• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Canada imposes duties on US.Corn but affects Cattle Industry

Help Support Ranchers.net:

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Canada imposes duties on 'dumped and subsidized' U.S. grain corn
20:46:49 EST Dec 15, 2005
OTTAWA (CP) - Canada said Thursday it is imposing provisional duties on U.S. grain corn after a preliminary finding by the Canada Border Services Agency that imports of unprocessed grain corn from the United States are being dumped and subsidized.

The decision came two months after the agency began investigating complaints from Canadian farmers that Washington was dumping and subsidizing grain corn.

It also followed a preliminary finding by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal that imports of unprocessed grain corn from America have caused injury to Canadian corn growers, the agency said Thursday.

Total provisional duties of $1.65 US per bushel will now be imposed on imports of unprocessed U.S. grain corn - $0.58 per bushel provisional

anti-dumping duty and $1.07 per bushel provisional countervailing duty.
"These duties will provide some relief to the dire conditions facing our nation's corn farmers," said Brian Doidge, spokesperson for CCP, based in Guelph, Ont.

However, the cattle industry said it was disappointed with the decision.

The Animal Industry Corn Users coalition estimates that if Canadian corn prices rise by the same amount as the duties, they could add feed costs of up to $100 per head of cattle in corn-feeding regions such as Ontario.

"As our industry was just beginning to come out of the BSE (mad cow) crisis, producers needed to make money on this turn of cattle. But instead, the cattle industry's recovery strategy is now in jeopardy," said Ian McKillop, president of the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, also based in Guelph.

According to the CBSA, dumping occurs when goods are sold to importers in Canada at prices that are less than their selling prices in the exporter's domestic market or at unprofitable prices.

Subsidizing occurs when goods imported into Canada benefit from foreign government financial assistance. The Special Import Measures Act protects Canadian producers from the damaging effects of such unfair trade.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
PORKER said:
Canada imposes duties on 'dumped and subsidized' U.S. grain corn
20:46:49 EST Dec 15, 2005
OTTAWA (CP) - Canada said Thursday it is imposing provisional duties on U.S. grain corn after a preliminary finding by the Canada Border Services Agency that imports of unprocessed grain corn from the United States are being dumped and subsidized.

The decision came two months after the agency began investigating complaints from Canadian farmers that Washington was dumping and subsidizing grain corn.

It also followed a preliminary finding by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal that imports of unprocessed grain corn from America have caused injury to Canadian corn growers, the agency said Thursday.

Total provisional duties of $1.65 US per bushel will now be imposed on imports of unprocessed U.S. grain corn - $0.58 per bushel provisional

anti-dumping duty and $1.07 per bushel provisional countervailing duty.
"These duties will provide some relief to the dire conditions facing our nation's corn farmers," said Brian Doidge, spokesperson for CCP, based in Guelph, Ont.

However, the cattle industry said it was disappointed with the decision.

The Animal Industry Corn Users coalition estimates that if Canadian corn prices rise by the same amount as the duties, they could add feed costs of up to $100 per head of cattle in corn-feeding regions such as Ontario.

"As our industry was just beginning to come out of the BSE (mad cow) crisis, producers needed to make money on this turn of cattle. But instead, the cattle industry's recovery strategy is now in jeopardy," said Ian McKillop, president of the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, also based in Guelph.

According to the CBSA, dumping occurs when goods are sold to importers in Canada at prices that are less than their selling prices in the exporter's domestic market or at unprofitable prices.

Subsidizing occurs when goods imported into Canada benefit from foreign government financial assistance. The Special Import Measures Act protects Canadian producers from the damaging effects of such unfair trade.

I guess those cattle will just have to be shipped south to "compete".
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
They could add feed costs of up to $100 per head of cattle.****Then Cargills beef going south would have to shut down.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
This is the stupidest damn thing I ve ever seen. I dont think our Liberal government has a brain in their damn head! If we soon dont get Mr Paul Martin out of there he is going to wreck this damn country!!!!!! :mad:
 

Jason

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
0
Location
Alberta Canada
From those I've talked with this will hurt very few feedlots. They have the ability to switch to cheap Manitoba barley as Alberta feedlots switched to then cheaper US con when barley hit $4 here a few years back.

The other side of this one is that Canadian corn isn't the same quality feeders can get from the States.

Many of the Ontario buyers haven't been big into buying calves out West this fall yet. They have been holding off waiting to see how the market progresses.

Is anyone closer to what is really happening with this deal? More info is always good.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
The Canadian government does have a point - our corn is subsidized. I don't know what else you would call a LDP.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
Do you think this $1.65per bushel duty is right Sandhusker? I personally dont think it is right.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Pending Canadian Duty on Imported Corn Creates Concern

Another key concern for livestock producers, as the December 13 start of the WTO ministerial meeting approaches, is the Canada Border Service Agency’s (CBSA) pending announcement regarding possible duties on imported non-processed American grain corn.



“December 15 is the date we all have our eye on right now,” states Kathleen Sullivan the General Manager of the Animal Nutrition Association of Canada (ANAC). “That is the day on which the Canada Border Services Agency could impose a provisional or temporary duty until a final decision on this matter.”



The Animal Nutrition Association of Canada, which represents Canada’s feed manufacturers, has been working closely with the Cattlemen’s Association and the Pork Council to oppose the introduction of duties on U.S. corn. “We are very concerned that the imposition of a provisional duty is going to have a very disruptive effect,” warns Sullivan.



She explains, “Feed costs represent about 60 percent of the cost of producing livestock in this country so anything that’s going to increase the price of feed is going to have an immediate effect on the finished product.”



However, she points out, “There is the opportunity for the Canadian government to delay the date of imposing the provisional duty. They can either wave the provisional duty completely or delay the date until the end of January. We think that would be a better way to go for a couple of reasons. One it would delay any provisional duties until after the Hong Kong negotiations. Also it would delay the implementation of the provisional duties until, obviously, after an election.”



A Duty Would Send the Wrong Message to Canada’s Trading Partners

Schlegel fears, “An announcement by Canada on a preliminary duty in the middle of the WTO round would send signals of protectionism rather than free trade.”



“It’s certainly within the capability of the CBSA and the president to use discretion. It makes sense in this situation particularly because of the WTO timing but also because of the effect it’s going to have on the users of corn. It’s not only the WTO situation but also because it’s got such a huge negative consequence and the benefit to corn growers in Canada is questionable in the long term.”



Rice adds, “The mood in Hong Kong is going to need every ounce of supportive goodwill that can be shown and a duty on corn announced just during that time would certainly, in our view, deflate some of that goodwill and will just underline the combativeness that exists in the international trade.”



“That’s the kind of thing that would impair the Canadian negotiators,” observes Masswohl. “At the same time that they’re over there talking about tariff reductions, to be increasing tariffs back at home is not the kind of goodwill scenario that you want to imagine.”



“We also look at those duties as livestock producers, as corn users, and it really affects us in a negative way in that it’s going to change the feed cost parity between Canadian livestock producers and U.S. livestock producers. Feeders in the U.S. will still have access to low cost corn and that will put us at a disadvantage.”



“[I’m] hopeful that we can sit down with the corn producers that have brought this complaint and perhaps try to identify other solutions to their concerns and their problems, rather than the imposition of duties which are frankly going to hurt everybody in the end including corn,” says Sullivan.



WTO Viewed as Canada’s Best Hope for Liberalized Trade

Despite the limited expectations, Rice is convinced, “There is still the opportunity to make further advancement in trade negotiations here. We are really concerned that all parties are going to still drive forward as far as they can in getting a new trade agreement at Hong Kong.”



He expects a follow up meeting will be scheduled for 2006 if enough is achieved in Hong Kong but doubts there will be any official date set until such progress has become evident.



He notes, “There is a determination to not have the Hong Kong meeting be a fiasco as was the case with the Cancun meeting and before that Seattle,” and suggests, “The hope is that Hong Kong will reach enough substance of agreement that, in the early part of 2006, a final package could be arrived at.”



Masswohl concludes, “If there’s ever a place you want to go to to reform the U.S. domestic subsidies, the only hope for that is in the WTO. So you really want to make that happen on as expedited a time schedule as possible.”



Farmscape Staff
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Manitoba_Rancher said:
Do you think this $1.65per bushel duty is right Sandhusker? I personally dont think it is right.

It does seem a bit high. I don't know about other parts of the country, but LDPs never got over 50 cents here -and that was considered nose bleed levels. They're closer to 25 cents now. Could be there are other factors other than LDPs they are considering. I suppose if they wanted to get picky, every producer with a FSA or Farm Credit loan would have a subsidized operation.
 

Manitoba_Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
Sandhusker,


I cant see what all this bickering is about over corn. We need the good quality US corn up here for feeding cattle and for hogs. What happened to the days when Canada and the US could get along. I sure dont like the way our so called Prime Minister is taking low shots at the US. Really irks me! :mad: As for Farm Credit loans, we have them up here as well. And the money is backed by the govt.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,052
Reaction score
131
Location
Big Muddy valley
MR I got blasted about this awhile back from Bill about it protecting the barley growers. The SSGA position was that we have to be competative to have a strong feeding setor. The barley growers would feel the hurt more if those cattle went south to feed rather then a limited amout of corn coming north. The price of freight is makeing that corn higher for most Alberta feeders anyways. A perfect world would be nice but we have to make do with the best we can.
 

cowzilla

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
363
Reaction score
0
Location
east of kato
I got a idea, the Canadians can scrap the corn duty and the Americans can scrap the lumber duty. Both duties hurt the Country that imposes them more than the country there against anyway :!:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
cowzilla said:
I got a idea, the Canadians can scrap the corn duty and the Americans can scrap the lumber duty. Both duties hurt the Country that imposes them more than the country there against anyway :!:

Cowzilla, wouldn't that be something like a North American Free Trade Agreement?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
Big Muddy rancher said:
MR I got blasted about this awhile back from Bill about it protecting the barley growers. The SSGA position was that we have to be competative to have a strong feeding setor. The barley growers would feel the hurt more if those cattle went south to feed rather then a limited amout of corn coming north. The price of freight is makeing that corn higher for most Alberta feeders anyways. A perfect world would be nice but we have to make do with the best we can.
I wouldn't call it blasting anyone but here was the discussion

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5750&start=60
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Bill said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
MR I got blasted about this awhile back from Bill about it protecting the barley growers. The SSGA position was that we have to be competative to have a strong feeding setor. The barley growers would feel the hurt more if those cattle went south to feed rather then a limited amout of corn coming north. The price of freight is makeing that corn higher for most Alberta feeders anyways. A perfect world would be nice but we have to make do with the best we can.
I wouldn't call it blasting anyone but here was the discussion

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5750&start=60

What all this discussion shows is that we don't really have a NAFTA. The concept is good but the execution is a joke. Corn and lumber are perfect examples. The premise became a big lie when the execution failed.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
By strengthening the rules and procedures governing trade and investment on this continent, the NAFTA has allowed trade and investment flows in North America to skyrocket. According to figures of the International Monetary Fund, total trade among the three NAFTA countries has more than doubled, passing from US$306 billion in 1993 to almost US$621 billion in 2002. That’s US$1.2 million every minute.

http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library/Fact_Sheets/2004/NAFTA_A_Decade_of_Success.html

All member economies have grown significantly from 1993-2003:

· United States: 38% economic growth

· Canada: 30.9% growth


· Mexico: 30% growth

● U.S. exports to Canada and Mexico grew from US$134.3 billion (US$46.5 billion to Mexico and US$87.8 billion to Canada) to US$250.6 billion (US$105.4 and US$145.3 billion respectively).

● Mexican exports to the United States reached over US$138 billion, while Mexican exports to Canada grew from US$2.7 billion to US$8.7 billion, an increase of almost 227%.

● Canada’s exports to its NAFTA partners increased by 104% in value.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Got to remember that a lot of countrys businesses moved out of the USA and the growth came from having to import goods that were in Canada and the USA before moving.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Got to remember that a lot of countrys businesses moved out of the USA and the growth came from having to import goods that were in Canada and the USA before moving.

What does that have to do with the overall economies. If they are growing that means more jobs, higher pay etc.

It comes down to growth of the economy, competition, and exposing your competitive product to a higher poulation/market.

I do find it funny that people like Econ and groups like RCALF wave their flag for competition, but are against free trade!

Competition seems to be fine, if it is American company's. Well, one way to create competition/retail margin in the US as a sealed trade jurisdiction, would be to lower wages, which are most often the highest input cost!!!

Another way is to promote the efficiency and lower input costs of your suppliers of raw material.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
All you Canadians should be marching on Ottawa on this one as I read where this imposing tariffs on US corn is really getting serious--they say it could raise the price of Canadian Whiskey!!!

Wars have been started over Whiskey and Whiskey taxes :wink: :lol:
 

Latest posts

Top