International Trade Law News
November 14, 2003
BIS Announces Enforcement Settlements
The U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has recently announced the settlement of two enforcement actions.
In the first matter, BIS imposed a civil penalty of $180,000 on Future Metals, Inc. of Tamarac, Florida to settle charges that it violated the Export Administration Regulations on 40 occasions by exporting aluminum bars and stainless steel sheets and tubes to India without the required export licenses.
In the second case, BIS assessed Omega Engineering Inc., of Stamford, Connecticut, $187,000 in civil penalties to settle charges that it illegally exported laboratory equipment to Pakistan. In addition, Omega and its Vice President, Ralph Michel, will have their export privileges to Pakistan denied for five years. Omega and Michel had previously been found guilty of criminal charges stemming from similar violations of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Export Administration Regulations. Michel was sentenced to 10 months of prison, followed by three years of supervised probation, in addition to $50,000 in penalties. Omega Engineering was assessed $313,000 in criminal penalties, placed on corporate probation for five years, and was required to implement an export compliance program.
November 13, 2003
Antidumping Petition Filed Against Hand Trucks From China
On November 13, 2003, Gleason Industrial Products, Inc. filed an antidumping petition against Hand Trucks from China with the U.S. International Trade Commission and U.S. Department of Commerce.
Furniture Retailers Line Up to Fight Antidumping Petition on Furniture From China
Some of the largest furniture retailers in the U.S. have organized an effort to oppose the recently filed antidumping petition on wooden bedroom furniture from China. A recent memo issued by a coalition called the "Furniture Retailer Group" called the antidumping petition "nothing less than a declaration of war against U.S. furniture retailers." The memo urged furniture stores to challenge the petition at the U.S. International Trade Commission and to help the retailers group pay for legal expenses with a suggested contribution of $5,000 for every $100 million of revenue.
The memo says that antidumping duties could increase the costs of bedroom furniture fivefold, "which most certainly will reduce consumer demand for these items." That would lead to a drop in consumer spending on furniture and a loss of jobs in the retail furniture industry.
The Furniture Retailer Group currently has the following members: The Bombay Co., Rooms to Go, Rhodes Furniture, City Furniture, Havertys, J.C. Penney Purchasing Corp. and Crate & Barrel.
U.S. Ban on Cuba Travel to Remain
Despite both houses of Congress passing measures to lift the ban on travel to Cuba in the past few months, the provision to lift the travel ban was removed by Congressional negotiators from the final version of the Transportation and Treasury Departments Approprirations Bill. The measure was removed after the White House signalled that the President would veto the bill if the Cuba travel ban remained in the final bill.
U.S. to Restore Normal Trade Relations for Serbia and Montenegro on December 4, 2003
Today the State Department published a Federal Register notice announcing that normal trade relations (NTR) status will be restored to Serbia and Montenegro as of December 4, 2003. NTR status was revoked for Serbia and Montenegro in 1992 during the conflict in Bosnia. The decision to restore NTR status was made after the State Department found that Serbia and Montenegro has ceased its armed conflict with the other ethnic peoples of the region, has agreed to respect the borders of the six republics that comprised the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,and has ceased all support of Serbian forces inside Bosnia-Hercegovina.
November 12, 2003
Nucor Requests ITC to Issue Written Response to WTO's Safeguards Decision
In a statement issued by Nucor Steel today, the company suggested that the WTO Appellate Body's ruling against the U.S. steel safeguard measures was a result of U.S. failure to provide a reasoned explanation for the safeguard, rather than flaws with the underlying U.S. law or practice. An analysis of the WTO's decision prepared by Nucor's outside counsel indicated that the Appellate Body's ruling differs substantially from other recent rulings against the United States, which have clearly identified a U.S. law that violates WTO rules. In this case, the primary violation identified was the failure of the ITC to provide a reasoned and adequate explanation of unforeseen developments, increased imports, and the impact of excluded imports, despite what appear to be favorable facts. As a result, Nucor contends that U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) should provide a detailed, clarified report responding to WTO's decision before any decision to lift the tariffs occurs.
BIS Issues Proposed Rule on SNAP+ License Submission System
Today the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published in the Federal Register a proposed rule that would amend the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to implement a revised version of BIS' Simplified Network Application Processing (SNAP), known as SNAP+. The proposed rule would mandate use of SNAP+ for all filings of Export License applications (except Special Comprehensive Licenses), Reexport Authorization requests, Classification requests, Encryption Review requests, and License Exception AGR notifications unless BIS authorizes paper filing for a particular user or transaction. The requirement to use SNAP+ also would apply to any documentation required to be submitted with applications, requests or notifications. Comments on the proposed rule must be received by January 12, 2004.
Senate Passes Syrian Sanctions Bill
In a surprise move, the Senate brought the Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act of 2003 to a vote on the Senate floor late Tuesday afternoon and the measure passed by a vote of 89-4. The bill, H.R. 1828, passed the House by an overwhelming margin in October. The Senate version of the bill contained some minor amendments to the House version. It is not clear when the House will reconsider the bill. The President has indicated that he will sign the bill.
November 11, 2003
Large Number of U.S. Food Contracts Signed at Havana International Fair
Alimport, the Cuban Government's purchaser of agricultural products, announced that it entered into contracts worth $164.9 million during the Havana International Fair that concluded last Sunday. U.S. companies were involved in more than 30 of the 46 contracts signed during the trade fair.
Among the contracts signed were $18.6 million worth of soybeans, soy oil, soy flour and corn from Archer Daniels Midland Co. of Decatur, Illinois. Louis Dreyfus Group, Tyson Foods and AJC International signed a number of contracts for the export of chicken products to Cuba. A number of smaller contracts were signed for products ranging from chewing gum to coffee creamer.
During the first eight months of 2003, U.S. companies shipped $139 million worth of food products to Alimport, a 50% increase over the same period in 2002.
American Among Panelists Rendering Decision Against U.S. Safeguard Measures
An interesting sidelight to yesterday's decision by the WTO's Appellate Body on the U.S. Safeguards on steel products was that an American was one of the three members of the Appellate Body that rendered the opinion against the United States. The three members of the panel that rendered the Appellate Body's decision were Mr. James Bacchus from the United States, Mr. John Lockhart from Australia and Mr. Georges Abi-Saab of Egypt.
Mr. Bacchus, one of the original members of the WTO Appellate Body is finishing his second and final four year term as a member of the Appellate Body. He is a former U.S. Congressman and Special Assistant to the United States Trade Representative. Mr. Bacchus will soon be replaced by Professor Merit Janow of Columbia University (see story below).
EU Retaliation List
As a result of the WTO's decision on the U.S. Safeguards on steel products, WTO Rules permits the European Union to impose additional tariffs on U.S. products. These tariffs are knows as "re-balancing measures." Products from the US concerned by the EU re-balancing measures was issued in Annex Two of European Council regulation 1031/2002. The EU re-balancing measures consist of additional duties of 8, 13, 15 or 30%, depending on the product. These additional duties mirror the additional tariffs imposed on EU steel exports in the context of the US steel safeguards.
In addition to most steel products, the list includes a number of products that were designed to impose maximum political pressure on the U.S. The list includes orange juice (from Florida), cigarettes, numerous agricultural products, sunglasses, knitwear, motor boats and photocopying machines. The list represents $2,242 million of US exports to the EU. This amount is substantially equivalent to the value of EU steel exports affected by the US steel safeguards.
November 10, 2003
WTO Appellate Body Affirms That U.S. Safeguard Measures Violate WTO Rules
As expected, the WTO Appellate body today issued its written opinion on the complaints brought to the WTO by Brazil, China, the European Communities, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland against the section 201 "safeguard measures" imposed by the United States on numerous steel products. The WTO Appellate Body affirmed most of the Dispute Settlement Panel's conclusions that the US measures were inconsistent with the WTO Safeguards Agreement and GATT 1994 but reversed some findings regarding tin mill products and stainless steel wire. However, the Panel's findings that were reversed did not affect the overall outcome of the case.
In one of the key findings, the Appellate Body found that the application of all safeguard measures imposed by the U.S. was inconsistent with the requirements of Article XIX:1(a) of GATT 1994 and Article 3.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards because "the United States failed to provide a reasoned and adequate explanation demonstrating that 'unforeseen developments' had resulted in increased imports causing serious injury to the relevant domestic producers."
U.S. Professor Appointed to WTO Appellate Body
The World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body has appointed Professor Merit Janow of Columbia University to the WTO’s Appellate Body. Professor Janow received her law degree from Columbia University, and is currently a professor of international economic law and policy at Columbia University teaching advanced graduate courses in international trade law and law of the WTO. She has served as a panelist in a WTO dispute, was a practicing lawyer, and is a former Deputy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative. She is filling the vacancy being created by the departure of Mr. James Bacchus, a former U.S. Congressman and the last original member of the Appellate Body.
WTO Establishes Dispute Settlement Panel on Long-Grain White Rice
The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently established a dispute settlement panel to review the U.S. challenge to Mexico's antidumping order on U.S. long-grain white rice. The panel, which will also review certain provisions of Mexico's Foreign Trade Act and its Federal Code of Civil Procedure, was established in response to a request by the United States after Mexico imposed antidumping duties on U.S. white long grain rice in June 2002.
In the WTO panel request, the United States identifies numerous apparent violations of Mexico's obligations under the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Antidumping Agreement), the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement), and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994). These violations relate to various procedures and methodologies Mexican authorities used in the rice investigation, as well as to the requirements of the Mexican legislation.
U.S. Senate Urges Agriculture Department to Proceed With Country-of-Origin Labeling
On November 6, 2003, the U.S. Senate voted 58-36 to oppose efforts by the House of Representatives to exempt imported meat products from a law requiring that foods start carrying country-of-origin labels by September 2004.
The House, in its version of the agriculture spending bill, voted 208-193 in July to prevent the Agriculture Department from proceeding with rulemaking for the meat labeling law, approved by Congress as part of a 2002 farm bill.
