subsidize them, in all the many forms, Think Ethanol, think crop insurance, think the tax benefits, think school lunches, think food stamps. Also how many times they are sold or resold on the commodities market. Not a lot to do with free market. That's what keeps the price of oil up and much of our food stuff.

While traveling through an area where they raise a lot of cotton, two years in a row, I saw them plowing under acres - hundred, I could see of cotton that had not been picked.

I read, or saw don't remember which, a documentary about a cotton farmer. He said he couldn't afford NOT to grow cotton. because of all the subsidies, crop insurance, etc., by the government, he would always come out OK no matter the circumstances.

I remember Pres. Bush lobbying for money for corporations. Those corporations who remained in the US AND 'those who have moved offshore, so they can stay competitive'

Boy would I like to see something done about Chinese and other foreign imports, but unless something changes, does it matter which mob puts the squeeze on you - Chinese or our own.

---

Really? You mean Mexico paid a different price than we paid for the same corn? Maybe NAFTA allows for that. I don't know. I know putting the Mexican corn farmers out of business was a big part of NAFTA. Why the stupid Mexicans would agree to that, I don't know. I guess the same reason stupid Americans thought "free trade is good for America". Just a bunch of stupid people being led around the corral by a ring in their nose, before economic slaughter by the Globalists.

All these "free trade agreements" need to be ripped up and thrown in the trash and the United States needs to withdraw from the WTO.

Whether something is "unfair dumping" or not is very hard to prove which is why most administrations just ignore it. But the laws are there and if it is unfair dumping in violation of a trade agreement or the WTO, the latter being the case with China since we do not have an agreement with them, then the time and effort should be spent to investigate, make the case and try to prove it to the WTO. Whether or not to pursue it is where Trump is at now. It may prove not worth the effort.

There was a timber case several years ago about unfair dumping with Canada. Too long ago to remember all the details, but I think we won that one under NAFTA. It was filed by the American timber companies. These "unfair dumping" cases are brought forward all the time by many different countries. Trump's thinking we should be more active under the WTO guidelines for those countries not covered by a trade agreement with their own dispute resolution mechanisms.

I support raising the issues whenever appropriate wherever the problem exists. You'll win some and lose some, but it puts everyone on notice, "don't mess with US", or we'll sue you. I mean that is vintage Trump. No reason for him to change now.

I support raising any issue that unfairly harms the American public.

Now, I would have preferred our government went after China for it's lumber and sheetrock that was toxic and caused many health problems for American people. I actually remember Pres Trump mentioning Chinese sheetrock and it's dangers.

I wish we had gone after toxic, dangerous, and poor quality products rather than the quantity of products.

I wish foreign imports were subject to the same health and safety rules American products are subject to.

Also, I wish all foreign food products had to be labeled as to the country of manufacture or country of origin.

I don't like picking up a package of crackers and it reads 'distributed by xyz corporation'. You have no idea where these are manufactured.

Yeah, and all those things should have been addressed by former Presidents, Congress, Courts and so forth. Trump is trying to use our laws to do just what you wish be done. They're hard cases sometimes to prove, it involves a lot of factors and complex maneuvering by the violators and dumpers. And like Trump said on the campaign trail, these international business opponents are very smart. But he's smart, too, smarter than most Presidents we've had, so they may have met their match here.

He'll do whatever he thinks he can do under executive authority to stop any and all things that are hurting our country. But it's very complicated now woven into complex WTO agreements and free trade agreements that are thousands of pages long. The politics is hard too because for every American aluminum producer who hates dumping, there are 1000 US buyers of dumped aluminum who love foreign dumped aluminum.

I hope you are right and some of these things are included in the negotiations.

Yes, me too.