Posted on 12/02/2002 2:11:22 PM PST by Willie Green
For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.
GENEVA (AP) — The United States government received a mixed reaction Monday when it presented the 144-member World Trade Organization with its sweeping plan to eliminate import taxes on consumer and industrial goods.
``Tariff-free trade for $6 trillion in world goods trade will open a world of opportunities for everyone,'' said U.S. Ambassador Linnet Deily, who outlined the plan to the WTO.
India said the plan was ``clearly unfair'' to developing countries.
``Tariffs are a vital source of government resources,'' said Indian Ambassador K.M. Chandrasekhar.
But New Zealand Ambassador Tim Groser said the proposal to eliminate tariffs by 2015 was ``a very favorable development.''
Developing countries should give the step-by-step proposal a close look because they stand to benefit significantly, Deily said. ``Industrial goods make up some 89 percent of developing country exports.''
Under the plan, she said, developing countries would find it easier to sell their products in developed countries. They also would benefit by exporting more to each other, she added.
``Nearly half of developing country trade is with other developing countries — with 70 percent of the duties being paid by other developing countries,'' Deily said.
Tariffs have long been used to discourage imports as way to protect a nation's weak or fledgling industries. Developing countries rely on them heavily to promote their own production of manufactured goods.
Deily said the United States regards the proposal as ``both bold and fair.''
``We are putting our own sensitive areas — textiles, apparel, footwear, glassware — on the table in an unprecedented manner,'' Deily said.
Carlos Perez del Castillo, the trade ambassador of Uruguay, said he regarded the U.S. proposal as ``very good,'' but that his country wished it would be extended to agricultural products.
The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush regards the plan as a way to jump-start global trade negotiations that were launched last year in Doha, Qatar.
The U.S. proposal would phase out tariffs on nonagricultural goods in a two-step process. From 2005 to 2010 all tariffs of 5 percent or less would be eliminated. Higher tariffs would have to be lowered to 8 percent or less.
In phase two, the 8 percent tariffs would be lowered each year, starting in 2010 until they reach zero in 2015.
Big U.S. manufacturers praised the proposal as a way of increasing U.S. exports. They claim high tariffs keep their goods out of poor countries.
But American companies making products like textiles and glassware that traditionally receive government import protection said the proposal would cost American jobs.
The administration says the plan would amount to an $18 billion annual tax cut in the United States alone. That is the amount Washington collected last year in tariffs on products ranging from automobiles to shoes.
Fundamentally, we believe that the U.S. government needs to devote more resources and put in place new programs to build wider expertise about China and to protect our industrial base from eroding as a result of our economic relations with China.
-- C. Richard D’Amato,chairman
U.S.-China Security Review Commission
(How to improve U.S.-China relations)
If you believe this, simply buy stock in "transnational corporations" and retire on easy street.
I am all for lower taxes. Across the board. It is nonsense to say we would be a third world country except for tariffs. BS.
EURO-SHRIEK!
froggies hopping madly in all directions ....
Your position seems to imply that if I pay a guy in Detriot more than he is worth to build me a car and he pays me more than I am worth to grow him some Tomatos, we are both richer.
Why don't we just add a couple of zeros to our money and all be rich. Minimum wage: $725/hour. Median Income: $3,500,000 Happy Meal: $299. New car: $3,000,000.
Hey, it would be just like the Yen!
No, if it were a simple transaction between a carmaker and a tomato grower, an equitable exchange would be made, provided there were plenty of other carmakers and tomato growers in the market.
The problem arises when the transaction is controlled and managed by a third party who produces nothing, but extracts an enormous commission for the exchange, leaving both the tomato grower and the carmaker little for their efforts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.