Printer Friendly

CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS, LUMBER INDUSTRY URGE PANEL TO REJECT COMMERCE LUMBER RULING

 CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS, LUMBER INDUSTRY URGE PANEL TO REJECT
 COMMERCE LUMBER RULING
 WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 /PRNewswire/ -- The Canadian federal, provincial and territorial governments and the Canadian lumber industry today urged a bi-national panel to reject the Department of Commerce's determination that provincial and territorial governments provide a countervailable subsidy to the softwood lumber industry.
 Citing "multiple factual and legal errors," the federal government of Canada, certain provinces and territories, the Canadian Forest Industries Council (CFIC) and the Quebec Lumber Manufacturers Association filed more than 500 pages of legal briefs calling upon the panel to remand the determination and instruct the Commerce Department to correct the errors.
 The panel does not have the authority to reverse the decision, but Tom Buell, chairman of CFIC, said that once the factual errors are corrected, Commerce will have no choice but to overturn the unjustifiable position it has taken in the case.
 "For nearly one year, only the Commerce Department, acting as both judge and jury, has been allowed to consider whether our lumber industry receives subsidies. Now we can go to an unbiased, bi- national panel, and we believe that when the panel finishes its review of the case, it will support our position that Commerce came to the wrong conclusion," Buell said.
 The two principle issues in the case involve the alleged countervailability of provincial-administered stumpage fees (charges for a right of access to cut standing timber) and British Columbia's (B.C.'s) log export regulations.
 As to the stumpage systems, Commerce committed a legal error by failing to address the arguments raised by Dr. William D. Nordhaus, a former member of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors, who demonstrated that stumpage programs do not constitute a subsidy, according to the brief.
 With respect to B.C.'s log export regulations, legislative history of the U.S. countervailing duty statute shows that the law was not intended to address border measures, such as B.C.'s log export restrictions, because it could potentially make every government program countervailable. Of the 6.51 percent subsidy determined by the Commerce Department, 3.6 percent was attributed to B.C.'s log export regulations. Commerce's decision to reverse its policy in order to counteravail border measures -- measures which the United States uses -- is a violation of U.S. law and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the brief said.
 The brief also stated that commerce violated U.S. law and GATT by considering only 24 of the 334 requests filed by Canadian companies which sought exclusion from the investigation on the grounds they did not receive subsidies. The law requires exclusion of all producers that do not receive subsidies and certain provinces have also requested that the panel remand and require Commerce to reconsider whether those provinces should ever have been included, the brief said.
 In October 1991, Commerce brought a case claiming that Canada subsidized its softwood lumber exports to the United States. On May 15, 1992, Commerce determined that several provincial programs provided subsidies and calculated a countervailable duty rate of 6.51 percent. On June 25, the International Trade Commission ruled that Canadian softwood lumber exports were injuring U.S. lumber manufacturers. Canada is appealing both decisions to bi-national panels under Chapter 19 of the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement.
 Oral arguments on the brief filed today will be held in January, 1993. The subsidy panel is expected to announce its decision in April 1993.
 -0- 9/29/92
 /CONTACT: Clare Lynam for the Canadian Forest Industries Council, 202-457-6382/ CO: Canadian Forest Industries Council ST: District of Columbia IN: PAP SU:


DC -- DC014 -- 4574 09/29/92 17:34 EDT
COPYRIGHT 1992 PR Newswire Association LLC
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1992 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:PR Newswire
Date:Sep 29, 1992
Words:611
Previous Article:ENDANGERED WHOOPING CRANES PROPOSED FOR REINTRODUCTION INTO FLORIDA
Next Article:AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE DAILY REPORT
Topics:


Related Articles
CANADIAN FOREST INDUSTRY REJECTS NEW SUBSIDY FINDING; WILL CONTEST 'BIASED,' 'HYPOCRITICAL' DECISION
MINISTER WILSON ANNOUNCES FTA APPEAL OF U.S. SOFTWOOD LUMBER DECISION
CANADIAN LUMBER INDUSTRY CRITICIZES ITC DECISION; WILL SEEK BINATIONAL RULING ON INJURY DETERMINATION
CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS, LUMBER INDUSTRY URGE PANEL TO REJECT INJURY FINDING IN LUMBER CASE
BINATIONAL PANEL UNANIMOUSLY DELIVERS SECOND IMPARTIAL REBUKE OF U.S. CASE IN SOFTWOOD LUMBER DISPUTE
CANADA-U.S. LUMBER DISPUTE ENDS IN CANADIAN VICTORY; FINAL CHALLENGE UPHOLDS EARLIER FINDING OF NO SUBSIDY
IMPROPER SOFTWOOD LUMBER DECISIONS BRING CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF FTA DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
The U.S. Commerce Department has ruled that Canadian softwood lumber entering the United States will face duties averaging 29.01 percent. (Business...
Canadians claim win in WTO lumber ruling. (Forestry).
Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports News Release: Commerce Department Requests Clarification of NAFTA Panel Decision.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2016 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters