Ford in Trouble with US Customs Chicken Tax with Transit Connect

[akirby]

I agree it should go away but how do you address the imbalance in trade where Japan doesn't open their commercial markets to the U.S.?

[RichardJensen]

lends encouragement to protectionist foot-draggers around the world

 

Oh goodness. There is more than sufficient internal justification for tariffs without *importing* a justification from some other country.

[Deanh]

Yes, it's a bad thing and sets a poor example. According to the article, the American Automotive Policy Council (Ford, GM, and Chrysler are members) is the party suggesting that the 25% tariff on light trucks not be abolished unilaterally and opposing Japan's participation in TPP.

 

Cato Institute's statement that this tariff "undermines U.S. credibility and lends encouragement to protectionist foot-draggers around the world" is definitely applicable here. Their recommendation from 2003 is way overdue:

ok, lets take it away on EXACTLY the same amount of cars imported that are EXPORTED to the country crying foul.....

[Deanh]

I've seen TCs with back seats still in them. A contractor I met in WV had one. Don't know if they were original or not, but they looked like they were.

apparently they ALL arrive with seats and windows all the way around....then they get "altered"...

[bzcat]

Because it was so much simpler to just take out the back seat. I'm sure they can do the same thing with the TC - it's just added cost and complexity that they didn't think they needed to do.

 

If the real issue is balance of trade then make the tax specific to Japan or China or wherever the problem exists. Doesn't it already exclude certain countries? Why can't they add Turkey?

Countries with which US has free trade agreements that removes all tariffs are exempt from things like Chicken tax. So of all the major car producing countries, these are the only ones exempt:

• Canada (NAFTA)

• Mexico (NAFTA)

• Korea (US-Korea FTA)

And one minor car producing country is exempt:

• Australia (US-Australia FTA)

One FTA with major car producing country was negotiated but never ratified:

• Thailand (this is why we don't get T6 Ranger, and why Toyota and Nissan are still making midsize pickup trucks in the US)

Two FTAs in negotiation that will potentially change the landscape dramatically:

• US-EU FTA (supported by all major US and EU car makers)

• Trans Pacific Partnership or TPP that will remove tariff on vehicles imported from Japan (opposed by all major US and EU car makers)

Turkey is not in the EU and too small of a trade partner with US to get a FTA deal. And besides, Transit Connect is now going to be imported from Spain, not Turkey.

Edited September 25, 2013 by bzcat

[aneekr]

Oh goodness. There is more than sufficient internal justification for tariffs without *importing* a justification from some other country.

 

What is the internal justification for the U.S. 25% tariff on light trucks?

Edited September 25, 2013 by aneekr

[aneekr]

I agree it should go away but how do you address the imbalance in trade where Japan doesn't open their commercial markets to the U.S.?

 

Since the U.S. and Japan have yet to sign a bilateral FTA to address trade issues, that's where Japan's participation in TPP would come into play.

[Kev-Mo]

Just ticks me off how the Japanese play both sides of this -

 

Half of Toyota's customers buy them because they are Japanese, and those folks would never buy an American car. The other half of their customers buy Toyota because they are "more American" than the Big 3. To watch a Tundra commercial one would think that America was built on the back of these hideous Japanese trucks. Toyota loves being in this 'win win' position and plays it all the way!

 

I just keep it simple - If it says Toyota, Honda, Nissan or Subaru, etc. it is foreign - period - regardless where they assemble the vehicle in order to avoid taxes.

 

Bottom line: Any product from any company that is headquartered in a foreign country that deliberately maintains a trade deficit with the USA should be taxed HEAVILY to bring their products here - whether the product is in in pieces or completely assembled.

[jpd80]

Bottom line: Any product from any company that is headquartered in a foreign country that deliberately maintains a trade deficit with the USA should be taxed HEAVILY to bring their products here - whether the product is in in pieces or completely assembled.

 

Or your auto industry will end up like Australia, dropping all tariffs and negotiated FTAs with our Asian neighbours

who then turned around and applied capacity and import taxes on our vehicle products - perfectly legal under FTAs

 

Australia should stand as an example of a country that tried to do the right thing and got burned by its greedy neighbors.

Edited September 25, 2013 by jpd80

[LSFan00]

So if Toyo nominally put a headquarters in Iowa they would be ok? This is pretty stupid.

[RichardJensen]

What is the internal justification for the U.S. 25% tariff on light trucks?

 

First, the internal justification is what it almost always is for tariffs: Protection of US business.

 

Secondly, I know of no country that is going to summon the chicken tax in order to persuade its citizens that a tariff is necessary, unless that tariff is in direct response to the chicken tax. Think about how stupid that line of reasoning is by imagining a politician in Ruritania telling his constituents, "Not only do we need to tax widget imports from Plotsylvania to protect our widget manufacturers and their employees, the US government taxes truck imports, so it's okay!"

Edited September 25, 2013 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

So if Toyo nominally put a headquarters in Iowa they would be ok? This is pretty stupid.

What?

 

 

This whole topic is about FORD getting charged for violating a tariff on imports.