[herbie]

And some new $6 shirts that won't take a second run thru the washing machine?

[Yogi]

Let'em charge $5.00 each. So what! We're going to charge $10.00! Upon presentation of Canadian passport when reentering Canada, the traveller gets their $5 back and we use the other fiver to reduce the airport improvment tax thusly making the cost of flying cheaper for Canadians. Thanks O.B.!

EDIT: Dropped part of my post.

This isn't going to fly, because the added charges will be passed on directly to the consumers. a tax by any other name!

[andyt]

We already charge more than they do for travelers. Let them charge what they want. This topic is about the import levy they want to charge on our products. Don't see how they can get away with that under NAFTA.

[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

Don't see how they can get away with that under NAFTA.

[andyt]

Pretty naive, I know. But I thought NAFTA was supposed to drop tarifs between us. If not, then lets hurt them the best we can. Maybe it will hurt us more, but it's time to stand up to a bully and at least make them pay some sort of price for all this bullshit they come up with. Especially an export tax on our oil - if it slows tar sands production a bit, all the better, save some oil for later.

[Lemmy]

I understand that sentiment (share it, in fact), but it's irrational when you calm down and think logically. Protectionism hurts Canadians. Anything we do to retaliate hurts us as much as them. It's better for Canadian consumers to just turn the other cheek and let the Yanks do as they wish rather than being hammered by protectionism from two sources. As for the tar sands, well, I don't think I need to restate my position on that folly.

[EyeBrock]

I don't think they can do this under NAFTA. Lemmy, you know this stuff better than most, what do you think?

[PJB]

Why does the US seem to be getting more and more protectionist. They are going to piss off the countries that are holding their debt. I could only imagine the chaos if one or two of those countries decide to call in their loans. The U.S is a dying super-power and the only way they can even attempt to stop the bleeding is make other nations pay for their insane spending. Heaven forbid it they actually taxed their own people. If they tried that there would be another civil war which might be a good thing.

[EyeBrock]

Lots of people wrote the Yanks off before. They were wrong then too.

[Lemmy]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I don't think they can do this under NAFTA. Lemmy, you know this stuff better than most, what do you think?

International trade isn't my area of particular expertise, but it sounds like a violation. There aren't a lot of details in the article, but in general, the only way a NAFTA country can tax imports from another NAFTA member is if there is a reason specific to that good. For example, Ontario taxes beer imported in cans because, it argues, cans are less environmentally friendly than bottles, so the beer tax is allowed as an environmental justification. Of course, the REAL reason for this tax is that most American beer comes in cans and most Canadian beer is bottled, but it's making use of the loopholes in the agreement. For the US to slap an arbitrary tax on ALL goods seems a violation, certainly of the spirit of the agreement. They should have to justify any levies on a good-by-good basis, with reasons specific to each product. Regardless, the Americans' track record isn't very good in terms of compliance with international trade disputes panels, whether that be the WTO or NAFTA. So, as I said earlier, since we can presume the Yanks will do as they wish, the law be damned, we're best to just take it and like it rather than making things worse for ourselves by retaliating. Any "turn-about is fair play" policy ends up being paid for by Canadian consumers, not American producers. In our entire trade history, we've really only gone to the mattresses a handful of times against the USA, with softwood lumber for example, and I'm sure you're aware how well that's worked out for us. Pay the $500 tax, bitch about it, sure, but mostly be happy the Yanks didn't pull the number 1000 out of their asses instead of 500.

[rickc]

PJB PJB:

Why does the US seem to be getting more and more protectionist. They are going to piss off the countries that are holding their debt. I could only imagine the chaos if one or two of those countries decide to call in their loans. The U.S is a dying super-power and the only way they can even attempt to stop the bleeding is make other nations pay for their insane spending. Heaven forbid it they actually taxed their own people. If they tried that there would be another civil war which might be a good thing.

If some of our debt holders called in their debt, we would just print up a whole lot more worthless dollars [like we are doing now] to pay them off. We could call it QE one million.

[Thanos]

I don't see the US being any more or less protectionist now than they've been in the past. The softwood and mad-cow debacles occurred under a Republican President and a Republican Congress, which sort of blew the shit out of all the bogus arguments that the GOP is interested in adhering to the legal letter of trade deals any more than the Democrats are. At least President Obama has tried to assure Canada that he'd do what he could to minimize the effects that any 'Buy American' policies would have on us. Whether he's going to be successful doing this against a House of Representatives that's now controlled by a pack of gutter TeaBircher nationalists and drooling religious fundamentalist psychopaths isn't a thing that Canada will really have much of any influence over.

[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

International trade isn't my area of particular expertise, but it sounds like a violation. There aren't a lot of details in the article, but in general, the only way a NAFTA country can tax imports from another NAFTA member is if there is a reason specific to that good. For example, Ontario taxes beer imported in cans because, it argues, cans are less environmentally friendly than bottles, so the beer tax is allowed as an environmental justification.

I doubt if Ontario only taxes imported beer in cans. My guess would be they tax all beer in cans more, both domestic and imported. That's totally allowed under NAFTA. The US is charging this levy for road costs. If they charged all trucks for road usage, carrying both domestic and foreign goods, that would totally fly - but not a levy only on imported goods.

As for us only hurting ourselves if we retaliate, plenty of people here have made the point that you have to stand up to bullies. Guess what, it's not like in the movies, where the good guy always wins, and often the bully is stronger and hurts you more than you hurt him. But standing up and giving him some pain will make him think next time whether it's worth bullying you, or if he'd rather pick on somebody that doesn't fight back - like Canada for instance, bends over and takes it, but just whines about it.

[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

I doubt if Ontario only taxes imported beer in cans. My guess would be they tax all beer in cans more, both domestic and imported.

Yes, they tax all beer in cans, but since most imported beer is canned and most domestic beer is bottled, it's a defacto tariff on imported beer.

[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

andyt andyt:

I doubt if Ontario only taxes imported beer in cans. My guess would be they tax all beer in cans more, both domestic and imported.

Yes, they tax all beer in cans, but since most imported beer is canned and most domestic beer is bottled, it's a defacto tariff on imported beer.

Yep, but that sort of thing is allowed. I'm sure both countries do those sorts of things.