The WTO has given the US the green light to place tariffs on Airbus products as a result of a 2006 complaint the US filed regarding launch aide for the A380 and A350.

https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-p ... irbus-win/

The decision means that U.S. President Donald Trump will almost certainly soon announce tariffs on European products ranging from cheeses to Airbus planes. One official said Trump had won the right to collect a total of between €5 billion and €8 billion. Another said the maximum sum was close to $10 billion.

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

Anyhow, this is a discussion more appropriate to the non-aviation section, this has nothing to do with aviation perse.

Dutchy wrote:

The decision means that U.S. President Donald Trump will almost certainly soon announce tariffs on European products ranging from cheeses to Airbus planes. One official said Trump had won the right to collect a total of between €5 billion and €8 billion. Another said the maximum sum was close to $10 billion.

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

The point of tariffs in this case specifically is to impose pain on European manufacturers and thus discourage EU governments from providing launch aid that the WTO has found illegal. To the extent that Americans keep buying EU products after tariffs are raised, yes, they'll pay more. If Americans substitute U.S. (and Australian/Chilean...) wine for French/Italian and Spanish wine, the point is made.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The decision means that U.S. President Donald Trump will almost certainly soon announce tariffs on European products ranging from cheeses to Airbus planes. One official said Trump had won the right to collect a total of between €5 billion and €8 billion. Another said the maximum sum was close to $10 billion.

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

The point of tariffs in this case specifically is to impose pain on European manufacturers and thus discourage EU governments from providing launch aid that the WTO has found illegal. To the extent that Americans keep buying EU products after tariffs are raised, yes, they'll pay more. If Americans substitute U.S. (and Australian/Chilean...) wine for French/Italian and Spanish wine, the point is made.

I know what the point is, but the system seems to quit off if cheese is going to get tariffed, instead of Airbus. Anyhow, like what was said in the other thread, Boeing/America will get slapped in six months, so let's call it a quits and leave it at that.

I think the interesting bit about the article is that it says the tariffs will be aimed particularly at airplane parts in order to disrupt Airbus' ability to assemble aircraft at their Mobile FAL. It is my opinion that if these tariffs go into effect and cannot be negotiated away, the EU would be wise to draw down their manufacturing capabilities in the US in general. If you manufacture elsewhere, at least you have the option to continue assembling and delivering elsewhere without the threat of tariffs and disruptions. Once you manufacture in the US for US customers, you are captive. Not a great position to be in long-term. And all this accomplishes is to claw back $10 billion (paid for by US consumers one way or another) and discourages foreign investment. Well done.

I see Airbus closing the Mobile line in retaliation if this happens, as well as the EU taxing Boeing products heavily if this happens in retaliation, which would hit airlines choosing to go Boeing hard. Could the EU impose taxes on Boeing aircraft in EU airspace operating for US carriers, even if overflying?

Dutchy wrote:

The decision means that U.S. President Donald Trump will almost certainly soon announce tariffs on European products ranging from cheeses to Airbus planes. One official said Trump had won the right to collect a total of between €5 billion and €8 billion. Another said the maximum sum was close to $10 billion.

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

Anyhow, this is a discussion more appropriate to the non-aviation section, this has nothing to do with aviation perse.

Airbus built in the US don’t get tarriffed.

FlyingElvii wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The decision means that U.S. President Donald Trump will almost certainly soon announce tariffs on European products ranging from cheeses to Airbus planes. One official said Trump had won the right to collect a total of between €5 billion and €8 billion. Another said the maximum sum was close to $10 billion.

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

Anyhow, this is a discussion more appropriate to the non-aviation section, this has nothing to do with aviation perse.

Airbus built in the US don’t get tarriffed.

If aircraft parts, manufactured in Europe and assembled in Mobile, fall under the tariffs, as has been said...

FlyingElvii wrote:

Airbus built in the US don’t get tarriffed.

Talk is about tariffs on _parts_ shipped to the US for assembly ( Mobile is an FAL not a full depth factory.)

MalevTU134 wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Don't they still not understand in the White House that imposing tariffs, will make products domestically more expensive,

Anyhow, this is a discussion more appropriate to the non-aviation section, this has nothing to do with aviation perse.

Airbus built in the US don’t get tarriffed.

If aircraft parts, manufactured in Europe and assembled in Mobile, fall under the tariffs, as has been said...

That would hurt Boeing as well, major sections of the 787 come from all over Europe and other countries

rufusmi wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Airbus built in the US don’t get tarriffed.

If aircraft parts, manufactured in Europe and assembled in Mobile, fall under the tariffs, as has been said...

That would hurt Boeing as well, major sections of the 787 come from all over Europe and other countries

Absolutely. Nobody claimed that this is clever...

What happened to the other thread, it was very civil compared to the fights during the court cases. This one is probably ok since it names Trump in the title.

$10 billion spread out is a drop in the bucket and isn't going to hurt anybody much. The EU has slapped $9 billion in fines on Google alone since 2017 and nobody blinked, $10 billion is not going to destroy any industry.

First of all as people said this is gonna hurt Boeing too, and the EU is probably gonna retaliate with their own tarrifs. Then you also have the fact that Boeing has most certainly also gotten similar funding, as has every manufacturer ever. Then again they did have that whole conflict with BBD that made no sense at all so I'm not too shocked they'd play victim again. Pretty sure Airbus also has a similar suit filed against Boeing so I'm against everyone here just to be clear. Point is that when everyone does these things just slapping one side with tariffs isn't gonna help and will unnecessarily make everything worse.

Wouldn't a better ruling be to prohibit both Airbus and Boeing from receiving any sort of government subsidies or loans?

Why not do away with the WTO and just let countries negotiate their own trade treaties?

No way anyone can seriously say Boeing doesn't benefit from military contracts from the US government.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Wouldn't a better ruling be to prohibit both Airbus and Boeing from receiving any sort of government subsidies or loans?

It would need to be wider ranging than that. Govt, State, city etc. One argument I have heard is that the State tax reductions Boeing get are not government subsidies but state one and hence excluded.

DDR wrote:

Why not do away with the WTO and just let countries negotiate their own trade treaties?

I think that's a very naive vision. Why not do away with air traffic control and just let pilots sort out situations themselves? Why not do away with industrial relations and just let individuals "negotiate" their own employment contracts? Etc.

DDR wrote:

Why not do away with the WTO and just let countries negotiate their own trade treaties?

No way anyone can seriously say Boeing doesn't benefit from military contracts from the US government.

The main reason why countries sign up for WTO in the first place is for standardized methods for international trade regulations and ruling.

Standardisation makes for cheaper and more efficient trade.

If each countries do this, and the other pair do that, then they won't need WTO.

ewt340 wrote:

Hmmm, because it's a private company that suing another private company on the other side of the world regarding competition on International levels?

Nothing private about WTO cases.
WTO accepts state vs state complaints. nothing else.
( Well the US government is a front to corporate interests, but .. )

Trump wants to erase Marshall Plan era protectthe US allowed for Europe to get back on its feet. That time has long passed.

The theory is that a post Brexit UK would become an assembly point for EU products to be shipped to the US due to a nice trade agreement.

Pretty much every country imposes tariffs. The US is amongst the lowest, even now. Facts, not BS...

U.S. tariffs are among the lowest in the world – and in the nation’s history
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... s-history/

Please stick to discussing the topic and try to leave blatantly political comments out. Political commentary that isn't directly related to the topic and/or purposeful political flamebait may be removed, so please try to keep the discussion civil.

✈️ atcsundevil

StTim wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Wouldn't a better ruling be to prohibit both Airbus and Boeing from receiving any sort of government subsidies or loans?

It would need to be wider ranging than that. Govt, State, city etc. One argument I have heard is that the State tax reductions Boeing get are not government subsidies but state one and hence excluded.

So to level the playing field every government meaning country should have the same type of government rules with the same taxation systems, level of taxes etc etc etc. an off shoot of globalization....

Never work will it. All governments (at many levels) find ways to support sectors they believe important. Hard to stop.

AirFiero wrote:

Pretty much every country imposes tariffs. The US is amongst the lowest, even now. Facts, not BS...

U.S. tariffs are among the lowest in the world – and in the nation’s history
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... s-history/

The US has been promoting free trade, with the goal the disappearance of tariffs, since WW2, so there is no surprise there ! Somehow the US has been the richest country on the planet throughout that period, it seems to me it was working pretty well.

DDR wrote:

Why not do away with the WTO and just let countries negotiate their own trade treaties?

No way anyone can seriously say Boeing doesn't benefit from military contracts from the US government.

There was an agreement in place between the US and EU, see this link for a summary http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... idies.html
which the US saw as fine as long as the EU were seen as being uncompetitive.

The main difference between the US and EU was on the EU side money was repaid to the government (and a royalty payment continues to the government after they original loan money is fully paid back), whereas in the US the money never has been repaid.

EADS/Airbus grew under the agreement to gain around 50% market share, Lockheed, McDonald Douglas, Convair ceased making civil airliners. The US unilaterally pulled out of the agreement and took the EU to the WTO.

The actions EADS/Airbus were using were permitted under the EU/US agreement, the agreement also allowed for NASA and the US DoD to fund civil airliners R&D, which is indirect state aide. Since the US pulled out of the agreement and took the EU to the WTO, the EU in turn took the US to the WTO.

The WTO is due to hand down that decision soon which will permit the EU to place tariffs on US goods.

No one wins, just the lawyers back balance.

I'm re-posting my question from the original thread:

Has the WTO authorised US tariffs against the EU in general, or is it specifically against Airbus products?

MalevTU134 wrote:

rufusmi wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

If aircraft parts, manufactured in Europe and assembled in Mobile, fall under the tariffs, as has been said...

That would hurt Boeing as well, major sections of the 787 come from all over Europe and other countries

Absolutely. Nobody claimed that this is clever...

Absolutely nothing to see. Boeing does not have an assembly line in Europe

rigo wrote:

I'm re-posting my question from the original thread:

Has the WTO authorised US tariffs against the EU in general, or is it specifically against Airbus products?

Punitive tariffs are against the EU in general, so the US can pick any products they choose to impose tariffs. As the US is imposing tariffs on the EU products even without WTO authorization based on for example national security grounds, it doesn't make much difference whether the tariffs are authorized by the WTO or not.

If I understand well WTO is not one sided nor is it "biased toward the US", so it seems their green light for the US tariff has been examined very seriously.

One comment says that they might also allow European Union to put tariff on US product for similar UE against US case. Again, WTO is probably not "biased toward EU", so if it happens then the decision would have been examined seriously.

Is there any reason why we, in this forum, have a dispute on WTO decision?
I do not think anyone of us has any credible information supporting our opinion on this subject.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

Trump wants to erase Marshall Plan era protectthe US allowed for Europe to get back on its feet. That time has long passed.

There was never any protection arrangement in regards to Europe.
Marshall Plan credits ( waived for the UK but not for Germany ) came with rather strong leveraging
conditions for the US : what to buy, what ships to use, what to deliver on the cheap.
( nice Phoenix documentary around.)

The Marshall Plan up front where it counts was a "help programme" for the US home industries that had to transition
away from a war footing without a contraction. After a listless interwar period WWII had moved US commerce
to a nice high. Intention was to maintain this. Only possible if there were consumers abroad where industry output
could be sunk ( previously the stuff was just destroyed in the war effort.) without saturating local markets.

rigo wrote:

I'm re-posting my question from the original thread:

Has the WTO authorized US tariffs against the EU in general, or is it specifically against Airbus products?

If the WTO authorizes anything it is a general allowance to mend damage.

Sometimes this leads to "interesting" arrangements:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trad ... 7420071221

Checklist787 wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

rufusmi wrote:

That would hurt Boeing as well, major sections of the 787 come from all over Europe and other countries

Absolutely. Nobody claimed that this is clever...

Absolutely nothing to see. Boeing does not have an assembly line in Europe

This is not about an assembly line in Europe.

The US would have to create special conditions to differentiate between fuselage segments from
Alenia for the 787 and those from XFW destined for Mobile for the A320 to impose import tariffs without hurting
Boeing too.

WIederling wrote:

rigo wrote:

I'm re-posting my question from the original thread:

Has the WTO authorized US tariffs against the EU in general, or is it specifically against Airbus products?

If the WTO authorizes anything it is a general allowance to mend damage.

Sometimes this leads to "interesting" arrangements:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trad ... 7420071221

Disclaimer: I don't want to get into a discussion about the merits of the case, or of the WTO, or who is right or wrong. I'm simply trying to understand the logic behind it. If the WTO has ruled that Airbus' funding facilities have caused damage to Boeing, wouldn't an appropriate way to mend the alleged damage be to sanction Airbus, not the European car makers or farmers who have nothing to do with the matter and who, by the way, don't affect Boeing in any way?

DDR wrote:

No way anyone can seriously say Boeing doesn't benefit from military contracts from the US government.

Those that do believe that could do themselves a favour by doing a bit of research on the X-32's wing.

Common sense would dictate that it is impossible to fully segregate military from civil aviation technology, and any appearance of doing so beyond classified technology is just smoke and mirrors. Any county spending on military aviation technology is also spending on civil, and vice versa. This entire thing is nothing more than big corporations using their political pull to disadvantage their competitors using whatever tools they can think of. Doesn't matter whether you agree with the politics of either side, they are all doing the same thing. This single ruling is just one playing card in a much bigger poker hand and to think otherwise is naïve. The U.S. tossed a few cards and had some good luck with the new ones, now in a few weeks we'll see how the E.U. does with their new cards. Regardless, aviation manufacturing is but a single card in a game with many different cards in play.

The reality is that aircraft manufacturing barely rates a secondary topic in relation to the real discussion on this subject and is unworthy of space on this forum. This whole thread should be deleted and the discussion left for a political or economics forum.

Aesma wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Pretty much every country imposes tariffs. The US is amongst the lowest, even now. Facts, not BS...

U.S. tariffs are among the lowest in the world – and in the nation’s history
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... s-history/

The US has been promoting free trade, with the goal the disappearance of tariffs, since WW2, so there is no surprise there ! Somehow the US has been the richest country on the planet throughout that period, it seems to me it was working pretty well.

Last I checked, the US was hundreds of billions (trillions?) in debt. Rich?

China is rich.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I see Airbus closing the Mobile line in retaliation if this happens, as well as the EU taxing Boeing products heavily if this happens in retaliation, which would hit airlines choosing to go Boeing hard. Could the EU impose taxes on Boeing aircraft in EU airspace operating for US carriers, even if overflying?

I see the EASA dragging their feet on 737 MAX re-certification. Trade wars are ugly all around.

Elementalism wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I see Airbus closing the Mobile line in retaliation if this happens, as well as the EU taxing Boeing products heavily if this happens in retaliation, which would hit airlines choosing to go Boeing hard. Could the EU impose taxes on Boeing aircraft in EU airspace operating for US carriers, even if overflying?

I see the EASA dragging their feet on 737 MAX re-certification. Trade wars are ugly all around.

No, I do not think so. Do not mix everything up...

Boeing are in the mud up to their knees. It's always good to have an enemy, when the problems are self inflicted.
Unfair sounds much better than incapable. In any war, the truth is the first victim..

The U.S. can lose at the WTO, too, but it won this one. That fact seems lost on a few posters here. See the link below for the 2002 WTO ruling on export tax credits.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

Remember that this is just about the case the US started against Europe, where the WTO now rules this can happen. It doesn't mean the WTO has 'picked sides' in the subsidies row between Boeing / US and Airbus / EU. There's another case working its way through the WTO that the EU started against the US over illegal Boeing subsidies. The WTO has already ruled in favor of the EU on that case in the past, so it's perfectly possible that they will eventually give the green light to the EU to place tariffs on Boeing planes too.

Interesting how the US and the EU have an expansive open skies agreement yet cannot come to any formal agreement on subsidies and tariffs when it comes to airframe and engine manufacturers. We will continue seeing issues such as these until one exists.

As an american I'm getting tired of "death by a thousand cuts".. his obsession with trade deficits leading to these stupid trade wars is infuriating! I realize this is not the same but its part of the same thought process.

I wonder if this affects "Orion/Artemis" in anyway?

nycbjr wrote:

As an american I'm getting tired of "death by a thousand cuts".. his obsession with trade deficits leading to these stupid trade wars is infuriating! I realize this is not the same but its part of the same thought process.

I wonder if this affects "Orion/Artemis" in anyway?

Stupid trade wars? Lol.

That has nothing to do with America, only with illegal practices by Airbus and the fair chance for Trump to compensate the competitive disadvantage Boeing has to endure.

I am a European and an Airbus fan, but I have to admit that if WTO finds wrongdoing they probably have done their due diligence.

To me the question is, will the US react or will the Trump administration use it as an bargaining chip in trade negotiations?

I really hope that this does not spiral into a situation where Boeing AND Airbus can't sell to each others home markets.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I see Airbus closing the Mobile line in retaliation if this happens, as well as the EU taxing Boeing products heavily if this happens in retaliation, which would hit airlines choosing to go Boeing hard. Could the EU impose taxes on Boeing aircraft in EU airspace operating for US carriers, even if overflying?

You do get the fact that the Mobilo Plant is seen as key for Airbus to achieve enough capacity towards delivering the A220s which they sold (and plan to sell), didn't you? If Airbus close this plant in retaliation, as you say, where are those will be built? What will happen to the DL and JetBlue Order? They will probably find solutions around it without closing this factory and shooting themselves in the foot.

Also, the idea that an Aicraft flying over an airspace could be taxed is effectivelly crazy. No!!! No EU country will ever do that since it is not feasible at all. What the EU can do (and might probably do so) is to heavy tax the SALE of aircrafts and components that are provenient from the US.

Basefly wrote:

I really hope that this does not spiral into a situation where Boeing AND Airbus can't sell to each others home markets.

It won't, that is in nobodies interest.

Scorpio wrote:

Remember that this is just about the case the US started against Europe, where the WTO now rules this can happen. It doesn't mean the WTO has 'picked sides' in the subsidies row between Boeing / US and Airbus / EU. There's another case working its way through the WTO that the EU started against the US over illegal Boeing subsidies. The WTO has already ruled in favor of the EU on that case in the past, so it's perfectly possible that they will eventually give the green light to the EU to place tariffs on Boeing planes too.

.....exactly, and then both sides will sit down and agree not to apply tariffs to each other. Happens all the time in other industries where companies launch IP cases against each other, only to eventually settle once they are at stalemate.

Only real winners are the Lawyers