We knew it was a stalling game when it happened originally. Same with EU and bananas, Japanese and Australia Salmon, etc, etc. You can easily gain a year or more of industry relief with tarriffs before the DSB finally whacks ya.
However, there is a problem to address:
Quote:
|
He also said the U.S. would use its antidumping laws if imports jumped after the tariffs are lifted, and American negotiators will push exporting countries to adopt "new and strong disciplines on subsidies" for steel producers.
|
Antidumping is an issue. Japan is notorious for trying to dump steel here cheaper than it costs them, in an effort to drive our steel industry into its grave. If that ever happens, Japanese still prices will soar, and they'll get quite a tidy profit. Japanese companies plan in terms of decades, and are willing to suffer for a few years to gain greater future rewards.
Subsidies are another issue. While the US has gotten on the subsidy bandwagon in the last 20 years, it still does not funnel money to companies the way the EU (moderate) or Japan (heavy) funnel money. 15 years ago Harvard economist Lester Thurow used this to define the distinctions between the US, EU, and "pacific rim" -- the three great economic powers. He put the Pacific Rim on the "communistic capitalism" end of the scale because the government directly subsidizes industry.
How does this affect the US steel business? Well, let's use air travel as an example. United was making a real bid for air travel business in Europe, and basically in mathematical terms had a 1% industry-wide margin of efficiency on Airbus. This allowed it to scoop up lots of routes and passengers. What did the UK do? Well, it realized that it could subsidize Airbus with an amount just big enough to offset that efficiency margin (plus a little extra). The whole thing then flip-flopped, Airbus started getting all the routes, and United left the building.
Once the gummint starts doling out to industry it mucks up free trade just as much as a tarriff.