Are you sure the DR SHOULD GO FOR A FREE TRADE AGREEMENT WITH THE AMERICANS. This is how the US Government treat their free trade parteners. The DR would be better off bargaining the the Europeans, other than isolationists like the states.
Another Bush Tax Hike
_____What's Your Opinion?_____
? Share Your Views About Editorials and Opinion Pieces on Our Message Boards
? About Message Boards
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to The Post
Thursday, March 21, 2002; Page A34
TWO WEEKS ago the Bush administration slapped tariffs on imported steel, a decision that raises costs to American consumers and amounts to a tax increase. Today the administration may do something considerably more original: It may force Canada's government to tax American consumers. Given its claims to hate taxes, the administration is putting on an impressive show of flexibility.
In negotiations that might end today, the Bush team is reportedly telling Canada to impose a 37 percent tax on lumber exports to the United States. Since a third of the lumber used in this country comes from Canada, that kind of tax would push up home prices considerably. The home-builders' association claims the export tax would add $1,000 to the price of the average home, which would mean in turn that 300,000 families that would otherwise qualify for mortgages would now not do so. Of course, more expensive homes also mean that fewer new ones will be built and jobs will be lost. The home-building industry employs 30 times more people than the domestic lumber industry that is lobbying for the export-tax protection.
The administration says that the tax increase will be in place only until Canada does away with alleged subsidies to its lumber industry. How should it eliminate those supposed subsidies? The administration is proposing a remedy so complicated that you'll wish you hadn't asked that question. Quebec is expected to bring its forest management practices in line with those used in Maine, Vermont and other Northeastern states; Ontario is supposed to come into line with a basket of Northwestern states; British Columbia is supposed to set its prices by holding auctions. Aligning management practices involves comparing road systems and environmental rules and other complex factors. The export taxes could be around for ages.
The administration could perfectly well drop its negotiations with Canada, and allow the supposed subsidies to be addressed in unfair-trade suits filed by American lumber producers. But the administration apparently fears that Canada would appeal those suits successfully at the World Trade Organization. Doesn't that suggest that Canada's supposed subsidies may be debatable? Is a tax on home ownership the best response to a problem whose existence is disputed?
? 2002 The Washington Post Company
Another Bush Tax Hike
_____What's Your Opinion?_____
? Share Your Views About Editorials and Opinion Pieces on Our Message Boards
? About Message Boards
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to The Post
Thursday, March 21, 2002; Page A34
TWO WEEKS ago the Bush administration slapped tariffs on imported steel, a decision that raises costs to American consumers and amounts to a tax increase. Today the administration may do something considerably more original: It may force Canada's government to tax American consumers. Given its claims to hate taxes, the administration is putting on an impressive show of flexibility.
In negotiations that might end today, the Bush team is reportedly telling Canada to impose a 37 percent tax on lumber exports to the United States. Since a third of the lumber used in this country comes from Canada, that kind of tax would push up home prices considerably. The home-builders' association claims the export tax would add $1,000 to the price of the average home, which would mean in turn that 300,000 families that would otherwise qualify for mortgages would now not do so. Of course, more expensive homes also mean that fewer new ones will be built and jobs will be lost. The home-building industry employs 30 times more people than the domestic lumber industry that is lobbying for the export-tax protection.
The administration says that the tax increase will be in place only until Canada does away with alleged subsidies to its lumber industry. How should it eliminate those supposed subsidies? The administration is proposing a remedy so complicated that you'll wish you hadn't asked that question. Quebec is expected to bring its forest management practices in line with those used in Maine, Vermont and other Northeastern states; Ontario is supposed to come into line with a basket of Northwestern states; British Columbia is supposed to set its prices by holding auctions. Aligning management practices involves comparing road systems and environmental rules and other complex factors. The export taxes could be around for ages.
The administration could perfectly well drop its negotiations with Canada, and allow the supposed subsidies to be addressed in unfair-trade suits filed by American lumber producers. But the administration apparently fears that Canada would appeal those suits successfully at the World Trade Organization. Doesn't that suggest that Canada's supposed subsidies may be debatable? Is a tax on home ownership the best response to a problem whose existence is disputed?
? 2002 The Washington Post Company