LETTER: Arguments against chicken import tariffs are incorrect
The minister must impose antidumping measures and protect local producers against unfair trade
01 August 2023 - 15:18
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
On behalf of chicken importers, he also pretends that antidumping duties are general import tariffs. Not true. Dumping — importing at unfairly low prices to capture market share — is a contravention of international trade rules and antidumping duties are a specific counter to such dumping, which harms local producers and costs local jobs.
That damage was investigated, proven and accepted by trade, industry & competition minister Ebrahim Patel a year ago. It is now time for him to impose the duties and provide protection against unfair trade for which local chicken farmers have been waiting for 12 long months.
Matthew implies that the antidumping duties will apply to all chicken imports. They will apply only to specific products (bone-in portions such as leg quarters) from Brazil and Ireland, and to three countries whose imports are now blocked by bird flu bans — Denmark, Poland and Spain.
He pretends there will be a huge increase in chicken prices if the duties are imposed. Not true, as shown by a study by the respected economic consultancy Genesis Analytics. The maximum effect is an average of 2.5%, only on bone-in portions, and this will be reduced by a number of factors, including local competition and the possibility that Matthew’s clients in Brazil will drop their prices, as they have done in the past.
He pretends the EU will be so angry at the imposition of duties that they will retaliate. Really? Antidumping duties have been in force since 2015 against Germany and the Netherlands, and Britain when it was an EU member, and there has not been a hint of trade retaliation.
He pretends the US will be so angry that it too will retaliate. This has nothing to do with the US, which already has a substantial annual quota free of antidumping duties.
Shorn of credible arguments, Matthew urges Patel to take a political decision in favour of Brazil and Brazilian workers, and not one in the interests of the local industry, local jobs or local consumers. He should be ashamed.
Francois Baird Founder, FairPlay movement
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your says to letters@businesslive.co.za. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
LETTER: Arguments against chicken import tariffs are incorrect
The minister must impose antidumping measures and protect local producers against unfair trade
Paul Matthew exaggerates (“Tariffs on chicken imports ahead of the Brics summit not a smart move for SA”, July 25).
On behalf of chicken importers, he also pretends that antidumping duties are general import tariffs. Not true. Dumping — importing at unfairly low prices to capture market share — is a contravention of international trade rules and antidumping duties are a specific counter to such dumping, which harms local producers and costs local jobs.
That damage was investigated, proven and accepted by trade, industry & competition minister Ebrahim Patel a year ago. It is now time for him to impose the duties and provide protection against unfair trade for which local chicken farmers have been waiting for 12 long months.
Matthew implies that the antidumping duties will apply to all chicken imports. They will apply only to specific products (bone-in portions such as leg quarters) from Brazil and Ireland, and to three countries whose imports are now blocked by bird flu bans — Denmark, Poland and Spain.
He pretends there will be a huge increase in chicken prices if the duties are imposed. Not true, as shown by a study by the respected economic consultancy Genesis Analytics. The maximum effect is an average of 2.5%, only on bone-in portions, and this will be reduced by a number of factors, including local competition and the possibility that Matthew’s clients in Brazil will drop their prices, as they have done in the past.
He pretends the EU will be so angry at the imposition of duties that they will retaliate. Really? Antidumping duties have been in force since 2015 against Germany and the Netherlands, and Britain when it was an EU member, and there has not been a hint of trade retaliation.
He pretends the US will be so angry that it too will retaliate. This has nothing to do with the US, which already has a substantial annual quota free of antidumping duties.
Shorn of credible arguments, Matthew urges Patel to take a political decision in favour of Brazil and Brazilian workers, and not one in the interests of the local industry, local jobs or local consumers. He should be ashamed.
Francois Baird
Founder, FairPlay movement
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your says to letters@businesslive.co.za. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Most Read
Related Articles
LETTER: What are you trying to say, governor?
LETTER: Tobacco bill out of sync with constitution
LETTER: Franchise groups are killing businesses
Published by Arena Holdings and distributed with the Financial Mail on the last Thursday of every month except December and January.