Trade Ruling Favors U.S. Catfish Farmers Over Vietnamese



By Paul Blustein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 24, 2003; Page E04


The final round in a highly charged trade dispute over catfish went in favor of American catfish farmers yesterday, and against their competitors from Vietnam.

The U.S. International Trade Commission agreed in a 4 to 0 vote that imports of Vietnamese frozen fillets are injuring the domestic catfish industry. The vote clears the way for the imposition of stiff duties by the Commerce Department, which ruled last month that the Vietnamese fillets have been "dumped," or sold at unfairly low prices.

The decision was widely expected, because U.S. catfish farmers and processors complained vociferously at a commission hearing last month that competition from Vietnam had forced them to start laying off workers as prices were driven down to unprofitable levels. The industry, which employs about 13,000 people, is concentrated in some of the least-prosperous areas of Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana.

But the dispute has inflamed popular sentiment in Vietnam, and the ruling will heighten perceptions there that the United States doesn't abide by its own free-trade principles, critics of the decision warned. The duties represent "the very kind of protectionist barrier we spent years urging the Vietnamese to abandon," said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a champion of closer U.S.-Vietnamese ties.

The catfish issue has attracted considerable attention, in part because of the colorful nature of the product at stake and in part because it is the first dumping case involving Vietnam. A little more than a year and a half ago, Washington and Hanoi reached a bilateral trade agreement that bestowed "normal trade relations" on Vietnam, ending the high tariffs that had been imposed on Vietnamese imports since the war there.

Shipments of goods from Vietnam to the United States have surged since that agreement, but the catfish case is stirring fears in Hanoi that benefits of the accord will be rolled back as more U.S. industries use the dumping laws to block imports. Critics of the laws contend that they are tilted heavily in favor of domestic producers.

The duties on the imported fillets will range from 37 to 64 percent of the import prices.

The Vietnamese embassy in Washington declined to comment pending word from Hanoi, where it was the middle of the night when the decision was announced.


© 2003 The Washington Post Company</p> As more and more U.S. industries use dumping laws how will this effect the views of the International community? Duties like this will be viewed as unfair and harsh, not well thought out, and not "normal". The vote being 4 to 0 suggests that. Should we take the word "International" out of the title? Tough job I would say. What are your thoughts?

Business will always be business, hard, unfair, and only the strong survive. This comment is in a way not really relevant to the topic, but in another way it is. The key here is negotiate until you drop.

Of course there's always the option of invading. :D

<font face="Verdana" size="3" color="#00FF00"> Expect this decision to end up going to the WTO. </font>

[ 07-24-2003, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

On the flip side, in response to the European Parliament accepting a 0.9% biotech labeling threshold, the USTR declared it a "technical barrier to trad" (referring to the WTO side agreement) that evidenced the EU was not serious about improving agricultural trade between the US and EU.

On WTO/Trade issues, the US's mouth certainly has two sides from which it talks. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Now, if the WTO had a proper anti-dumping provision (like NAFTA does), these problems could be fairly resolved.

How about just a fishing trip - LoL!

That makes sense Timber [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] Now that "free trade" seems to be spreading rapidly more and more case's will be heard on a daily basis. Like I said before, tough job.