Breaking News
Get 40% Off 0
Is NVDA a 🟢 buy or 🔴 sell? Unlock Now

Canada to challenge extension of US softwood lumber duties

Published Aug 22, 2023 08:56AM ET Updated Aug 22, 2023 04:31PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Finished lumber is seen at West Fraser Pacific Inland Resources sawmill in Smithers, British Columbia, Canada February 4, 2020. REUTERS/Jesse Winter/File Photo
 
Lumber
-0.44%
Add to/Remove from Watchlist
Add to Watchlist
Add Position

Position added successfully to:

Please name your holdings portfolio
 

OTTAWA (Reuters) -Canada will challenge what Ottawa described as an "unfair, unjust and illegal" extension of U.S. import duties on Canadian softwood lumber products, the trade ministry said on Tuesday.

The softwood lumber tariffs are the legacy of a decades-long trade dispute over the structure of Canada's timber sector that could not be resolved when a quota agreement expired in 2015. U.S. producers say Canada unfairly subsidizes its lumber sector.

The U.S. Commerce Department in July set a duty rate of 7.99% on the product.

Canada on Monday filed notices of intent to commence judicial review of those duties, the trade ministry said in a statement, adding that Ottawa remained willing to discuss a negotiated outcome with Washington. The ministry has routinely filed challenges under the rules of U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade.

"For years, the United States has imposed unfair, unjust and illegal duties on Canadian softwood lumber, hurting Canadian industry and increasing housing costs in both countries," Trade Minister Mary Ng said in the statement.

The United States has based its tariffs on a finding that Canadian timber harvested from federal and provincial lands with low government-set stumpage fees constitutes an unfair subsidy, while most U.S. timber is harvested from private land at market rates.

The U.S. Trade Representative's office said it was trying to ensure a level playing field.

"We are prepared to discuss another softwood lumber agreement when Canada is ready to address the underlying issues related to subsidization and fair competition so that Canadian lumber imports do not injure the U.S. industry," a USTR spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

The U.S. Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Canada to challenge extension of US softwood lumber duties
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.
  • Any comment you publish, together with your investing.com profile, will be public on investing.com and may be indexed and available through third party search engines, such as Google.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email