Bush, After Halting Tariffs, May Use Steel Duties (screw WTO/EU/Japan)

[papau]

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aHsid62A7B9Q&refer=us

Bush, After Halting Tariffs, May Use Steel Duties (Update2)

Dec. 11 (Bloomberg) -- A week after dropping one set of tariffs on steel, the Bush administration is considering giving new protection to U.S. steelmakers by changing how other duties are calculated.

The proposal, being reviewed by the Commerce Department, would raise the duties on $1.7 billion in steel imports determined to have been "dumped" in the U.S. at prices lower than those in the producer's home market. Revenue from the increased penalties would go to companies such as International Steel Group, U.S. Steel Corp. and Nucor Corp., which asked the department for the changes.

The idea is triggering new tensions between the U.S. and European steelmakers. "It's a continuation (of the tariffs) by other means," said Christian Mari, a director at Brussels-based Eurofer, which represents companies that produce 95 percent of European steel.<snip>

Anti-dumping duties through 2004 will be based on statistics from 2003, when the safeguard tariffs were in place. The practical effect of the proposed calculation would increase anti-dumping tariffs on almost all steel facing such charges....Consider a hypothetical example: A South Korean importer sells hot-rolled steel for $94 a ton to a U.S. manufacturer, 6 percent less than a "fair-market value" price of $100 a ton. In a typical case, the U.S. would levy an anti-dumping duty of $6, or 6.4 percent, on all steel of that kind from that company.In this example, the Korean company's $94 price included a 24 percent tariff under Bush's steel safeguards. The proposed new calculation would make the effective "dumping" price $75.80 a ton, or the cost excluding the tariff. The new anti-dumping duty would then be $24.20 a ton, or 32 percent. "The effect would be to add to any dumping margins," said Alan Wolf, an attorney representing U.S. Steel. "It would certainly be of benefit to the industry." <snip>

[LeftCoast]

1. Clearly illegal, but by the time the WTO rules it'll be AFTER the election

Pretty clever in a Rovian sort of way.