(Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada)
Federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz today [Wednesday] responded to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently published rule regarding the implementation of the mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL).
“The Government of Canada is disappointed with the U.S. COOL legislation, and remains concerned that it may discriminate against Canadian products,” said Minister Ritz. “We will analyze the recently released rule to determine the economic impacts on integrated North American markets”.
The U.S. Congress passed the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 U.S. Farm Bill) in June. This legislation requires the mandatory COOL rule for beef, lamb, pork, chicken and goat meat, along with perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts, to be implemented by September 30, 2008.
The implementation of the COOL rule for food products has happened in stages. Implementation for fish and shellfish was effective April 4, 2005. However, implementation for all other commodities was delayed until September 2008.
Since the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, and then the North American Free Trade Agreement, trade between Canada and the U.S. has tripled. Eliminating obstacles to trade has contributed to mutually-beneficial supply chains, making both countries more competitive domestically and internationally. The Government of Canada understands that this new rule could have an impact on highly integrated sectors like the beef and pork sectors.
“The Government of Canada will continue to work with industry and the provinces and territories to minimize any impact on Canadian farmers and ranchers,” said Minister Ritz. “Should the implementation of the rule result in undue restrictions on the exportation of any products or animal from Canada, the Government will have to consider its options.”
As it did in 2003, 2005 and 2007, the Government of Canada will submit comments to the U.S. Federal Register, outlining its views on the rule.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Freight Index Rises in June, but Hurdles Remain
(CNN Money – Associated Press)
Truck tonnage increases in June, but trade group economist suggests recovery might be far off
The American Trucking Associations (ATA) said total goods shipped by truck in the U.S. rose for the second consecutive month in June, but the trade group’s chief economist suggested the nation’s overall economy might not yet be on the road to recovery.
Truckers are considered gauges of the nation’s economic health because they often recover ahead of the broader economy, as they transport goods to stock retailers’ shelves in preparation for a rebound in consumer spending. Almost 70% of manufactured and retail goods in the U.S. are carried by truck, according to the ATA.
The ATA said its seasonally adjusted tonnage index, which measures the weight of freight hauled by U.S. truckers based on membership surveys, rose 1.3% in June. The index also hit its highest mark since February. It rose 0.5% in May.
The trade group’s Chief Economist Bob Costello said despite the uptick, the fate of the overall economy still remains unknown. “It seems that truck tonnage is once again leading the U.S. economy,” Costello said in a statement. “Unfortunately, truck tonnage could slow later this year as the overall economy is expected to be quite weak in the fourth quarter and the first quarter of next year.”
Costello noted that during the economic downturn in 2001, trucking demand recovered before the economy fell into a recession.
A key driver in the last two months may have more to do with capacity cutbacks across the sector. High fuel prices have driven many carriers to cut their fleet sizes or sell trucks to foreign buyers in an effort to bring U.S. supply and demand back into balance. Costello predicts that additional fleet reductions will probably continue in the near future.
The Arlington, Va.-based trucking group’s members include FedEx Corp., United Parcel Service Inc., Con-way Inc. and Knight Transportation Inc. Most trucking stocks advanced in morning trading Wednesday as the broader market continued a two-day rally.
Truck tonnage increases in June, but trade group economist suggests recovery might be far off
The American Trucking Associations (ATA) said total goods shipped by truck in the U.S. rose for the second consecutive month in June, but the trade group’s chief economist suggested the nation’s overall economy might not yet be on the road to recovery.
Truckers are considered gauges of the nation’s economic health because they often recover ahead of the broader economy, as they transport goods to stock retailers’ shelves in preparation for a rebound in consumer spending. Almost 70% of manufactured and retail goods in the U.S. are carried by truck, according to the ATA.
The ATA said its seasonally adjusted tonnage index, which measures the weight of freight hauled by U.S. truckers based on membership surveys, rose 1.3% in June. The index also hit its highest mark since February. It rose 0.5% in May.
The trade group’s Chief Economist Bob Costello said despite the uptick, the fate of the overall economy still remains unknown. “It seems that truck tonnage is once again leading the U.S. economy,” Costello said in a statement. “Unfortunately, truck tonnage could slow later this year as the overall economy is expected to be quite weak in the fourth quarter and the first quarter of next year.”
Costello noted that during the economic downturn in 2001, trucking demand recovered before the economy fell into a recession.
A key driver in the last two months may have more to do with capacity cutbacks across the sector. High fuel prices have driven many carriers to cut their fleet sizes or sell trucks to foreign buyers in an effort to bring U.S. supply and demand back into balance. Costello predicts that additional fleet reductions will probably continue in the near future.
The Arlington, Va.-based trucking group’s members include FedEx Corp., United Parcel Service Inc., Con-way Inc. and Knight Transportation Inc. Most trucking stocks advanced in morning trading Wednesday as the broader market continued a two-day rally.
CBP Proposes Revision of Country of Origin Rules
(American Shipper)
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is proposing to revise the rules used to determine the country of origin of imported merchandise.
The proposal would apply the so-called “tariff shift” rules, which CBP said “have proven to be more objective and transparent, and provide greater predictability in determining the country of origin of imported merchandise than the system of case-by-case adjudication they would replace. The proposed change also will aid an importer’s exercise of reasonable care.”
The proposal was published Friday in the Federal Register in a notice of proposed rulemaking and comments on the proposal are being accepted through Sept. 23.
Merchandise imported into the United States is subject to a country of origin determination, and under most circumstances that is done by CBP.
In a memo to clients, the law firm of Katten Muchin Rosenman explained that for customs purposes, all imported products must have a single country of origin. When products are composed of materials from more than one country, or undergo processing operations in more than one country, the country of origin is the country in which the product last underwent a “substantial transformation” prior to entry into the United States.
“For nearly a century, both CBP and courts have interpreted substantial transformation to mean the creation of a new or unique article of commerce having a distinctive name, character or use,” the firm explained. “This analysis, which applies to labeling and preferential trade systems, such as the Generalized System of Preferences or the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act, has been applied in a case-by-case basis, which CBP argues has led to subjective or inconsistent results.”
So more recently, CBP has applied the “tariff shift” rules laid out in Part 102 of its regulations that looks for specific changes in the tariff classification of a product before and after processing or combination with other materials. The Part 102 rules are used to determine the country of origin for all goods imported from Canada and Mexico under NAFTA, for nearly all imports of apparel or textile products, and for imports of products under certain free-trade agreements.
Under the new proposal, CBP would apply the Part 102 rules “to all country of origin determinations made under the customs laws of the United States, with only a few exceptions as mandated in certain trade agreements,” said Katten Muchin Rosenman. CBP claims the new test will be more transparent to importers, can be objectively applied, and will result in more predictable country of origin determinations.
Another law firm, Tompkins & Davidson, noted the Part 102 rules “will not be used for purposes of determining origin for preferential trade agreements, if the agreements specify another origin test for that purpose. For example, application of tariff benefits under NAFTA are determined by the preference origin rules set out in Chapter Four of that agreement.” Read the complete article.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is proposing to revise the rules used to determine the country of origin of imported merchandise.
The proposal would apply the so-called “tariff shift” rules, which CBP said “have proven to be more objective and transparent, and provide greater predictability in determining the country of origin of imported merchandise than the system of case-by-case adjudication they would replace. The proposed change also will aid an importer’s exercise of reasonable care.”
The proposal was published Friday in the Federal Register in a notice of proposed rulemaking and comments on the proposal are being accepted through Sept. 23.
Merchandise imported into the United States is subject to a country of origin determination, and under most circumstances that is done by CBP.
In a memo to clients, the law firm of Katten Muchin Rosenman explained that for customs purposes, all imported products must have a single country of origin. When products are composed of materials from more than one country, or undergo processing operations in more than one country, the country of origin is the country in which the product last underwent a “substantial transformation” prior to entry into the United States.
“For nearly a century, both CBP and courts have interpreted substantial transformation to mean the creation of a new or unique article of commerce having a distinctive name, character or use,” the firm explained. “This analysis, which applies to labeling and preferential trade systems, such as the Generalized System of Preferences or the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act, has been applied in a case-by-case basis, which CBP argues has led to subjective or inconsistent results.”
So more recently, CBP has applied the “tariff shift” rules laid out in Part 102 of its regulations that looks for specific changes in the tariff classification of a product before and after processing or combination with other materials. The Part 102 rules are used to determine the country of origin for all goods imported from Canada and Mexico under NAFTA, for nearly all imports of apparel or textile products, and for imports of products under certain free-trade agreements.
Under the new proposal, CBP would apply the Part 102 rules “to all country of origin determinations made under the customs laws of the United States, with only a few exceptions as mandated in certain trade agreements,” said Katten Muchin Rosenman. CBP claims the new test will be more transparent to importers, can be objectively applied, and will result in more predictable country of origin determinations.
Another law firm, Tompkins & Davidson, noted the Part 102 rules “will not be used for purposes of determining origin for preferential trade agreements, if the agreements specify another origin test for that purpose. For example, application of tariff benefits under NAFTA are determined by the preference origin rules set out in Chapter Four of that agreement.” Read the complete article.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Eliminate Middlemen and Save on U.S. Customs Duties
(Tom Travis — Entrepreneur.com via MSNBC)
Importers today are typically being told they’re buying directly from the factory, that it’s the manufacturer who is selling to you. In fact, you’re usually buying through multiple parties, each that’s taking its own markup on the goods, adding to the amount of duty paid once the goods arrive in the United States. As a result, importers are trying to reduce U.S. duties by using a “first sale” concept.
Simply stated, the First Sale Rule allows the value entered to U.S. Customs to be based on the purchase price between the middleman and the factory, rather than the middleman and the importer. Importantly, the First Sale Rule may also apply to U.S. imports where the middleman is related to the importer and/or the factory or when there are multiple levels of middlemen. Working back to the price between the actual manufacturer and the immediate buyer substantially reduces the amount of duties, provided that all the appropriate requirements of the customs valuation statute are satisfied. This concept currently may be utilized in both the U.S. and the European Union.
It’s not always possible to work backward from your immediate seller to the actual manufacturer. Sometimes the parties in the transaction are afraid of giving away too much information about their markups or are concerned about revealing too much about the parties they do business with. However, even working back one level in the sales transaction can result in significant duty savings. While at times it seems almost impossible to penetrate the wall of silence and obtain the needed pricing information, experience shows that your suppliers are key to overcoming this problem. Read the complete article.
Importers today are typically being told they’re buying directly from the factory, that it’s the manufacturer who is selling to you. In fact, you’re usually buying through multiple parties, each that’s taking its own markup on the goods, adding to the amount of duty paid once the goods arrive in the United States. As a result, importers are trying to reduce U.S. duties by using a “first sale” concept.
Simply stated, the First Sale Rule allows the value entered to U.S. Customs to be based on the purchase price between the middleman and the factory, rather than the middleman and the importer. Importantly, the First Sale Rule may also apply to U.S. imports where the middleman is related to the importer and/or the factory or when there are multiple levels of middlemen. Working back to the price between the actual manufacturer and the immediate buyer substantially reduces the amount of duties, provided that all the appropriate requirements of the customs valuation statute are satisfied. This concept currently may be utilized in both the U.S. and the European Union.
It’s not always possible to work backward from your immediate seller to the actual manufacturer. Sometimes the parties in the transaction are afraid of giving away too much information about their markups or are concerned about revealing too much about the parties they do business with. However, even working back one level in the sales transaction can result in significant duty savings. While at times it seems almost impossible to penetrate the wall of silence and obtain the needed pricing information, experience shows that your suppliers are key to overcoming this problem. Read the complete article.
Canada to Turn to Bilateral Agreements After WTO Trade Talks Collapse
(Video: Bloomberg TV / Story: The Canadian Press)
Canada will move aggressively to negotiate individual country-to-country trade deals to protect its economic interests amid an abrupt collapse of global talks in Geneva, Trade Minister Michael Fortier said.
Canada would be at the table whenever talks resume, but is not waiting for a multi-national agreement, Fortier said.
“We are a trading nation. We depend on the ability for exporters to access markets worldwide and in particular markets in emerging and developing economies,” he said in a conference call from Geneva.
Fortier is most interested in reaching agreement with countries in the Americas, noting recent successful talks with Peru and Colombia, as well as in emerging markets such as China and India.
Canada has free trade agreements in place with the United States, Mexico and Chile. It has recently negotiated an agreement with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, and is seeking deals with South Korea and Europe, among others.
But the Canadian Chamber of Commerce questioned whether the country could get the same concessions from other countries in bilateral agreements that could have been won at the WTO.
“We had a real potential to see some significant gains in (exports) in agriculture and services and some limited gains in tariffs, and now all of that is off the table,” said Shirley-Anne George, the chamber’s head of policy.
“This is not good for Canada because we don’t have the economic might to force what we need in bilaterals the way the U.S. and Europe does.”
The Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance has estimated that a breakthrough in the agricultural sector of the talks, known as the Doha development round, could potentially mean $3 billion in additional exports for Canadian farmers.
The farm trade alliance said in a statement Tuesday that a new deal was needed “not just to increase our access to world markets, but to maintain what we got.”
But the bigger losers, said trade alliance president Darcy Davis, are the world’s poor countries, which stood to gain greater access for their farm exports into the developed world, and protection from subsidized imports from countries such as the United States and Europe.
“This is the development round,” he explained in a telephone interview from Geneva. “This was supposed to bring trade and lots of good things for developing countries. If we can get rid of export subsidies that hamper the ability of subsistence farmers to make a living, that would have been good.”
Fortier and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz were cautiously optimistic WTO chief Pascal Lamy could kick start a resumption of talks soon, but they admitted there were obstacles.
Ritz said several countries were entering election cycles, which could mean some of the players at the table in Geneva in the past nine days will likely not return.
As well, although some progress was achieved, the hurdles remain “significant.” Read the complete article.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Canada Better Than U.S. For Corporate Taxes: KPMG
(CBC News)
Canada has a more competitive tax system for companies than the United States, according to a KPMG study released Monday.
KPMG says Canada, often thought of as a high-tax country, scored third-best out of 10 countries according to the consultancy’s total tax index.
The Canadian score placed this country ahead of seven other major industrialized economies, including the U.S., the United Kingdom and Japan. Only Mexico and the Netherlands posted a better, or lower score, than Canada.
“A lot of governments have been trying to make Canada more competitive for business. And that quest is continuing,” says Greg Wiebe, KPMG’s Canadian managing partner for tax.
“The average person on the street has a view of Canada (as a high tax country) because of their personal tax rates. But, the U.S. has one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world,” he said.
KPMG’s total tax index attempts to look at taxes at all three levels of government rather than merely adding up the posted corporate tax rates. KPMG examined corporate rates, capital taxes, sales taxes, property taxes among other factors to arrive at its index.
Overall, Canada scored 78.3 in the KPMG study compared to 100 for the United States and 120.8 for Japan.
A lower score indicates a tax system that is more favourable to business while a higher score would mean that country is less business-friendly.
One reason for Canada’s strong showing is the policy whereby some provinces reduce corporate taxes by implementing a variety of tax holidays and tax credits for various firms, according to the study. Read the complete article or view the KPMG competitiveness report here.
Canada has a more competitive tax system for companies than the United States, according to a KPMG study released Monday.
KPMG says Canada, often thought of as a high-tax country, scored third-best out of 10 countries according to the consultancy’s total tax index.
The Canadian score placed this country ahead of seven other major industrialized economies, including the U.S., the United Kingdom and Japan. Only Mexico and the Netherlands posted a better, or lower score, than Canada.
“A lot of governments have been trying to make Canada more competitive for business. And that quest is continuing,” says Greg Wiebe, KPMG’s Canadian managing partner for tax.
“The average person on the street has a view of Canada (as a high tax country) because of their personal tax rates. But, the U.S. has one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world,” he said.
KPMG’s total tax index attempts to look at taxes at all three levels of government rather than merely adding up the posted corporate tax rates. KPMG examined corporate rates, capital taxes, sales taxes, property taxes among other factors to arrive at its index.
Overall, Canada scored 78.3 in the KPMG study compared to 100 for the United States and 120.8 for Japan.
A lower score indicates a tax system that is more favourable to business while a higher score would mean that country is less business-friendly.
One reason for Canada’s strong showing is the policy whereby some provinces reduce corporate taxes by implementing a variety of tax holidays and tax credits for various firms, according to the study. Read the complete article or view the KPMG competitiveness report here.
WTO Talks Collapse Over Import Rules
(Video: CCTV / Story: CBC News)
A bid by the world’s major trading powers to salvage trade talks collapsed on Tuesday after the United States, India and China failed to agree on farm import rules, according to officials.
The failure of the discussions between seven commercial trading powers likely signals the end to efforts by the World Trade Organization to gain an overall global trade pact.
The WTO has been trying since 2001 to secure a deal on the rules governing trade. But the prospects for such an agreement have been damaged by continual disagreements between Western nations and emerging economic powers, such as India and China, over manufacturing and agricultural rules.
In mid-July, trade officials from a smaller group of countries began meeting in an effort to get the large WTO talks back on track.
This most recent setback, however, could mean the larger negotiations will also fail, a senior source told the Associated Press.
The United States and the European Union have been pushing hard for a reduction of tariffs on manufactured products and the lessening of restrictions on farm trade.
India and China, however, have been demanding emergency powers that would allow those countries to protect domestic farmers against import surges from other countries.
These newly-industrializing powers say they need these rights to prevent small-scale farmers from being pounded by global agricultural producers, who could drive produce prices down.
Canada defends supply-management regime
The United States has argued that such rules could wind up raising farm tariffs in those countries, an unacceptable result from Washington’s perspective.
For its part, Canada has consistently defended this country’s supply-management regime, a system of rules and production quotas that, critics say, keeps consumer prices for products, such as chicken, overly high.
“There’s no doubt this is a significant setback,” federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz told reporters during a conference call from Geneva. “But we will push ahead with our trade agenda.”
Canada will now focus on negotiating more bilateral deals with other countries and trade blocks, said International Trade Minister Michael Fortier.
Canadian farmers sounded alarm bells over a possible failure to get a trade deal.
“To not get a new WTO agreement would mean tariffs can be raised and domestic supports increased to further distort trade,” said Darcy Davis, president of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance, a group representing Canadian beef and pork producers and grain growers.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Particularly Bad Timing
(New York Times Editorial)
With the global economy slowing, prices soaring for oil and food and protectionist passions boiling up everywhere, it is an especially dangerous time to give up on international trade negotiations. Unfortunately, the world’s leading trading nations seem ready to abandon the World Trade Organization’s seven-year effort to reduce some of the world’s obstacles to trade.
The talks, initiated in 2001 in Doha, Qatar, were supposed to help the world’s poorest countries. An agreement would open markets to their main products, like food and textiles, and reduce the lavish farm subsidies in the rich world that have put poor farmers out of business. After years of wrangling, the negotiations now appear to be deadlocked.
While the reluctance to cut farm subsidies in Europe and the United States had been a main obstacle, the big developing countries also bear a lot of responsibility.
At marathon meetings this week in Geneva, the United States offered to further lower the ceiling for its agricultural subsidies — to roughly $15 billion a year from the current $48 billion. Europe — with France objecting — also fleshed out a new offer.
Big developing countries, notably Brazil and India, however, are insisting on even deeper subsidy cuts. And they are refusing to submit any offers of their own to reduce tariffs on industrial imports. They argue that the wealthy countries really aren’t giving up much. American agricultural subsidies, they note, have already fallen sharply as food prices have soared, to about half the proposed new ceiling.
We fear the whole process is on the verge of collapse. This is the last chance to get a deal during the Bush administration, experts say. And if talks fail to make substantial progress, the new American president will probably want to start from scratch rather than pick up where his predecessor left off. Read the rest.
With the global economy slowing, prices soaring for oil and food and protectionist passions boiling up everywhere, it is an especially dangerous time to give up on international trade negotiations. Unfortunately, the world’s leading trading nations seem ready to abandon the World Trade Organization’s seven-year effort to reduce some of the world’s obstacles to trade.
The talks, initiated in 2001 in Doha, Qatar, were supposed to help the world’s poorest countries. An agreement would open markets to their main products, like food and textiles, and reduce the lavish farm subsidies in the rich world that have put poor farmers out of business. After years of wrangling, the negotiations now appear to be deadlocked.
While the reluctance to cut farm subsidies in Europe and the United States had been a main obstacle, the big developing countries also bear a lot of responsibility.
At marathon meetings this week in Geneva, the United States offered to further lower the ceiling for its agricultural subsidies — to roughly $15 billion a year from the current $48 billion. Europe — with France objecting — also fleshed out a new offer.
Big developing countries, notably Brazil and India, however, are insisting on even deeper subsidy cuts. And they are refusing to submit any offers of their own to reduce tariffs on industrial imports. They argue that the wealthy countries really aren’t giving up much. American agricultural subsidies, they note, have already fallen sharply as food prices have soared, to about half the proposed new ceiling.
We fear the whole process is on the verge of collapse. This is the last chance to get a deal during the Bush administration, experts say. And if talks fail to make substantial progress, the new American president will probably want to start from scratch rather than pick up where his predecessor left off. Read the rest.
Canadians Semi-Pumped Up to Hit the Road
(James Mennie — The Gazette)
High gasoline prices were supposed to force Canadians to change their travel habits, and statistics made public this week suggest we are spending less on fuel.
But at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the impression is that while a road trip to the United States might cost Canadians more than last year, it's a price we're prepared to pay.
"There hasn't been any significant increase or decrease in the traffic that's been coming across the border," U.S. Customs spokesperson Ted Woo said. "Weekend traffic is busier and Mondays and Tuesdays it might lighten up.
"But whether it's a small (crossing) like Derby Line (in Vermont) or elsewhere, there's been no real change."
Woo's comments follow a report by Statistics Canada this week that shows even though the price of gasoline increased by 8.8 per cent from April to May, revenues from sales at the pump rose by only 2.4 per cent. That gap represents a nearly six-per-cent drop in the amount of fuel sold, some analysts have calculated.
That apparent frugality with fuel, however, might be manifested in the choices Canadians make about how to get to work, rather than where they vacation. Read the complete article.
High gasoline prices were supposed to force Canadians to change their travel habits, and statistics made public this week suggest we are spending less on fuel.
But at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the impression is that while a road trip to the United States might cost Canadians more than last year, it's a price we're prepared to pay.
"There hasn't been any significant increase or decrease in the traffic that's been coming across the border," U.S. Customs spokesperson Ted Woo said. "Weekend traffic is busier and Mondays and Tuesdays it might lighten up.
"But whether it's a small (crossing) like Derby Line (in Vermont) or elsewhere, there's been no real change."
Woo's comments follow a report by Statistics Canada this week that shows even though the price of gasoline increased by 8.8 per cent from April to May, revenues from sales at the pump rose by only 2.4 per cent. That gap represents a nearly six-per-cent drop in the amount of fuel sold, some analysts have calculated.
That apparent frugality with fuel, however, might be manifested in the choices Canadians make about how to get to work, rather than where they vacation. Read the complete article.
Friday, July 25, 2008
Shipping Federation Works to Free Containers
(Montreal Gazette – Mike King)
A national group representing owners, operators, charterers and agents of vessels engaged in Canada’s overseas commerce is attempting to break a backlog of shipments being held excessively long at ports on both coasts because of new customs testing rules for cargo containers.
“We’re working with the Canada Border Services Agency to get rid of the backed-up shipments,” James Moram, director of marine administration at the Shipping Federation of Canada, said yesterday from Halifax before returning to Montreal headquarters.
“Things are being done to try to clear up the Port of Halifax,” where he said there is a 77-container backlog with an average 17-day delay before they are cleared for delivery to their final destinations – more than three times the normal turnaround period.
“It’s costing importers an arm and a leg as well as lots of frustration,” Moram said.
One of the 40-foot containers carrying a wide variety of goods for eight Montreal customers, including Bombardier Inc., and five clients in Toronto, including Ford Canada, has been sitting there since June 14. Gillespie-Munro Inc., the Montreal-based international freight-forwarding firm responsible for the shipment, has been fielding angry calls from the increasingly impatient importers.
“Now everybody is yelling at us because they all think we’re lying to them,” said Chris Gillespie, president and CEO of the family company. “My staff is getting pummeled every day from the importers. “It has gone beyond all common sense,” Gillespie added. “We’re being brutalized.”
The problem began last month when the border services agency ordered all marine containers randomly selected for inspection for contraband also be tested for formaldehyde – one of six common gases used for fumigation – as a means of protecting customs employees from any possible exposure to hazardous chemicals.
But the levels of formaldehyde deemed safe by Customs on instructions of Health Canada – 0.15 parts per million, less than is found in hardwood floors, for example – have meant virtually every container has tested positive and had to be held for ventilation.
Although ventilation should not take more than a day, border services isn’t giving any explanation why the containers are being kept longer.
While the CBSA recognizes the testing and ventilation of containers is causing delays with the movement of containers and is subsequently taking action, Moram’s shipping federation, the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association and the Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters, argue the testing for formaldehyde has caused and continues to cause serious harm to the entire importing and exporting community.
They say Canadian importers are facing cancelled orders, back-to-school goods aren’t reaching the retail shelves on time, late project and construction materials are creating fines and delays while administration and tracking expenses are skyrocketing.
There have also been big backlogs at the Port of Vancouver, but Patrice Pelletier, Port of Montreal president and chief executive officer, said yesterday there are no such delays here.
A national group representing owners, operators, charterers and agents of vessels engaged in Canada’s overseas commerce is attempting to break a backlog of shipments being held excessively long at ports on both coasts because of new customs testing rules for cargo containers.
“We’re working with the Canada Border Services Agency to get rid of the backed-up shipments,” James Moram, director of marine administration at the Shipping Federation of Canada, said yesterday from Halifax before returning to Montreal headquarters.
“Things are being done to try to clear up the Port of Halifax,” where he said there is a 77-container backlog with an average 17-day delay before they are cleared for delivery to their final destinations – more than three times the normal turnaround period.
“It’s costing importers an arm and a leg as well as lots of frustration,” Moram said.
One of the 40-foot containers carrying a wide variety of goods for eight Montreal customers, including Bombardier Inc., and five clients in Toronto, including Ford Canada, has been sitting there since June 14. Gillespie-Munro Inc., the Montreal-based international freight-forwarding firm responsible for the shipment, has been fielding angry calls from the increasingly impatient importers.
“Now everybody is yelling at us because they all think we’re lying to them,” said Chris Gillespie, president and CEO of the family company. “My staff is getting pummeled every day from the importers. “It has gone beyond all common sense,” Gillespie added. “We’re being brutalized.”
The problem began last month when the border services agency ordered all marine containers randomly selected for inspection for contraband also be tested for formaldehyde – one of six common gases used for fumigation – as a means of protecting customs employees from any possible exposure to hazardous chemicals.
But the levels of formaldehyde deemed safe by Customs on instructions of Health Canada – 0.15 parts per million, less than is found in hardwood floors, for example – have meant virtually every container has tested positive and had to be held for ventilation.
Although ventilation should not take more than a day, border services isn’t giving any explanation why the containers are being kept longer.
While the CBSA recognizes the testing and ventilation of containers is causing delays with the movement of containers and is subsequently taking action, Moram’s shipping federation, the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association and the Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters, argue the testing for formaldehyde has caused and continues to cause serious harm to the entire importing and exporting community.
They say Canadian importers are facing cancelled orders, back-to-school goods aren’t reaching the retail shelves on time, late project and construction materials are creating fines and delays while administration and tracking expenses are skyrocketing.
There have also been big backlogs at the Port of Vancouver, but Patrice Pelletier, Port of Montreal president and chief executive officer, said yesterday there are no such delays here.
New NEXUS Card Offers Security
(The Windsor Star – Craig Pearson)
NEXUS border-crossing cards are changing to add security, though a U.S. government official says they should also help speed the process. Sometime in the fall, current NEXUS cards – in use for five years to help regular commuters move quickly across the border – will be swapped for second-generation NEXUS cards.
“It’s leaps and bounds more secure,” Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Wednesday. “But beyond the security issue it will also make us more efficient.”
Smith said the new cards are being issued in conjunction with the introduction of new card readers that improve upon the radio-frequency-identification-device technology – which can read nearby cards without having to swipe them. The chip in the old NEXUS cards sent information 15 feet. The new card will send it only 10 feet, which lessens the chance someone can intercept the information.
That said, cards only contain an ID number. Border officials then retrieve personal information from a protected data bank. As well, the new cards are harder to counterfeit or alter.
Furthermore, the new U.S. card readers can handle more information, making them faster. With the previous system, the card readers could only identify one or two people at the same time. With the updated system, the readers will be able to identify four NEXUS commuters in one car all at once.
“It’s an all-around better system,” Smith said. “It should also help us increase our NEXUS usage.”
About 355,000 people currently hold NEXUS cards. Both Canadian and American officials hope that number will climb significantly, since NEXUS cardholders typically cross land borders with less delay than those using other government-issued ID.
Smith also noted that the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative will require all Canadians and Americans to use passports to enter the United States, including through land borders, starting June 1, 2009. NEXUS cards can be used as a passport at the border,” Smith said. “It’s simple.”
Current NEXUS cardholders will receive new, more secure cards by mail sometime in the fall. NEXUS cards cost $50 and are good for five years. You can apply for NEXUS cards online at http://www.nexus.gc.ca. The entire process, including interviews with border officials, takes about six weeks.
NEXUS border-crossing cards are changing to add security, though a U.S. government official says they should also help speed the process. Sometime in the fall, current NEXUS cards – in use for five years to help regular commuters move quickly across the border – will be swapped for second-generation NEXUS cards.
“It’s leaps and bounds more secure,” Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Wednesday. “But beyond the security issue it will also make us more efficient.”
Smith said the new cards are being issued in conjunction with the introduction of new card readers that improve upon the radio-frequency-identification-device technology – which can read nearby cards without having to swipe them. The chip in the old NEXUS cards sent information 15 feet. The new card will send it only 10 feet, which lessens the chance someone can intercept the information.
That said, cards only contain an ID number. Border officials then retrieve personal information from a protected data bank. As well, the new cards are harder to counterfeit or alter.
Furthermore, the new U.S. card readers can handle more information, making them faster. With the previous system, the card readers could only identify one or two people at the same time. With the updated system, the readers will be able to identify four NEXUS commuters in one car all at once.
“It’s an all-around better system,” Smith said. “It should also help us increase our NEXUS usage.”
About 355,000 people currently hold NEXUS cards. Both Canadian and American officials hope that number will climb significantly, since NEXUS cardholders typically cross land borders with less delay than those using other government-issued ID.
Smith also noted that the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative will require all Canadians and Americans to use passports to enter the United States, including through land borders, starting June 1, 2009. NEXUS cards can be used as a passport at the border,” Smith said. “It’s simple.”
Current NEXUS cardholders will receive new, more secure cards by mail sometime in the fall. NEXUS cards cost $50 and are good for five years. You can apply for NEXUS cards online at http://www.nexus.gc.ca. The entire process, including interviews with border officials, takes about six weeks.
Border Trade Alliance Renews Call for Border Funding
(Truck News)
The Border Trade Alliance (BTA) is pushing leaders in Washington to expedite funding earmarked for improving the flow of goods through land ports-of-entry.
The trade organization wrote to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs to emphasize the importance of funding to upgrade aging infrastructure at U.S. border crossings. It says inadequate infrastructure and increased security is a hindrance to NAFTA trade, which is up 172% since 1993, now totaling US$797 billion.
The group claims millions of dollars are lost each day due to supply chain inefficiencies. U.S. Congress has already committed funds to the Department of Homeland Security and the General Services Administration (GSA) to help upgrade border crossings. The BTA is also urging impending GSA administrator Jim Williams to use any leftover funding to expedite the delivery of port infrastructure projects.
“GSA has made great strides and taken positive steps toward delivering much needed border infrastructure, however we need to continue to stress the importance of land ports of entry to our national economy,” said Maria Luisa O’Connell, president of the BTA.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection estimated that $500 million per year is needed over the next 10 years to fund much needed border infrastructure improvements. BTA points out the average truck crossing into the U.S. at El Paso now experiences a one hour delay, with delays as long as four hours not uncommon, at the crossing, which costs shippers more than $100 million per year.
The Border Trade Alliance (BTA) is pushing leaders in Washington to expedite funding earmarked for improving the flow of goods through land ports-of-entry.
The trade organization wrote to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs to emphasize the importance of funding to upgrade aging infrastructure at U.S. border crossings. It says inadequate infrastructure and increased security is a hindrance to NAFTA trade, which is up 172% since 1993, now totaling US$797 billion.
The group claims millions of dollars are lost each day due to supply chain inefficiencies. U.S. Congress has already committed funds to the Department of Homeland Security and the General Services Administration (GSA) to help upgrade border crossings. The BTA is also urging impending GSA administrator Jim Williams to use any leftover funding to expedite the delivery of port infrastructure projects.
“GSA has made great strides and taken positive steps toward delivering much needed border infrastructure, however we need to continue to stress the importance of land ports of entry to our national economy,” said Maria Luisa O’Connell, president of the BTA.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection estimated that $500 million per year is needed over the next 10 years to fund much needed border infrastructure improvements. BTA points out the average truck crossing into the U.S. at El Paso now experiences a one hour delay, with delays as long as four hours not uncommon, at the crossing, which costs shippers more than $100 million per year.
New Food Labelling Rules Call for Listing of Allergens, Gluten, Sulphites
(CBC News)
Federal Health Minister Tony Clement announced new food labelling regulations Wednesday which will force food manufacturers to list specific allergens, gluten sources and sulphites on the labels of the products they sell.
“Canadians want to know what it is in the packaged food that they eat. They have come to expect detailed information on every label of the products on the grocery store shelves,” Clement said at a press conference in Ottawa.
The upcoming changes will mean food labels will have to list any key ingredients in a food item that may have been created with an allergenic substance. Clement said that will include some ingredients that are currently listed as “spice” or “seasoning,” for example.
Any allergenic products used to create an ingredient will also have to be listed, Clement said. He used the example of gluten; labels will now have to specify where the gluten comes from, such as barley, wheat or rye.
“These changes will help Canadians manage these allergies and celiac disease,” said Clement. “We believe that better information can only lead to better nutrition, and better nutrition, of course, means better health.”
Even though the regulations have yet to be implemented, Clement called on the food industry to take action now. “While these food allergen regulations are being submitted, I’m making a request to the food industry now: improve their labelling for common allergens, sulphites and gluten sources.”
The proposed regulations follow Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s food and consumer product action plan announced last year.
Last week, federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz announced new labelling guidelines for food, which will ensure that all foods labelled as products of Canada will contain food that is both produced and processed here.
At Wednesday’s press conference, Clement also mentioned changes to the regulation of health products. He said pharmaceutical products will now be closely watched before and after they are approved for sale. He said that recent reports of adverse drug reactions have highlighted the fact that many new drugs only show serious side effects after they reach the market. The regulations are meant to stop that.
Minister Clement’s announcement is here. Health Canada is publishing its proposed regulatory amendments in Canada Gazette, Part I, on July 26, 2008 to allow for public comment. The background document is available here.
Federal Health Minister Tony Clement announced new food labelling regulations Wednesday which will force food manufacturers to list specific allergens, gluten sources and sulphites on the labels of the products they sell.
“Canadians want to know what it is in the packaged food that they eat. They have come to expect detailed information on every label of the products on the grocery store shelves,” Clement said at a press conference in Ottawa.
The upcoming changes will mean food labels will have to list any key ingredients in a food item that may have been created with an allergenic substance. Clement said that will include some ingredients that are currently listed as “spice” or “seasoning,” for example.
Any allergenic products used to create an ingredient will also have to be listed, Clement said. He used the example of gluten; labels will now have to specify where the gluten comes from, such as barley, wheat or rye.
“These changes will help Canadians manage these allergies and celiac disease,” said Clement. “We believe that better information can only lead to better nutrition, and better nutrition, of course, means better health.”
Even though the regulations have yet to be implemented, Clement called on the food industry to take action now. “While these food allergen regulations are being submitted, I’m making a request to the food industry now: improve their labelling for common allergens, sulphites and gluten sources.”
The proposed regulations follow Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s food and consumer product action plan announced last year.
Last week, federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz announced new labelling guidelines for food, which will ensure that all foods labelled as products of Canada will contain food that is both produced and processed here.
At Wednesday’s press conference, Clement also mentioned changes to the regulation of health products. He said pharmaceutical products will now be closely watched before and after they are approved for sale. He said that recent reports of adverse drug reactions have highlighted the fact that many new drugs only show serious side effects after they reach the market. The regulations are meant to stop that.
Minister Clement’s announcement is here. Health Canada is publishing its proposed regulatory amendments in Canada Gazette, Part I, on July 26, 2008 to allow for public comment. The background document is available here.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Energy Prices Only Lift To Exports This Year Before Decline In 2009, Says EDC
(Export Development Canada)
Canada’s total exports are expected to jump by 4.2% in 2008 as a result of soaring energy prices, according to a Global Export Forecast issued today by Export Development Canada (EDC). EDC forecasts export earnings to decline by 1 per cent as key commodity prices pull back in 2009.
“Since our Spring Global Export Forecast, there hasn’t been much good news for Canadian exporters. Losses due to the U.S. sub-prime crisis and its spill over effects into Canada continue to mount, the impact of soaring commodity prices upon consumers continues to increase, and proof of slowing global production is rampant,” said Peter Hall, Vice-President and Chief Economist for EDC. “The gain of 4% in exports in 2008 is actually an energy price story, but when all price effects are removed, Canadian exports are actually on track to tumble by 4% this year.”
EDC expects the Canadian dollar to trade near parity with the U.S. dollar during the summer period before pulling back by year-end, trading in the USD 0.94 to USD 0.97 range during the first half of 2009. The forecast for the currency is largely based upon an expected decline in the price of oil through 2009. The outlook sees crude prices sinking below USD 100 per barrel by the end of this year, and averaging USD 84 per barrel in 2009. Bolstered by higher prices for natural gas, Canada’s energy exports are expected to rise by almost 40% this year, before falling 7% in 2009.
“While EDC recognizes that global supply and demand for crude is tight, we sees signs that a large price correction is on the horizon”, Mr. Hall continued. “On the demand front, growth expectations are likely to moderate as the global slowdown spreads and oil price subsidies in emerging markets are scaled back. On the supply front, the Energy Information Administration is already forecasting a doubling of OPEC surplus capacity, to 4 million barrels per day in 2009, and non-OPEC supply gains of 1 million barrels per day.”
EDC’s forecast noted that a significant portion of the recent spike in oil prices is the result of speculative investors seeking safe haven from a falling U.S. dollar. EDC’s forecast also noted that the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Euro is more tightly linked to the price of oil now than in the past. EDC believes that when the U.S. dollar stops falling against the Euro, speculators will exit crude and prices will fall accordingly.
On a sectoral basis, robust global demand for grains and high prices should help buoy the agri-food and fertilizer sectors. Exports of industrial commodities continue to benefit from soaring prices, but an expected correction in 2009 should pull earnings down. Weakness continues to be concentrated among forestry, automotive and consumer goods – areas that rely heavily on the struggling U.S. market. The expected drop in the Canadian dollar, however, will provide some relief in 2009. Read the complete press release here.
Canada’s total exports are expected to jump by 4.2% in 2008 as a result of soaring energy prices, according to a Global Export Forecast issued today by Export Development Canada (EDC). EDC forecasts export earnings to decline by 1 per cent as key commodity prices pull back in 2009.
“Since our Spring Global Export Forecast, there hasn’t been much good news for Canadian exporters. Losses due to the U.S. sub-prime crisis and its spill over effects into Canada continue to mount, the impact of soaring commodity prices upon consumers continues to increase, and proof of slowing global production is rampant,” said Peter Hall, Vice-President and Chief Economist for EDC. “The gain of 4% in exports in 2008 is actually an energy price story, but when all price effects are removed, Canadian exports are actually on track to tumble by 4% this year.”
EDC expects the Canadian dollar to trade near parity with the U.S. dollar during the summer period before pulling back by year-end, trading in the USD 0.94 to USD 0.97 range during the first half of 2009. The forecast for the currency is largely based upon an expected decline in the price of oil through 2009. The outlook sees crude prices sinking below USD 100 per barrel by the end of this year, and averaging USD 84 per barrel in 2009. Bolstered by higher prices for natural gas, Canada’s energy exports are expected to rise by almost 40% this year, before falling 7% in 2009.
“While EDC recognizes that global supply and demand for crude is tight, we sees signs that a large price correction is on the horizon”, Mr. Hall continued. “On the demand front, growth expectations are likely to moderate as the global slowdown spreads and oil price subsidies in emerging markets are scaled back. On the supply front, the Energy Information Administration is already forecasting a doubling of OPEC surplus capacity, to 4 million barrels per day in 2009, and non-OPEC supply gains of 1 million barrels per day.”
EDC’s forecast noted that a significant portion of the recent spike in oil prices is the result of speculative investors seeking safe haven from a falling U.S. dollar. EDC’s forecast also noted that the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Euro is more tightly linked to the price of oil now than in the past. EDC believes that when the U.S. dollar stops falling against the Euro, speculators will exit crude and prices will fall accordingly.
On a sectoral basis, robust global demand for grains and high prices should help buoy the agri-food and fertilizer sectors. Exports of industrial commodities continue to benefit from soaring prices, but an expected correction in 2009 should pull earnings down. Weakness continues to be concentrated among forestry, automotive and consumer goods – areas that rely heavily on the struggling U.S. market. The expected drop in the Canadian dollar, however, will provide some relief in 2009. Read the complete press release here.
CBSA Testing of Ocean Containers for Formaldehyde
(IE Canada)
I.E.Canada joined with the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association and the Shipping Federation of Canada in a letter to CBSA Executive Vice-President Greta Bossenmaier last week expressing concerns about the introduction of testing for formaldehyde and the serious harm it is causing to the trade community.
The letter reads in part as follows:
I.E.Canada joined with the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association and the Shipping Federation of Canada in a letter to CBSA Executive Vice-President Greta Bossenmaier last week expressing concerns about the introduction of testing for formaldehyde and the serious harm it is causing to the trade community.
The letter reads in part as follows:
The introduction of testing for formaldehyde on containers identified for inspection by the CBSA on June 12, 2008 has caused, and continues to cause, serious harm to the entire importing and exporting community. There are several issues which we have identified as contributing to the problem.
1. The CBSA introduced this test for formaldehyde without notification to the community. No communications were sent to the importers, carriers, ports or international freight forwarders that the testing protocols were being changed.
2. There has been no communication as to the reason behind this increased testing, validation of ‘positive test levels’ or additional resources required to manage this increased testing.
3. There is no apparent reason for the Health Canada ‘safe levels’ of .15ppm. The containers which are testing positive have not been ‘fumigated’ at origin and do not bear ‘fumigation’ marks and so cannot have abnormally high levels of formaldehyde due to fumigation.
4. Increased testing and the new need for container ventilation have stressed examination facilities’ capabilities by tying up equipment, creating massive backlogs and severely frustrating human resources.
Confusion and misinformation reign; due primarily to the uncertainty now introduced into the inbound flow of goods. Neither carrier, freight forwarder, customs broker, nor cartage company can provide accurate information to the importer as to when an identified container will be inspected (backlogs are now more than eight days in Halifax, ten days in Vancouver and fourteen days in Prince Rupert). Once a container is entered into the examination warehouse, because the ‘test positive’ rate is so high – upwards of 95% in many inspection facilities, and because the CBSA is not adequately resourced to handle proper ventilation, we are experiencing additional delays of up to three weeks.
Canadian import capabilities are being severely compromised. Canadian importers are facing cancelled orders, back-to-school goods are not reaching the retail shelves on time, late project and construction materials are crating fines and delays, administration and tracking expenses are skyrocketing. Canadian export containers identified for inspection by the CBSA have also been delayed — in one instance by five sailing rotations — severely compromising Canada’s export capabilities. The impact of this testing for formaldehyde at the current ‘safe levels’ will have a dramatic, negative effect on the Canadian economy and on Canada’s competitiveness. We respectfully ask the CBSA to review and rescind the decision to test for formaldehyde.
A copy of the letter is available here. If your marine containers are being delayed due to testing for fumigants, IE Canada would like to hear from you. Please contact Amesika Baeta at abaeta@iecanada.com.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
EU Offers to Cut Farm Tariffs by 60% in Global Trade Pact
(The Canadian Press)
The European Union says it will slash farm tariffs by 60% as part of a new global trade pact, a deeper cut than it has ever offered.
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson told reporters today at the World Trade Organization that the offer is meant to kick-start a week of crunch global commerce negotiations. The EU has previously proposed to cut the tariffs by 54%.
Mandelson says he now hopes emerging economies like Brazil, India and China will respond by improving offers on industrial tariffs.
Rich and poor countries have clashed repeatedly in the seven-year WTO talks. Developing countries want more agricultural openings, while the U.S., EU and others seek better access for their manufacturers andbanks.
The European Union says it will slash farm tariffs by 60% as part of a new global trade pact, a deeper cut than it has ever offered.
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson told reporters today at the World Trade Organization that the offer is meant to kick-start a week of crunch global commerce negotiations. The EU has previously proposed to cut the tariffs by 54%.
Mandelson says he now hopes emerging economies like Brazil, India and China will respond by improving offers on industrial tariffs.
Rich and poor countries have clashed repeatedly in the seven-year WTO talks. Developing countries want more agricultural openings, while the U.S., EU and others seek better access for their manufacturers andbanks.
Product of Canada, Made in Canada
(Canadian Food Inspection Agency)
The Canadian Food Labelling Initiative was recently posted on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) web site and can be viewed here.
Modifications to the 2003 Guide to Food Labelling and Advertising (2003 Guide) Section 4.19 Product of Canada, Made in Canada are available here, and An Industry Advisory – New Guidelines Defining Product of Canada and Made in Canada on food labels and advertising here.
The Canadian Food Labelling Initiative was recently posted on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) web site and can be viewed here.
Modifications to the 2003 Guide to Food Labelling and Advertising (2003 Guide) Section 4.19 Product of Canada, Made in Canada are available here, and An Industry Advisory – New Guidelines Defining Product of Canada and Made in Canada on food labels and advertising here.
Move Faster to Fix Border Delays, Van Dongen Urges
(Vancouver Sun – Derrick Penner)
Lineups for truckers and tourists a concern
The Canadian and U.S. federal governments need to move faster to fix the delays truckers face at border crossings, according to John van Dongen, B.C.’s minister of public safety and solicitor-general.
At a major intergovernmental conference on Monday, van Dongen said that while governments have moved to implement programs that expedite the passage of “trusted travellers” across the border, he still sees long lineups at the Fraser Valley’s Pacific Border Crossing.
He contends that those lineups result in fewer vehicles taking more time to get across, “which represents huge lost dollars.”
The situation has improved over the past four years, according to other speakers at the breakout session of the Pacific North West Economic Region (PNWER) conference in Vancouver.
However, van Dongen said that while things are moving in the right direction, “Rome is burning while we’re trying to get this stuff implemented.”
The issue of the border, which has become a stickier line to cross in the security-conscious 9/11 era, was a key topic of discussion at the PNWER annual meeting, which brings together top government and business representatives to talk about common issues. Van Dongen serves as one of PNWER’s vice-presidents.
The potential for visitors to Vancouver and Whistler’s Olympics in 2010 to face delays dominated a morning session on border issues.
Premier Gordon Campbell reprised that theme as part of his keynote address during lunch.
Recalling an uncomfortably long wait for transportation at the 2004 Athens Olympics that still sticks out in his memory, Campbell said he wants to make sure the thing that people don’t remember about the 2010 Games is a long wait at the border to get into Canada.
Campbell credited PNWER with advancing the border-delay issue with both the Canadian and U.S. federal governments, and pushing for innovative solutions, such as the enhanced drivers licences being piloted by Washington and B.C. as acceptable border identification.
Cargo crossing the border was the afternoon topic, when it was mentioned strides have been made towards improving the two-way flow. Click here for the complete article.
Lineups for truckers and tourists a concern
The Canadian and U.S. federal governments need to move faster to fix the delays truckers face at border crossings, according to John van Dongen, B.C.’s minister of public safety and solicitor-general.
At a major intergovernmental conference on Monday, van Dongen said that while governments have moved to implement programs that expedite the passage of “trusted travellers” across the border, he still sees long lineups at the Fraser Valley’s Pacific Border Crossing.
He contends that those lineups result in fewer vehicles taking more time to get across, “which represents huge lost dollars.”
The situation has improved over the past four years, according to other speakers at the breakout session of the Pacific North West Economic Region (PNWER) conference in Vancouver.
However, van Dongen said that while things are moving in the right direction, “Rome is burning while we’re trying to get this stuff implemented.”
The issue of the border, which has become a stickier line to cross in the security-conscious 9/11 era, was a key topic of discussion at the PNWER annual meeting, which brings together top government and business representatives to talk about common issues. Van Dongen serves as one of PNWER’s vice-presidents.
The potential for visitors to Vancouver and Whistler’s Olympics in 2010 to face delays dominated a morning session on border issues.
Premier Gordon Campbell reprised that theme as part of his keynote address during lunch.
Recalling an uncomfortably long wait for transportation at the 2004 Athens Olympics that still sticks out in his memory, Campbell said he wants to make sure the thing that people don’t remember about the 2010 Games is a long wait at the border to get into Canada.
Campbell credited PNWER with advancing the border-delay issue with both the Canadian and U.S. federal governments, and pushing for innovative solutions, such as the enhanced drivers licences being piloted by Washington and B.C. as acceptable border identification.
Cargo crossing the border was the afternoon topic, when it was mentioned strides have been made towards improving the two-way flow. Click here for the complete article.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Parts Makers Win Trade Dispute
(David Shepardson — Detroit News)
WTO rules that China’s hefty import tariffs discriminate against U.S. auto suppliers.
The World Trade Organization ruled Friday that China violated trade laws by hiking taxes on auto parts imported from the United States, — a decision that could boost struggling Canada and the European Union U.S. auto parts makers.
Critics of China’s policy said it encouraged suppliers to relocate to China, costing jobs in their home markets.
The “report leaves no doubt that China’s discriminatory treatment of U.S. auto parts has no place in the WTO system,” said U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab. “We will not stand idly by when China or any other country adopts regulations or industrial policies that tilt the playing field against American goods or services.”
Schwab’s office said U.S. auto suppliers set up operations in China so automakers could avoid hefty tariffs they had to pay if they used less than 51 percent Chinese-made parts in vehicles built in China. The policy has helped China’s auto parts companies, resulting in a steadily rising Chinese auto parts trade surplus.
Bob McKenna, president and CEO of the Motor Equipment Manufacturers Association, a trade group that represents many U.S. auto parts makers, said the WTO’s decision would “ensure a more level playing field for our products in China.”
The U.S. first objected to the Chinese policy in March 2006, and a hearing panel was formed in October. China has the right to appeal Friday’s decision, but an appeal likely would be resolved within six months.
It could take years before the United States would be allowed to impose economic sanctions on Beijing for failing to comply with the ruling. If it opts not to appeal, China has an undefined “reasonable period” to end the tariffs. If it does not, the United States would have to appeal to a separate WTO panel and win a ruling that China had not taken corrective action before it could impose sanctions. The process is designed to convince countries to work out their differences. Read the complete article.
WTO rules that China’s hefty import tariffs discriminate against U.S. auto suppliers.
The World Trade Organization ruled Friday that China violated trade laws by hiking taxes on auto parts imported from the United States, — a decision that could boost struggling Canada and the European Union U.S. auto parts makers.
Critics of China’s policy said it encouraged suppliers to relocate to China, costing jobs in their home markets.
The “report leaves no doubt that China’s discriminatory treatment of U.S. auto parts has no place in the WTO system,” said U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab. “We will not stand idly by when China or any other country adopts regulations or industrial policies that tilt the playing field against American goods or services.”
Schwab’s office said U.S. auto suppliers set up operations in China so automakers could avoid hefty tariffs they had to pay if they used less than 51 percent Chinese-made parts in vehicles built in China. The policy has helped China’s auto parts companies, resulting in a steadily rising Chinese auto parts trade surplus.
Bob McKenna, president and CEO of the Motor Equipment Manufacturers Association, a trade group that represents many U.S. auto parts makers, said the WTO’s decision would “ensure a more level playing field for our products in China.”
The U.S. first objected to the Chinese policy in March 2006, and a hearing panel was formed in October. China has the right to appeal Friday’s decision, but an appeal likely would be resolved within six months.
It could take years before the United States would be allowed to impose economic sanctions on Beijing for failing to comply with the ruling. If it opts not to appeal, China has an undefined “reasonable period” to end the tariffs. If it does not, the United States would have to appeal to a separate WTO panel and win a ruling that China had not taken corrective action before it could impose sanctions. The process is designed to convince countries to work out their differences. Read the complete article.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
New Intermodal Rail Container Yard Will be Huge
(Regina LeaderPost – Veronica Rhodes)
The planned Canadian Pacific intermodal facility (IMF) could be bringing national distribution centres to Regina, the size of which the Queen City has never seen.
“This will be an area with extremely large warehouses. Think of the biggest warehouse you know and multiply by a factor of two, three or four and you get a sense of the scale of these,” Jeff Lehman, a principal with MKI, an independent consulting firm contracted to prepare a concept plan and cost analysis for the IMF, said Wednesday. “Some of these are one million square feet so it’s a type of land use that isn’t in Regina yet – a very, very large warehouse.”
Lehman explained that intermodal facilities are central to distribution networks, particularly for retailers who will send out goods to their stores across the country. The IMF is to be built west of the city and will replace the current CP yards in downtown Regina.
The estimated $93-million project has already received $27 million in funding from the federal government and will also result in the creation of an interchange at Lewvan Drive and the Trans-Canada Highway.
Mayor Pat Fiacco explained the IMF is basically an inland port, allowing retailers to be able to move product by air, road and rail. Regina is the ideal location due to its central position in the country.
“This is about the creation of not hundreds of jobs but literally thousands of jobs over the next few years. That’s not just including the construction portion of it, this is ongoing jobs,” said Fiacco.
Lehman said each warehouse could be located on roughly 50 hectares of land by the IMF, but won’t match the size of such facilities seen in Chicago and Calgary. Read the complete article.
The planned Canadian Pacific intermodal facility (IMF) could be bringing national distribution centres to Regina, the size of which the Queen City has never seen.
“This will be an area with extremely large warehouses. Think of the biggest warehouse you know and multiply by a factor of two, three or four and you get a sense of the scale of these,” Jeff Lehman, a principal with MKI, an independent consulting firm contracted to prepare a concept plan and cost analysis for the IMF, said Wednesday. “Some of these are one million square feet so it’s a type of land use that isn’t in Regina yet – a very, very large warehouse.”
Lehman explained that intermodal facilities are central to distribution networks, particularly for retailers who will send out goods to their stores across the country. The IMF is to be built west of the city and will replace the current CP yards in downtown Regina.
The estimated $93-million project has already received $27 million in funding from the federal government and will also result in the creation of an interchange at Lewvan Drive and the Trans-Canada Highway.
Mayor Pat Fiacco explained the IMF is basically an inland port, allowing retailers to be able to move product by air, road and rail. Regina is the ideal location due to its central position in the country.
“This is about the creation of not hundreds of jobs but literally thousands of jobs over the next few years. That’s not just including the construction portion of it, this is ongoing jobs,” said Fiacco.
Lehman said each warehouse could be located on roughly 50 hectares of land by the IMF, but won’t match the size of such facilities seen in Chicago and Calgary. Read the complete article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
