U.S. takes China to task over trade subsidies

[Katana]

The United States has begun legal action at the World Trade Organization (WTO), accusing China of using subsidies to harm US firms.
Washington tried to resolve the dispute bilaterally but failed, US Trade Representative Susan Schwab said.

She says China uses tax legislation to "encourage exports and discriminate against imports", and called for a "level playing field".

The move comes as the US trade deficit with China is at a record high.

Link

I admit that I likely do not understand the issue as well as others, so keep that in mind if you choose to respond to this question:

Isn't this a bit hypocritical when other countries are accusing our government of unfair practices in the subsidies that our farmers receive, which is a huge sticking point right now in the Doha Round?

Or am I completely off-base and what China is doing is completely different?

 

[Mike B.]

Isn't this a bit hypocritical when other countries are accusing our government of unfair practices in the subsidies that our farmers receive, which is a huge sticking point right now in the Doha Round?

Put it this way,

The US, EU, and other first world countries are horrendous hypocrites when it comes to farm subsidies.

Remember all that talk about a new plan to help Sub-Saharan Africa. It was great, yet nobody will do the one thing that would do the most help by allowing agricultural products into their countries from the third world to compete.

(Tony Blair and some Scandanavian countries did try to raise the issue, but were shot down.)

P.S. This does not mean of course China is blameless in its trade policies.

 

[Tony]

Instead of going to the WTO, why don't we just put tariffs on Chinese import?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Instead of going to the WTO, why don't we just put tariffs on Chinese import?

Because it would hurt the big American firms that sell them.

It's so much easier to yell at the Chinese than to yell at Walmart.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Because it would hurt the big American firms that sell them. It's so much easier to yell at the Chinese than to yell at Walmart.

I seem to recall some spiteful rhetoric levied at the Japanese over rice subsidies, about 20 years ago, while our car manufacturers tried to give the market to Japanese firms. At roughly the same time, public lands were being harvested for wood that was being sold directly to Japan, rather than via US lumber mills, which were beginning to close. (Oh, James Watt, where are you now?)

This sort of carping is standard behavior.

Nothing to see here, really, move along.

DR

 

[egslim]

(Tony Blair and some Scandanavian countries did try to raise the issue, but were shot down.)

Putting this in perspective, the UK has little agriculture (it even receives financial compensation for not being eligable for EU agricultural subsidies.) and I expect those Scandinavian countries are too far up north to produce many crops. So these countries weren't altruistic, they were just trying to score brownie points on an issue that wouldn't cost them much.

 

[geni]

Putting this in perspective, the UK has little agriculture (it even receives financial compensation for not being eligable for EU agricultural subsidies.) and I expect those Scandinavian countries are too far up north to produce many crops. So these countries weren't altruistic, they were just trying to score brownie points on an issue that wouldn't cost them much.

Net cost to them would probably be negative.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Putting this in perspective, the UK has little agriculture (it even receives financial compensation for not being eligable for EU agricultural subsidies.) and I expect those Scandinavian countries are too far up north to produce many crops. So these countries weren't altruistic, they were just trying to score brownie points on an issue that wouldn't cost them much.

Depends what you mean by "little agriculture".

According to here:

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/news/ng.asp?id=58990-uk-agriculture-sector

The UK sector output was £16.9bn and 63% of all food was indigenously produced.

Approx 500,000 jobs in farming & primary production - not the sort of statistic that politicians normally ignore.

 

[egslim]

Depends what you mean by "little agriculture".

According to here:

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/news/ng.asp?id=58990-uk-agriculture-sector

The UK sector output was £16.9bn and 63% of all food was indigenously produced.

Approx 500,000 jobs in farming & primary production - not the sort of statistic that politicians normally ignore.

From the top of my head the EU has both import tariffs and farmer subsidies - removing those import tariffs would lower import costs while maintaining the subsidies would continue to protect domestic farmers. That would be beneficial to a net food importer like the UK.

 

[Ryokan]

....and I expect those Scandinavian countries are too far up north to produce many crops. So these countries weren't altruistic, they were just trying to score brownie points on an issue that wouldn't cost them much.

Your first point is true, Scandinavia is not exactly farmland paradises.

Still, and I can only speak for Norway here, we have very tight import restrictions and you'll find few foreign agricultural products in stores compared to Norwegian ones. We heavily subsidize our farmers, to the point where when the food arrives at the stores, we've already paid for them through taxes. Doesn't stop the bastards from still charging blood money for the products, of course.

Norway would like to be seen as the paragon of good guys when it comes to foreign policy and trade matters. But the truth is, we're just as bad and hypocritical as the rest of the western world.