|
Potential
Sanctions Anticipated Against Brazil
|
|
| The
Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has authorized the Agriculture
and Agri-Good Administrative Monetary Penalties (AMPS) Act, which
became effective May 24, 2000. It is designed to address violations
of the Plant Protection Act and the Health of Animals Act. The Canadian
Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) will benefit from the penalty system
in a number of ways, i.e.: reductions in prosecution costs, increase
in compliance and more effective enforcement. Until these regulations
came into force, the only way of addressing violations was through
prosecution in the courts subject to the Department of Justice pursuing
a case. Under the new system of penalties, CFIA will be able to act
immediately as necessary and with a broader range of options. Thus
they will be able to tailor enforcement response to the violations.
Violations are rated as minor, serious and very serious as outlined
in the May 24, 2000 issue of the Canada Gazette. There is also a distinction
made between offenses committed to obtain a financial benefit or not.
In addition, consideration is given to the history of the violator
and compliance |
agreements
for those persons assessed penalties of $2000 or more (allows penalties
to be reduced if agreements are made to ensure future compliance).
CFIA will have full authority to issue the monetary penalties, which
range from $500 to $6000. Decisions by CFIA are subject to review
by a Tribunal if requested in accordance with the regulations. One
area of concern that has been identified and will be subject to AMPS
is the lack of follow up with original documents. Currently, releases
through Customs requiring CFIA approval are generally handled with
faxed documents, on the condition that originals are forwarded to
the appropriate CFIA office within five days. One official with CFIA
indicated that the original documents are often either slow to arrive
or are not being received at all. Additional information may be obtained
at CFIA’s web-site at www.cfia-acia.agr.ca and follow the links, i.e.
Acts & Regulations then AMPS or Newsroom then News Releases then New
Enforcement Tool Increases Protection for Canadian Agriculture Resources |
|
| As
has been reported in the press and elsewhere, Canada won its complaint to
the WTO regarding export subsidies extended by Brazil to regional jet manufacturer
Embraer. The Proex export subsidy reduced interest rates to Embraer clients.
The WTO told Brazil to withdraw the illegal subsidy. Brazil unsuccessfully
appealed the ruling but has yet to abide by the decision and dispense with
the subsidy. As a result, Canada has now asked the WTO to authorize retaliatory
measures against Brazilian goods of up to $700 million per year for seven
years. It is unlikely that any countermeasures will be implemented before
late August. A list of goods potentially affected is |
available.
Frequent importers of goods from Brazil may want to consider alternate sources
of supply or increase inventory levels until a resolution is reached. If
sanctions are approved and implemented, significant surtaxes will be imposed.
Statistics Canada records show that Canada imported goods worth $1358 million
from Brazil and exported goods worth $825 million to Brazil in 1999. It
is claimed that the illegal Proex subsidy, of up to $4.5 million per aircraft,
has cost Canada’s aerospace industry untold millions of dollars since
1991. We will, in the near future, be contacting clients potentially impacted
by this issue. However, should you require further information please do
not hesitate to contact us. |
|
Who’s Number One?
A Reuters News Service article dated May 29, 2000 reported that Mexico
will become the United States largest trading partner within the next
ten years according to Luis de la Calle, Mexico’s Trade Undersecretary.
Last year Mexico eclipsed Japan’s two-way trade figures with the U.S.,
Mexico engaging in 196.6 billion (110 billion in exports) versus Japan’s
188.9 billion (131.4 billion in exports), while Canada weighed in with
364.6 billion (198.3 billion in exports) according to U.S. Commerce Department
figures.
Imports
of Wood
Products with Bark
The CCRA has advised
that all exemption lists for importers of wood products with bark will
no longer be updated. These lists were maintained on behalf of CFIA. Customs
Memorandum D19-1-1 will reflect the change with its next revision.
|
General Preferential Tariff
The General Preferential Tariff has been extended to the Republic of Bosnia
and Herzegovina and to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia effective
May 4, 2000.
Export
of Wood
Packing Material
Several countries have complained to the CFIA of violations to their phytosanitary
import requirements. The most recent warnings have been received from
Australia, Brazil, China, European Union, New Zealand and Russia. Most
countries require that packing material be free of bark, disease, and
pests. Fumigation procedures etc. vary from country to country so it is
advisable to obtain specific information for the country where the packing
material is going. Additional information may be obtained at CFIA’s web-site
through the Forestry section. See: www.cfia-acia.agr.ca/english/
plant/forest/home_e.html.
|
back
to top
