Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:31 pm

Just In

The World Trade Organization said Thursday that the European Union had failed to eliminate illegal subsidies to Airbus Group SE in a multibillion-dollar trade dispute with the U.S.

The 574-page verdict is the latest in the long-running trans-Atlantic battle over state aid that governments have granted Airbus, the world’s No. 2 plane maker, and its larger rival Boeing Co.

The WTO said the EU and some of its member states “failed to comply” with an earlier ruling to remove the subsidies or void their effect. Measures the EU took to comply with an earlier finding were deemed insufficient.



http://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-gave-bil ... 1474554683
Forum Moderator
 
Flaps
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 1:11 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:55 pm

Oh gee. Now there's a shock.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24771
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 5:02 pm

Guess it's not a great day for Airbus: Airbus Chief Warns Workforce That Cuts ‘Won’t Be Negligible’ ( ref: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... negligible ). My condolences to those impacted. Hopefully there will be a decent severance and you can find a similar or better job. The article says that Enders calls out the A380 and the helicopter product lines as being problem areas.

They also have a report on the WTO issue: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... llegal-aid

Fair use quote:

The European Union failed to eliminate subsidies to planemaker Airbus Group SE that were previously found to violate trade rules, the World Trade Organization said in a ruling that opens the door to billions of dollars in sanctions against Brussels.

The finding by a WTO compliance panel Thursday strikes a blow to the EU in a long-running dispute with the U.S. over government subsidies to the world’s two largest aircraft manufacturers, Airbus and Boeing Co. The U.S. had said it would seek $10 billion in sanctions if the EU didn’t remedy illegal financing, which the trade body found in a 2011 ruling had cost Boeing plane sales and market share.

The Geneva-based WTO can’t force nations or companies to drop payments that violate trade rules, but it can authorize retaliatory measures to pressure governments into complying with its rulings. The EU can still appeal the latest decision. If it loses, the U.S. can seek sanctions. Separate cases involving assistance for Boeing remain under consideration.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24771
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 5:50 pm

Now at http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... subsidies/ we have WTO slams EU for failing to remedy harm to Boeing from illegal Airbus subsidies

One part I found interesting:

In a surprise step, the WTO ruling, published Thursday, also ruled illegal nearly $5 billion in additional government subsidies that Airbus used to launch its latest jet, the A350 — even though those subsidies were granted after the original case was filed.

The WTO decided that the launch aid for the A350, which now poses a significant competitive threat to Boeing’s 787 and 777 programs, was virtually identical to the earlier subsidies and should be covered by the same ruling.


That's a double whammy. The A350 launch aid is now also ruled illegal, and by doing so the WTO shows the EU really hasn't come into compliance with the earlier ruling.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15265
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:23 pm

Relegation,

Does this ruling in any way suggest the launch of the 787 and 77X is legal ?

Just be careful with your statements, I would like to know exactly how much launch aid Boeing has paid back to the government of Japan over the years, and the interest rate paid.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
bob75013
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:42 pm

Well Zeke, who said "Does this ruling in any way suggest the launch of the 787 and 77X is legal ?"

The Forbes article does talk about that "When Airbus alleged that Boeing too was subsidized, WTO dismissed 80% of the charges and the U.S. moved immediately to comply with WTO findings concerning the remaining, relatively modest, aid the U.S. company received. ..

European governments have exhibited no reciprocal behavior. The latest jetliner offered by Airbus, the A350, has received nearly $5 billion in improper launch aid, even though its development occurred after the WTO ruled against use of such subsidies. So what originally looked like $17 billion in illegal subsidies since Airbus was established now looks like $22 billion — a hefty infusion of cash over several decades that has grossly distorted market forces to the detriment of U.S. manufacturers and workers."

added " at the end of the Forbes article quote.
 
bob75013
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:59 pm

More from the Forbes article: "The scale of illegality perpetrated by four European governments in subsidizing Airbus is indicated by a United States Trade Representative estimate that the U.S. may be entitled to as much as $10 billion in retaliatory duties ANNUALLY (my emphasis) to rectify the damage Airbus has done. Since Airbus has now exhausted its appeals in the WTO process, the next step is for Washington seek authority to levy those duties."
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24771
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:02 pm

zeke wrote:
Does this ruling in any way suggest the launch of the 787 and 77X is legal ?

Just be careful with your statements, I would like to know exactly how much launch aid Boeing has paid back to the government of Japan over the years, and the interest rate paid.


Re: "Does this ruling in any way suggest the launch of the 787 and 77X is legal ?" -- No, this ruling does not, perhaps you should read the Bloomberg link I provided?

The European Union failed to eliminate subsidies to planemaker Airbus Group SE that were previously found to violate trade rules, the World Trade Organization said in a ruling that opens the door to billions of dollars in sanctions against Brussels.


Re: "Just be careful with your statements" -- Why? Everything I've written here is factual, nothing I wrote is dubious, although the mere mention of the topic seems to upset you since it made you resort to childish name calling and made you issue a stern yet groundless caution.

Re: "I would like to know exactly how much launch aid Boeing has paid back to the government of Japan over the years, and the interest rate paid." -- Then you should open up a thread about that topic and ask for such information, or perhaps even consider doing your own research, IMHO. Yes, I understand the EU filed their own suit too, but that's not what this thread is about. Both suits have their merits and both will be resolved in due time.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:05 pm

Actually....


20. In summary, the Panel found that:

i.The United States failed to demonstrate that the French, German, Spanish and UK A80 and A350XWB LA/MSF measures constituted prohibited export subsidies within the meaning of Article 3.1(a) and footnote 4 of the SCM Agreement;

ii.The United States failed to demonstrate that the French, German, Spanish and UK A350XWB LA/MSF measures constituted prohibited import substitution subsidies within the meaning of Article 3.1(b) of the SCM Agreement; and

iii.The United States demonstrated that the European Union and certain member States failed to comply with the adopted DSB recommendations and rulings and, in particular, the obligation under Article 7.8 of the SCM Agreement “to take appropriate steps to remove the adverse effects or … withdraw the subsidy”, to the extent that the effects of the challenged LA/MSF subsidies and the non-LA/MSF subsidies continue to be, respectively, a “genuine and substantial” and “genuine”, cause of serious prejudice to the United States’ interests in the post-implementation period, within the meaning of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(a), (b) and (c) of the SCM Agreement.

21.The Panel therefore concluded that the European Union and certain member States failed to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB to bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under the SCM Agreement, and to this extent, that the adopted recommendations and rulings remained operative.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:06 pm

The detail isn't quite a damning as the idiotic mass-media "review" [aka you'd be safer asking a 5 year old].
 
User avatar
KrustyTheKlown
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:45 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:08 pm

bob75013 wrote:
...
The Forbes article does talk about that "When Airbus alleged that Boeing too was subsidized, WTO dismissed 80% of the charges and the U.S. moved immediately to comply with WTO findings concerning the remaining, relatively modest, aid the U.S. company received. ..
...


I wish a government could provide me with relatively modest aid amounting $ 8.7 Billion (and that's only WA state's aid to the 777X program).
 
bob75013
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:16 pm

KrustyTheKlown wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
...



I wish a government could provide me with relatively modest aid amounting $ 8.7 Billion (and that's only WA state's aid to the 777X program).


Well apparently, what WA state did for BA was legally acceptable, while what the EU did for AB was not
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24771
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:32 pm

bob75013 wrote:
Well apparently, what WA state did for BA was legally acceptable, while what the EU did for AB was not


The Seattle Times link given above contradicts that, but that's a separate topic than what we are discussing here.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
11725Flyer
Posts: 1397
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:34 pm

bob75013 wrote:

Well apparently, what WA state did for BA was legally acceptable, while what the EU did for AB was not


Not quite.

Meanwhile, a countersuit the EU brought against the U.S. — including the lion’s share of the tax breaks the state of Washington granted in 2003 to its aerospace industry — is moving in parallel.

In that case, the WTO ruled five years ago that a much lower level of Boeing subsidies were also illegal. However, the EU filed that suit more than a year after the U.S. filed its case against Airbus and the final outcome is still lagging.


http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... subsidies/
 
RandWkop
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 10:56 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:34 pm

There seems to be a case in aviation for government involvement. The cost of certification alone can run into billions.
It looks like European governments made a mistake by directly financing these projects in the form of loans at very generous terms. Part of the ruling refers to the interest rates charged on the launch aid.
Washington state, on the other hand, are simply giving Boeing $9 billion in tax breaks on the 77x project. This seems to be a more acceptable form of aid.
Also the US arguement that this aid has cost Boeing $22 billion in sales. Is this at the prices Boeing would have been able to charge if they were the only player in the market?
Also both cases could be seen to be spurious in that they are simply trying to get the upper hand in the duopoly for both entities. In reality there should be a case taken against both to prove that state aid in the form of loans or tax breaks is actually barring anyone other than the duopoly from becoming a competitor in this industry.
 
wingman
Posts: 4018
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:43 pm

I honestly don't expect any other outcome than the panel finding for the same general amount against Boeing. It's all very silly at this point.
 
User avatar
11725Flyer
Posts: 1397
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:02 pm

wingman wrote:
I honestly don't expect any other outcome than the panel finding for the same general amount against Boeing. It's all very silly at this point.


I disagree. The WTO may rule against Boeing, but it would be for a lower amount, and this is probably the most damning statement against the EU:

“It is apparent that the A350XWB could not have been launched and brought to market in the absence of launch aid,” the WTO report said.

In assessing the competitive harm done, the report said that as a result of the Airbus launch aid, Boeing lost 50 orders in the 787 and 777 large aircraft category, 54 orders in the 747 very-large category and 71 orders in the 737 narrowbody jet category."


http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... subsidies/

Airbus and the EU would be wise to try and bring down the temperature and settle it before the U.S. slaps some heavy retaliatory tariffs on a wide range of EU goods and services. (I realize that the EU will most likely appeal, and a decision could be a year away or so.) Based on the fragile health of the EU economy, it would be prudent to avoid a trade war in which the EU would be on the losing end.
 
User avatar
HALtheAI
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:30 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:46 pm

bob75013 wrote:
The Forbes article does talk about that "When Airbus alleged that Boeing too was subsidized, WTO dismissed 80% of the charges and the U.S. moved immediately to comply with WTO findings concerning the remaining, relatively modest, aid the U.S. company received. ..

European governments have exhibited no reciprocal behavior. The latest jetliner offered by Airbus, the A350, has received nearly $5 billion in improper launch aid, even though its development occurred after the WTO ruled against use of such subsidies. So what originally looked like $17 billion in illegal subsidies since Airbus was established now looks like $22 billion — a hefty infusion of cash over several decades that has grossly distorted market forces to the detriment of U.S. manufacturers and workers."

The Forbes article, like pretty much everything else on that site, is an opinion piece. In this case, it isn't from a remotely impartial source ("Boeing is a contributor to my think tank"), so I wouldn't rely too much on it.
 
billreid
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:57 pm

If I am DL, UA or AA I'm really worried. Expect the import duties on the Airbus Orders to increase airline costs by 100M per aircraft.
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
StTim
Posts: 3749
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:58 pm

There are many twists yet to come from this and the screaming headlines do not in any way seem to be backed up by the detail.

I agree it is all silly. I suspect if you make the 350 couldn't be built without the aid you could also make it for the 777x
 
racercoup
Posts: 408
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:48 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:38 pm

Let's see.... 10 billion a year is about 17 million per delivered aircraft. It might be tough to make money on some of those underpriced 100= unit orders Leahy's sales team sold.....
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 4:42 am

The US side in unison fails to acknowledge basic finance terms and principles.

The WTO never said, that the Airbus RLI would be illegal. In fact they confirmed "the legality of repayable loans made to Airbus". The reason is obvious (if you are not blinded): this money will be paid back. Only the too low interest rates (below market standard) were considered as illegal subsidies. This is a fine, yet very important difference:
- Launch aid = will be paid back = the large numbers = legal.
- Lower than usual interest rates for the launch aid = a much, much, smaller number = illegal.

So it seems now that Airbus just did not pay back the delta between the interest rates they initially got and some market typical interest rates. How much would that be? In times of generally low interest rates? You can safely assume that these numbers will be very low, probably some dozens of millions. Airbus says “only tiny tweaks will be required to make the A350 launch-aid terms compliant with WTO rules."

If you compare this (whole mess) to Boeings sins, you immediately see that the illegal part must be much larger for Boeing: first e.g. there is no interest rate at all in the first place because the subsidies Boeing gets are just a gift and do not need to be paid back at all. In the tax break case, as well as the Japanese sponsoring of the 787, the big numbers are already illegal.

For this reason Enders said: "Muilenburg should be careful throwing stones at us while he himself sits in a glass house. Boeing might later be hit by a rock when the next WTO ruling comes”

The two quotes are from the seattle times article....
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 5:13 am

billreid wrote:
If I am DL, UA or AA I'm really worried. Expect the import duties on the Airbus Orders to increase airline costs by 100M per aircraft.


LOL! NEVER going to happen.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27294
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 5:26 am

HALtheAI wrote:
The Forbes article, like pretty much everything else on that site, is an opinion piece. In this case, it isn't from a remotely impartial source ("Boeing is a contributor to my think tank"), so I wouldn't rely too much on it.


Exactly. The Forbes Contributor Network are just paid shills writing opinion pieces carefully crafted per the PR departments of their paymasters. It says what Boeing and their supporters want it to say and as such, I would give it little to no weight.
 
2175301
Posts: 1907
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 5:31 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
The US side in unison fails to acknowledge basic finance terms and principles.

The WTO never said, that the Airbus RLI would be illegal. In fact they confirmed "the legality of repayable loans made to Airbus". The reason is obvious (if you are not blinded): this money will be paid back. Only the too low interest rates (below market standard) were considered as illegal subsidies. This is a fine, yet very important difference:
- Launch aid = will be paid back = the large numbers = legal.
- Lower than usual interest rates for the launch aid = a much, much, smaller number = illegal.

So it seems now that Airbus just did not pay back the delta between the interest rates they initially got and some market typical interest rates. How much would that be? In times of generally low interest rates? You can safely assume that these numbers will be very low, probably some dozens of millions. Airbus says “only tiny tweaks will be required to make the A350 launch-aid terms compliant with WTO rules."

If you compare this (whole mess) to Boeings sins, you immediately see that the illegal part must be much larger for Boeing: first e.g. there is no interest rate at all in the first place because the subsidies Boeing gets are just a gift and do not need to be paid back at all. In the tax break case, as well as the Japanese sponsoring of the 787, the big numbers are already illegal.

For this reason Enders said: "Muilenburg should be careful throwing stones at us while he himself sits in a glass house. Boeing might later be hit by a rock when the next WTO ruling comes”

The two quotes are from the seattle times article....


I agree that the WTO did in the previous case say that properly structured launch aid would be legal. I also agree that Boeing is not out of the woods on this either.

But, I do believe that you have missed the main impact of the ruling; and why that will affect Airbus a lot more than Boeing. The WTO did not base its damages on the incremental cost of Airbus's launch aid being "legal." They based their damages on the existence of the planes that launch aid assisted had on Boeing's market share and future profits. It is my understanding that in this case it is primarily the launch aid for the A350 in question. So, what impact on Boeing did the development and existence of the A350 have considering where Boeing was when the A350 was being developed with said launch aid.

In Boeing's case I believe that a good portion of the individual state subsides (which is different than a national government subsidy) will be found to be legal; but, perhaps 1/3 to will not be based on a review I did on this case several years ago (Keep in mind that this kind of aid was considered legal if properly structured in the first case; just as the EU kind of launch aid was legal if properly structured). I also believe that this case is mainly about the 787 subsidies, and perhaps a bit for the 777-10 (but, my memory is a good portion of 787 work was started under the previous case; so the 787 damages may be prorated down). So, what impact does the 787 have on Airbuses market share given that they did not have the A350 when the later 787 work was being done. I think that is a much smaller impact. What impact potentially does the 777-10 have on Airbus's market share?

I suspect we will see in a few months. But, please note that the WTO did not assign damages for the piddly millions it would have taken for Airbus to be legal. They assigned damages based on the effect on market share of the existence of the planes so subsidized.

Have a great day,
 
billreid
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:08 pm

Scorpio wrote:
billreid wrote:
If I am DL, UA or AA I'm really worried. Expect the import duties on the Airbus Orders to increase airline costs by 100M per aircraft.


LOL! NEVER going to happen.


OK maybe not 100M but it leads to serious questions whether AB won sales at US carriers with illegal subsidies.
If the Government adds Duties that cost 20M per aircraft then the airlines need to think long and hard.
If Drumpf gets elected the airlines can expect a 50M subsidy direct to his personal bank account.
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15265
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:01 pm

As I suspected this turns out to be another oped piece. The tempo of these increased in the past in the lead up to decisions being made, it is expectation management.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
WIederling
Posts: 9408
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:30 pm

billreid wrote:
If the Government adds Duties that cost 20M per aircraft then the airlines need to think long and hard.
If Drumpf gets elected the airlines can expect a 50M subsidy direct to his personal bank account.


The "Chicken Tax" still protects the manufacturers of small trucks in the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4385
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:37 pm

11725Flyer wrote:
wingman wrote:
I honestly don't expect any other outcome than the panel finding for the same general amount against Boeing. It's all very silly at this point.


I disagree. The WTO may rule against Boeing, but it would be for a lower amount, and this is probably the most damning statement against the EU:

“It is apparent that the A350XWB could not have been launched and brought to market in the absence of launch aid,” the WTO report said.

LOL quite a ridiculous statement. What would a bunch of bureaucrats in Geneva know about designing, certifying and building commercial aircraft?


11725Flyer wrote:
In assessing the competitive harm done, the report said that as a result of the Airbus launch aid, Boeing lost 50 orders in the 787 and 777 large aircraft category, 54 orders in the 747 very-large category and 71 orders in the 737 narrowbody jet category."[/i]

:lol: I would love to know how they come up with those numbers. The notion that Boeing lost 737 orders because the A380 and A350 development was partially financed by repayable government loans is beyond ridiculous.

rheinwaldner wrote:
If you compare this (whole mess) to Boeings sins, you immediately see that the illegal part must be much larger for Boeing: first e.g. there is no interest rate at all in the first place because the subsidies Boeing gets are just a gift and do not need to be paid back at all. In the tax break case, as well as the Japanese sponsoring of the 787, the big numbers are already illegal.

Exactly. The tax breaks Boeing were given to keep 777X production in Washington is far more serious than the sins that Airbus has supposedly committed. Didn't the WTO previously rule that tax breaks were the equivalent of subsidies?

Good post btw

StTim wrote:
I agree it is all silly. I suspect if you make the 350 couldn't be built without the aid you could also make it for the 777x

Exactly. It's an incredibly stupid argument.
First to fly the 787-9
 
WIederling
Posts: 9408
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:52 pm

Might be useful to read the primary source ( i.e. WTO ) and not the fantastic interpretations authored by partisan interrests.
Summary:
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dis ... #bkmk316rw
in full:
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dis ... abrw_e.pdf

maybe the wsj got theirs from a parallel universe?
Murphy is an optimist
 
mrocktor
Posts: 1391
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:57 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:53 pm

RandWkop wrote:
There seems to be a case in aviation for government involvement. The cost of certification alone can run into billions.


"The fact government makes producing airplanes extremely expensive with its regulatory burden justifies government economic intervention in the aviation industry."
Last edited by mrocktor on Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2534
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:56 pm

It's Airbus' turn this year, Boeing's next year and then it all starts again. Same old, same old.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
WIederling
Posts: 9408
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:35 pm

garpd wrote:
It's Airbus' turn this year, Boeing's next year and then it all starts again. Same old, same old.


wise men say . . :-) Thank you.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:49 pm

billreid wrote:
Scorpio wrote:
billreid wrote:
If I am DL, UA or AA I'm really worried. Expect the import duties on the Airbus Orders to increase airline costs by 100M per aircraft.


LOL! NEVER going to happen.


OK maybe not 100M but it leads to serious questions whether AB won sales at US carriers with illegal subsidies.
If the Government adds Duties that cost 20M per aircraft then the airlines need to think long and hard.
If Drumpf gets elected the airlines can expect a 50M subsidy direct to his personal bank account.

The actual amount of extra import duties will be zero dollars. This is much ado about nothing, as already pointed out by several others.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:10 am

Do not expect Airbus to pay a penny.

No sanctions will be levied on Airbus and Boeing in WTO dispute

rheinwaldner wrote:
For this reason Enders said: "Muilenburg should be careful throwing stones at us while he himself sits in a glass house. Boeing might later be hit by a rock when the next WTO ruling comes”


The 777X tax break will be another fun debate to watch.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4884
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Fri Oct 14, 2016 2:00 pm

Europe appeals the WTO ruling.

They say WTO panel made several errors in its assessment of subsidies and the harm they could have inflicted on Boeing.
Also they believe this case must be viewed in context of other on-going WTO challenges.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-us ... SKCN12D1OQ
mercure f-wtcc
 
User avatar
Balerit
Posts: 624
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:14 am

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Sun Nov 27, 2016 6:51 pm

Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (retired).
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4407
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:34 pm

Just my periodic reminder. For markets to be truly free there needs to be lots of potential suppliers, and lots of buyers with elastic demand. A few markets actually operate that way, or at least substantially so. The entire airline industry does not, there are particular areas in which it does operate as a free market, but those areas may entail the frequent bankruptcies the industry constantly faces. Boeing, for all its strengths, seems to bounce between near disaster and arrogant complacency. I don't follow Airbus closely enough to say the same about them.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: WTO rules EU failed to Cut Off Illegal Subsidies to Airbus

Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:40 pm

From two months ago:

"Muilenburg should be careful throwing stones at us while he himself sits in a glass house. Boeing might later be hit by a rock when the next WTO ruling comes”


And today:

“Now it becomes clear why Boeing made such a noisy PR stunt on the occasion of the recent WTO ruling requiring some limited adaptations to the European funding schemes. It was all smoke and thunder to cover up for today’s ruling on prohibited US subsidies,” said Tom Enders, CEO of Airbus Group.


https://leehamnews.com/2016/11/28/airbu ... ax-breaks/
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos