Blog: Scaremongering on safeguards
Leonie Barrie | 16 September 2009
There’s a lot of scaremongering going on just now, with media reports and trade groups hinting that President Obama’s decision to impose tariffs on imported tyres from China will lead to a flood of new petitions – especially from the textile and apparel industry.
I spent most of yesterday talking to industry experts about the situation, and they’re agreed that while there’s a slim chance some petitions will be filed against apparel made in China, the likelihood is largely being exaggerated.
The big difference between tyres and textiles, it seems, hinges not on US law but on the accession agreement signed when China joined the WTO in late 2001.
This says an industry may petition for duties against Chinese companies if it is unfairly damaged by a surge in imports – but unlike soaring tyre imports, most US shipments of Chinese-made textiles and apparel are falling as a result of the global and US economic downturn.
Trade expert Brenda Jacobs, an attorney at Sidley Austin LLP also points out that it’s hard to imagine any relief against Chinese imports would be useful because there are literally dozens of other foreign (mostly Asian) suppliers available to fill any void.
Which also means a reprisal of the safeguards wouldn’t save any US apparel jobs.
And with a track record that already includes a special three year textile safeguard and, before that, the 40-plus year quota program, new tariffs on apparel would be likely to harm larger US national economic interests.
USA-ITA executive director Laura Jones adds that the whole point of the China safeguard is to give industry time to adjust to a surge in imports.
“After five decades, if there are any US fabric or apparel makers who haven’t adjusted by now, yet another bite at the protectionist apple isn’t going to give them new life,” she notes.
A special seminar being held on Friday 18 September at the USA-ITA offices in Washington DC to discuss 'What's Next for China Safeguard Measures?' Brenda Jacobs of Sidley Austin LLP will be guest speaker. Click here for more details.
Over the past month, Donald Trump and his team failed to offer any clear plan to ensure Americans would "Buy American, Hire American" - while the British government's attempts to clarify the specifics...
The Bangladesh government was forced to respond late last week to pressure over its crackdown on labour activists after a number of global brands and retailers, including H&M and Inditex announced pla...
Fresh from their disappointment at seeing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade deal abandoned last month with an executive order by President Donald Trump, the US apparel and footwear sector...
With the ultimate aim of ensuring all the cotton in its products is sourced sustainably, value clothing retailer Primark is adamant that having a business model focused on offering the lowest prices o...
- What TTIP might mean for US, EU textiles & apparel
- Four steps to reduce product defects
- Unlocks for the future fashion sourcing landscape
- Geo-political uncertainty and how to survive it
- Where next for Corporate Human Rights Benchmark?
- H&M, VF Corp and Levi among most ethical companies
- US Q4 in brief – PVH Corp, J Crew, Perry Ellis
- Sears has "substantial doubt" of future
- Vietnam limits hazardous chemicals in apparel
- PVH Corp to acquire e-commerce retailer True&Co
- Central and East Europe Report Package
- Central America strategic sourcing review - a focus on Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras
- Southeast Asia strategic sourcing review – a focus on Cambodia, Vietnam and Myanmar
- When Things Go Wrong - A Practical Guide to Managing Common Problems in Apparel Sourcing
- Outdoor performance apparel 2016: A broader perspective