The European Union blocked a U.S. complaint to the World Trade Organization that says Airbus received new government subsidies, complicating 18- month-old countersuits over the legality of aircraft financing.
The United States filed a request for an additional WTO legal ruling on Feb. 1, saying that since its original complaint in October 2004, Airbus has benefited from an additional 5.2 million-pound, or $9.3 million, subsidy from the Welsh government. The EU rejected the U.S. call for the new aid to be added to the original case.
Under WTO rules, the EU can't reject a second request by the United States, which may come next month. The next scheduled meeting at which the matter may arise is May 17.
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3674 times:
Yet another thrilling chapter in this compelling saga of barnyard justice. As I've said before, both of the OEMs sit in front of the governmental trough as much as possible in numerous ways, and neither comes to the "subsidies" debate with "clean hands." IMO, any attempt to sort out or adjudicate which OEM has cleaner hands with regard to governmental aid/subsidies is truly a fool's errand; the ultimate case of chasing one's own tail. In short, a real circle jerk.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
I have a solution: void the current agreement, be done with it, draft a NEW agreement that prevents any subsidies to both Airbus and Boeing to exist any further. Airbus and Boeing then would be 100% on their own without any gov't funding....PERIOD!
Any subsidy should be declared 100% illegal no matter where it comes from and who funds it. A & B both do not need subsidies for any reason.
Flame away, I could care less!
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
A350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1143 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 3342 times:
We must not forget that at the end of the day, both A and B live very well with the subsisies and they allow them to keep third players out of the game. I'm convinced that once the subsidies come to an end on both sides of the pond, we will see Bombardier and Embraer offering planes directly competeing with A and B types.
@Leelaw: thanks for your great post! I totally agree with you.
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 36
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 3301 times:
Quoting A350 (Reply 4): We must not forget that at the end of the day, both A and B live very well with the subsisies and they allow them to keep third players out of the game. I'm convinced that once the subsidies come to an end on both sides of the pond, we will see Bombardier and Embraer offering planes directly competeing with A and B types.
Why? These companies have needed subsidies to compete in the market as well. They have been involved in WTO conflicts over those subsidies in the small jet market.
I think if Boeing is successful with composite fuselages, these other companies from low labor cost countries will see an advantage disappear. Composite fuselage manufacturing will be more capital intensive than labor intensive.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!