Blog: What's in a word...or two?
Leonie Barrie | 27 February 2009
What a difference a word makes. Well two words actually.
This clause was included in a House appropriations report that came out last year but was never enacted, at the request of US yarn and fabric makers seeking evidence that Chinese imports may be dumped:
“Import Monitoring – The Committee expects ITA [the International Trade Commission] to undertake apparel import monitoring, including socks, focusing on prices of imports from China and Vietnam and whether their industries are illegally pricing products and dumping in the US market.”
And here’s the version that appears in the 2009 appropriations bill, which is causing great concern to US importers and retailers:
“Import monitoring – ITA is expected to undertake apparel import monitoring, focusing on prices of imports from China and Vietnam and whether their state-run industries are illegally pricing products and dumping in the US market.”
This second version is arguably more provocative because it now adds the words “state-run industries.” And it’s a point with which many of the multinationals invested in China and Vietnam would take strong issue.
The bill also raises the interesting prospect that there might eventually be two monitoring programs on Chinese textile and apparel imports into the US. After all, one is already underway by the ITC following a request from the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee at the end of last year.
Again this was at the request of the US yarn and fabric industry. But it now seems objective data filed every two weeks isn’t enough, particularly since the industry itself has to petition for duties against Chinese companies if it is unfairly damaged by a surge in imports.
What a formal import monitoring programme means, however, is that the US government is allowed to start and fund legal proceedings for investigating the case for anti-dumping duty, as well as short-circuiting the long-drawn-out process.
It always seemed probable that calls for a formal Import Monitoring Program on imports from China are unlikely to go away. And the mere threat of protectionist actions from America's yarn and fabric producers could be enough to cause US importers and retailers to act with caution when placing orders in China.
Continuing our look at what lies ahead for the apparel industry and its supply chain in 2017, the panel of industry experts consulted by just-style last week tackled likely shifts in the sourcing land...
This week our focus turns to first thoughts from a panel of industry experts consulted by just-style on the challenges and opportunities likely to face the apparel supply chain in 2017, with prospects...
Welcome back after the holiday break, and from the team here at just-style I’d like to wish all our readers a happy and prosperous New Year....
Apparel sourcing is a complex process built on a mix of location, logistics, lead-time, price, compliance, risk and reliability. And it's in a constant state of flux as retailers, brands and manufactu...
- Trump and the apparel industry – Infographic
- How US border adjustment tax could affect apparel
- British Brexit plans prioritise tariff-free trade
- Apparel factory auditing is in the firing line
- $1.7bn package to boost Pakistan clothing exports
- Cambodia clothing exports at risk from Brexit
- Apparel brands urge Bangladesh PM to address wages
- New project to digitalise European fashion chains
- Brands need to tackle Turkey factory refugee abuse
- JC Penney to roll out hundreds of Nike "shops"
- Outdoor performance apparel 2016: A broader perspective
- Southeast Asia strategic sourcing review – a focus on Cambodia, Vietnam and Myanmar
- Anti-odour clothing: fresh fashion for an active lifestyle
- Global market review of lingerie – forecasts to 2022
- Global apparel markets: product developments and innovations, October 2016