Blog

Steven Capozzola

By Steven Capozzola
Media Director, Alliance for American Manufacturing

Bill Lambrecht at the St. Louis Post Dispatch has written an excellent article documenting some of the unexpected problems U.S. manufacturers are facing from illegally dumped imports from China.

Lambrecht relates the story of Missouri’s Mid Continent Nail.  The Poplar Bluff, MO-based company was relieved when a 2008 case with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) found that Chinese companies were dumping low-cost nails into the U.S. in an effort to undercut the pricing of U.S. manufacturers.  The ITC determined that these ”dumped” nails broke laws guarding against unfair trade.

Following the ITC ruling, the Commerce Department imposed duties on certain nail imports, which should have helped Mid Continent and other U.S. manufacturers of nails for home and industrial use.

Unfortunately, Mid Continent never saw the hoped-for gain in sales.  Instead, underpriced Chinese nails kept coming into the U.S. market. (more…)

Scott N. Paul

By Scott N. Paul
Executive Director Alliance for American Manufacturing

President Obama deserves credit for making a tough call on trade.  On September 11, he decided to impose tariffs on consumer tires from China for the next three years, resisting the pleas of most opinion elites across the nation and one of the principal financiers of our massive public debt: China’s government. 

Though many industries have been battered by imports from China, the safeguard mechanism permitted under rules China agreed to upon entering the World Trade Organization eight years ago has never been invoked before this month.  While the merits of the trade case filed by the United Steelworkers (USW) union seeking relief from a massive surge of imported Chinese consumer tires were quite clear, an absurd mythology has encompassed it.

Even though the International Trade Commission (ITC) recommended tariffs after hearing copious evidence from importers and the Chinese tire industry as well as from the USW (which represent tire workers), opponents of the tariffs still insist that the decision will be counterproductive, raising prices while creating jobs in other importing nations.  That is complete nonsense.  No other exporter can replace the market share of consumer tires that China currently holds.  Goodyear has indicated that it will invest $600 million in its American tire manufacturing facilities, making it highly likely that the tariffs will allow for some capital investments in the domestic tire industry and put tire workers back on the job.  Prices for tires—if they rise at all—will increase by $3 per tire according to the ITC, while the economic benefits to the nation, in the form of jobs and wages saved, taxes paid, and corporate profits—will more than double that. 

Some critics of the tariffs have pointed to potential retaliation by China against U.S.-produced chicken feet and auto parts.  This is merely bluster by Beijing, which is not normally held to account on trade issues.  For eight years, China has not faced serious sanctions for a beggar-thy-neighbor, mercantilist trade policy.  But remember this: China depends on access to the U.S. market for its own employment and growth, and will not ultimately risk its livelihood to make a point. 

Others believe that the outcome of this case will lead to the filing of even more import surge cases against China by industries such as textiles or steel.  The sad fact is that scores of American industries have seen an import surge from China.  While a few more cases may be in the offing, a far more likely outcome of the tire case is a serious bilateral negotiation between the U.S. and China to address a number of trade irritants, such as massive industrial subsidies, lack of market access, intellectual property theft, persistent dumping, and an exchange rate that most economists believe is dramatically undervalued and misaligned. 

Does anyone still believe it is a good thing to outsource not only our manufacturing but also our debt financing to China?  The tire decision alone will not change this equation, but it could chart a better course for America. 

Revitalizing manufacturing, reducing our trade imbalances and bringing down our public debt are interconnected.  The tire trade decision alone will not accomplish these goals, but it may lead lawmakers to embrace a new strategy to grow manufacturing in this nation.  Trade enforcement as articulated by President Obama is an essential component of that strategy, but it is only part of the equation.  We need a results-oriented trade policy, one that recognizes the importance of opening new markets as well as enforcing the rules.  It is refreshing to see a pragmatic national leader on trade after so many years of benign neglect.

***

This piece was first published in the Detroit News.

Tire, tariff, free trade, fair trade, manufacturing, President Barack Obama, China, United Steelworkers, USW, World Trade Organization, International Trade Commission, ITC, exports, Goodyear,

Leo W. Gerard

By Leo W. Gerard
International President

Barack Obama proved Friday he’s got grit. He enforced trade laws.

These are special trade safeguard rules, called “Section 421,”  that the Chinese had agreed to obey to gain entrance to the World Trade Organization (WTO). They are, however, laws that had gone unenforced by the U.S. in the past.

President Obama used these safeguard rules to imposed tariffs on tires manufactured in China and imported into the U.S., following a recommendation by the International Trade Commission, an independent, bi-partisan group. The action made Obama the first president to execute sanctions under “Section 421.”

The International Trade Commission recommended sanctions under “Section 421” four times before Obama took office. Nothing was done. The result was closed American factories, lost American manufacturing jobs, diminished American dreams.

Not this time though. Not this president. Obama showed he’s made of tougher stuff. By placing tariffs on imported Chinese tires, President Obama put himself in the line of fire for the jobs of U.S. workers, for the preservation of U.S. manufacturing and, ultimately, for the stabilization of the U.S. economy.

Don’t kid yourself. This is a battle. For the U.S. to maintain a viable economy, it must sustain a strong manufacturing base. It must make products of value that can be sold here and overseas – not just swap paper, some of it bogus on Wall Street.

The U.S. economy is under attack by countries engaging in unfair trade. In the past decade, we’ve lost 40,000 manufacturing facilities. In just the 21 months since the Great Recession began, more than 2 million manufacturing workers have lost their jobs, making their unemployment rate 11.8 percent, significantly higher than the 9.7 percent rate for the average worker.

That’s what the Chinese tire case was all about. My union, the United Steelworkers (USW) filed it in April. We demanded penalties against China because it has smothered the U.S. market with tires. In 2004, its share of the U.S market was 4.7 percent. Four years later, it was 16.7 percent. In that time, the number of tires it sold rose from 14.6 million to 46 million. As a result, four U.S. tire manufacturing plants closed and 5,100 workers lost their jobs. Another three plants will close before year’s end, throwing 3,000 more U.S. workers on the street.

We filed for relief under “Section 421” for two reasons. One is that it provides quicker relief than other trade remedies. The other is that China consented to its provisions. When China wanted to get into the World Trade Organization in 2000, it secured U.S. support by agreeing to abide by Section 421 until 2013. Section 421 was designed to protect the U.S. economy by providing ways to combat unfair and damaging surges of particular Chinese imports.

In the past, corporations had asked for Section 421 tariffs. And we had joined them. This time, not one tire company joined us, though, to be clear, Goodyear was openly neutral. By contrast, Ohio-based Cooper, fought us. As did a collection of rag-tag import firms, one of which had nearly gone bankrupt after importing defective Chinese tires that had to be recalled after a series of crashes.

 Cooper, in testimony to the International Trade Commission, reported that all of the tires it makes at its Chinese plant, under its licensing agreement with the Chinese, must be exported until May, 2012. So it has a clear financial interest in preventing tariffs on imported tires to the U.S. The tire import companies have the same interest. For them, it’s about the money they make today, no matter how or where it’s made. They’ve got no allegiance to the U.S. and don’t care what happens to America’s future manufacturing capability or financial stability.

President Obama, by contrast, is a patriot who sees the big picture and takes the long view. U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio was right when he said after the tire tariffs were announced:

“Today the President courageously stood up and enforced fair trade rules that will save jobs and help our communities. Since China joined the World Trade Organization, American workers have not been assured that the government would defend them against unfair trade. With this “Section 421” decision, President Obama has taken the side of American workers and manufacturers.

“Rigorous trade enforcement is a major piece of our manufacturing and global competitiveness strategy. If American workers and manufacturers are going to compete in the global market, they need to have a government that uses trade enforcement tools, including the Section 421 safeguard.”

American workers and American manufacturers can compete – when trade is fair. It’s unfair when countries don’t enforce their own labor regulations, including their own minimum wage laws. It’s unfair when U.S. companies abide by strict environmental regulations and those in other countries openly pollute air and water. It’s unfair when other countries allow their firms to steal trade secrets, when other countries demand that firms export all of their products for a certain number of years and when other countries manipulate the value of their currencies.

If trade laws aren’t enforced, America will lose virtually all manufacturing and become nothing but a dumping ground – a place where the rest of the world sells the stuff it makes. Fewer and fewer citizens in that America would be able to buy stuff after the factories close and all the jobs that they support disappear.

In announcing the tire trade sanctions — tariffs of 35 percent for a year beginning Sept. 26, 30 percent for a year after that, and 25 percent in the final year — U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said, “Enforcing trade laws is key to maintaining an open and free trading system.”

Unfair trade isn’t free.

President Obama is bold enough to draw that line of distinction for America.

Sometime before Sept. 17, President Obama has to make a decision that will tell us a lot about his commitment to American manufacturing. By that date, Obama has to accept, reject or modify a recommendation from the International Trade Commission (ITC) to impose tariffs on the Chinese-made tires that are swamping the U.S. market.

The importance of this battle goes well beyond its impact on the tire industry. Much of Americans’ skepticism toward free trade comes from their empirically verifiable sense that their government has been reluctant to enforce its own trade laws — an issue that candidate Obama tackled head-on last year by his repeated pledges to enforce those laws.

Between 2004 and 2008, tire imports from China increased 215 percent, while imports from other nations decreased 5 percent and U.S. tire production declined 27 percent. The ITC found this a clear violation of a provision in the Trade Act (Section 421), added with Beijing’s consent during the negotiations preceding Congress’s 2000 enactment of Permanent Normalized Trade Relations with China, that allowed the U.S. government to levy tariffs on surging Chinese imports that were eviscerating an American industry.

Indeed, China’s agreement to the anti-surge provision was a key argument in persuading Congress to permanently normalize trade relations. Section 421, contended Montana Sen. Max Baucus, a leading free-trader, “ensures that if shifts in trade patterns, following China’s entry into the world trading system, cause or threaten dislocations to American workers, businesses and farmers, they will be able to obtain relief quickly.”

Or not, as the case may be. Four times during George W. Bush’s presidency the ITC — a bipartisan, presidentially appointed commission — recommended invoking Section 421 to counter surges of Chinese imports that were damaging American industries, and four times Bush declined its advice. The Chinese tire ruling is the first such case to reach Obama’s desk; the ITC that sent it there comprises Bush appointees and one Clinton appointee, but none as yet from Obama.

Whatever its outcome, the case of the Chinese tires provides a revealing snapshot of the U.S. economy in the early 21st century. For one thing, the petitioner is the United Steelworkers union, which the rubber workers union merged into some years back. No U.S. tire companies joined the complaint, and it’s easy to understand why: Almost all the leading tire manufacturers with major production facilities here — including Bridgestone, Cooper, Goodyear, Michelin and Pirelli — also have factories in China. What’s more, the Chinese government often requires those factories to export all the tires they make. Cooper has opened two such factories under a government mandate stipulating that every one of their tires be exported for their first five years.

America’s leading manufacturers, whether U.S.- or foreign-owned, no longer have American interests. In fact, by producing in China, they almost invariably opt, like Cooper, to serve Chinese interests. American workers, by contrast, can’t generally cross oceans to follow their erstwhile employers, and the jobs they pick up when their factories close are likely to be in the lower-paying retail and service sectors.

Critics of the ITC ruling have argued that U.S. tire factories no longer produce the kind of low-end tires that China exports, but the ITC concluded that fully 20 percent of U.S.-made tires are inexpensive and directly compete with their Chinese counterparts. Critics have also predicted a soaring increase in the cost of tires, but the ITC’s staff analysis forecast an increase of only $3.50 per tire — not nothing, to be sure, but a cost that has to be measured against the possibility of tens of thousands of job losses in U.S. tire factories (where more than 5,000 jobs already have been lost because of Chinese imports).

The implications of Obama’s decision go well beyond tires. Section 421 was created to provide some protection for American workers while allowing China entry to our markets. If Obama opts not to enforce it, why would anyone concerned about American jobs believe such provisions in future trade agreements? Why would U.S. manufacturers maintain their domestic production if they know that none of the legal protections they’ve been promised will ever be invoked?

The financial crisis that was already raging when Obama became president compelled him to do more to rescue Wall Street than he surely ever wished. Endorsing the ITC’s recommendation would not only honor his campaign promises and fulfill the mandates of our trade laws, but would also allow him to rescue the very Americans who, rightly or wrongly, have felt left out of his efforts to save the nation’s economy.

***

Harold Meyerson also is political editor and columnist for the L.A. Weekly, the nation’s largest metropolitan weekly, and a regular contributor to The Washington Post, where this piece originally appeared.

Leo W. Gerard

 By Leo W. Gerard
International President

A group of tire importers that should be competitors banded together recently to ally themselves with China in a trade case.

Doesn’t sound like they’re working for the interests of the United States, does it? No, they’re not. They’re collaborating with China against American manufacturing in general and American tire workers, represented by the United Steelworkers, in particular.

They’re opposing the union’s petition seeking a limit on the flood of Chinese tires that has so overwhelmed the U.S. market in the past five years that six American tire plants closed and nearly 7,000 American workers lost their jobs.

China cheats in international trade. It does so by manipulating its currency and subsidizing its manufacturing, which results in lower prices for its exports. For the tire importers, calling themselves the American Coalition for Free Trade in Tires, China cheating means higher profits.

After taking up with China, these companies are not the American Coalition of anything. They’re the Chutzpah Coalition. Here’s the quote that explains why: “If you impose quotas, you harm American jobs because of the impact on all of the people that work for independent dealers.” The Chutzpah Coalition lawyer, Jim Jochum of Jochum, Shore & Trossevim had the lack of insight to say that.

What we have here are tire import companies that grew and profited at the cost of American tire plants and American workers now asserting that if they are forbidden from importing limitless tires, then the result will be terribly wrong and unfair because some of their importing jobs might have to be cut.

If imports are limited, preserving thousands of American tire workers’ jobs, here’s what Del-Nat president Jim Mayfield asked at the Chutzpah Coalition press conference, “What’s supposed to happen to my company and my workers?” A call to Del-Nat asking for the total number of employees got this response: 68.

That’s chutzpah.

For those unfamiliar with Yiddish, chutzpah is not generally considered a positive attribute. The typical definition goes something like this: A boy kills his parents then seeks the court’s mercy because he’s an orphan.

In dealing with the Chinese and this coalition, there’s reason to believe chutzpah can be deadly. Chinese manufacturers are notorious for cutting corners in ways that proved lethal to consumers.  Babies, cats and dogs have all died from melamine-laced milk and pet food from China. In another case, the Chinese manufacturer of Aqua Dots substituted a chemical, which when ingested reacted like the “date rape” drug, forcing a recall of the toy after it sickened American children who put the dots in their mouths, and caused at least one youngster to end up in a coma.

And then there’s the tire case. On Aug. 12, 2006, four Philadelphia carpenters were driving home after work when the treads on one of the Chinese-made tires on their van separated. The rollover crash that followed killed two of the men and permanently impaired a third. An investigation showed that the tires, imported by Foreign Tire Sales – one of the members of the Chutzpah Coalition – did not contain a gum strip between belts necessary to prevent tread separation.

Initially, when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ordered Foreign Tire Sales to recall the defective tires, the company said it couldn’t afford to do that. Foreign Tire said it could pay only 10 to 15 percent of the approximately $80 million cost of recovering nearly half a million tires. Sure, it could profit from importing defective products. But it wasn’t prepared to pay to clean up the mess.

Later, it decided that only 255,000 tires needed to be returned. Ultimately, Foreign Tire was spared when drivers turned in fewer than 20,000 of those tires – less than 8 percent of the total. Who knows what happened to the remainder of those questionable tires or the people driving the cars they were on.

Foreign Tire, the Chutzpah Coalition and China want to continue importing freely – free trade not fair trade. And Chinese officials have taken steps to ensure that happens. Early in May, according to a report in the People’s Daily, China’s Vice Minister of Commerce met with U.S. Embassy personnel in Beijing “to negotiate on two trade remedy investigations targeting Chinese-made products that U.S. industries recently filed with the U.S. government.”

After that, the International Trade Commission released a memo revealing that Chinese officials attempted to discuss trade cases in a private meeting – a contact that was improper because other parties in these cases did not have an opportunity to argue their side. The ITC memo said China expressed particular concern about petitions filed under Section 421, the China-specific trade safeguard law that the USW used in the tire case.

Here’s what is at risk for China and their Chutzpah Coalition allies: in 2004 China sent 14 million tires to the U.S. valued at $453 million. By last year, that had increased to 46 million tires valued at $1.7 billion.

The USW wants the U.S. International Trade Commission to limit the imports to the 2005 level, which was 21 million. That number then could rise by five percent the following year, and five percent more the year after that. 

Congress added Section 421 to the U.S. Trade Act in 2000 to give U.S. industries and workers an opportunity to obtain product-specific relief from sharp increases in imports from China. Section 421 could provide resolution more quickly than a dumping or countervailing duty case.

Another good reason to call this group of tire importers the Chutzpah Coalition is that in its news release, announcing its formation, it suggested it represented “thousands of Americans working in the tire industry.” Not likely. Two of the six members refused to say how many employees they have – Dunlap & Kyle Co., Inc. and Foreign Tire. But the total employed in the U.S. for the other four together: American Omni Trading Co.; Del-Nat Tire Corp.; Hercules Tire & Rubber Co. and Orteck Global Supply & Distribution Co., is 400.

That’s hardly “thousands of Americans.”

But they’ve cost 7,000 Americans their jobs. And they’re fine with that. They’re working hard every day to add more to that number.