Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: World Trade Organization (WTO)

foreign investment, world, 16467_11.12_000007395743XSmall

Oddly, some US farm subsidies go to Brazil.

Imagine a safety net when you think of a subsidy. If prices are too low, then growers get money from the federal government. During the 1930s Great Depression, the goal of subsidies was to sustain a farmer’s purchasing power when he had a bad year.

Fast forward to 2013. Because the US is the world’s leading cotton exporter, our farmers depend on the world price. if that price is too low, they get a subsidy.

This is where Brazil enters the picture. Because US subsidies lower production costs, they depress world cotton prices for Brazilian farmers. Complaining to the WTO, a World Trade Organization composed of 151 countries that include the US and Brazil, Brazil said US cotton subsidies violated WTO rules. A WTO panel agreed.

However, Brazil still had a problem. Because WTO decisions are not enforceable and the US Congress was not about to eliminate subsidies voluntarily, the panel’s decision was virtually meaningless. Then though, Brazil threatened retaliatory measures that would include ignoring US pharmaceutical patents and music copyrights. It worked. Faced with WTO condemnation, angry Brazilians, US firms fearing retaliation, and subsidized US farmers, the US government devised a unique solution. As of 2010, through the Brazilian Cotton Institute, we would pay Brazilian farmers $147.3 million every year–$12.275 million monthly–until an acceptable farm bill is passed.

The farm bill is still being debated.

Our bottom line? Subsidies, like tariffs and quotas, are barriers that diminish the efficiencies of free international trade. As barriers, they obstruct David Ricardo’s comparative advantage and the ability of nations to produce goods and services for which they have the lower opportunity cost..

Sources and Resources: NPR’s Planet Money explains the US/Brazil cotton dispute in one wonderful 30 minute podcast. But then, for more of the specifics, I recommend this 2011 report from the Congressional Research Service. To complete the picture, this Slate column provides all you want to know about the Farm Bill that the US Congress is considering. (Econlife looked at the bill’s impact on the dairy industry here.)

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

US Chicken Paw Exports to China

Yesterday’s headlines about the US taking China to the World Trade Organization (WTO) for unfair auto and auto parts subsidies took me to chicken feet and The Economist’s Sinodependency Index. Knowing the major firms that depend on China for revenue might help us further assess our relationship.

Approximately 20 years ago, chicken paws, used primarily for animal feed, were worthless. Now though, with Perdue producing more than a billion chicken feet a year, paw exports annually return $40 million in revenue. The reason is China.

A delicacy in China, chicken feet are a perfect U.S. export. US chickens are fat and juicy because we grow big chickens. In addition, their “natural scarcity” (only 2 per chicken) bestows some prestige on diners who order them.

Similarly, Intel, Apple, IBM and GE generate considerable revenue from China. Called a Sinodependency Index, The Economist displayed the relative revenue dependence on China of 135 firms in the S&P 500. Their goal was to show the extent to which China has woven its presence within the fabric of world trade.

Although some of their statistics were rough because of each firm’s revenue breakdown, The Economist believed that their Index conveyed the information effectively. In a copy of their chart below (interactive with percents if you visit their site here), you can see their color coding for industry and size coding for how a firm’s revenue compared to the other 134 in the index. The top 10 in their list, in size order, are: Intel, Apple, IBM, GE, Caterpillar, Procter & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson, Yum Brands, Philip Morris, Boeing.

As economists, we could not conclude without mentioning comparative advantage. First explained by 19th century economist David Ricardo, comparative advantage says that worldwide productivity increases when nations specialize and export the good or service for which they sacrifice the least to make. But, what to do when a nation employs unfair trade practices like subsidizing their exports to make them cheaper and adding duties to imports to make them more expensive?

My Sources and Resources: A wonderful podcast and post from Freakonomics was the source of my chicken feet facts while you can look directly at The Economist’s Sinodependency chart, their article and a link to the math behind the Index here. For more on the current trade dispute in the World Trade Organization (WTO), here is one article from Bloomberg. And here, this EconLife post presents more on a past trade dispute with China that involved chicken paws and is the source of 2 sentences in this entry.

Trade Dependency on China From the Economist

135 Firms From S&P 500: Revenue From China from the Economist

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment