presentation by: edward t. hayes, esq. leake & andersson llp imports of certain frozen warmwater...

Presentation by:Edward T. Hayes, Esq.

Leake & Andersson LLP

Imports of Certain Frozen Imports of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp:Warmwater Shrimp:

An Update on Current Issues An Update on Current Issues for the Industryfor the Industry

January 6, 2010

2

OverviewOverview

►Background on antidumping orders on Background on antidumping orders on shrimp from six countriesshrimp from six countries

►Evasion and circumvention of the ordersEvasion and circumvention of the orders

►Shrimp CDSOA (“Byrd”) distributionsShrimp CDSOA (“Byrd”) distributions

►Facts and Myths about Thailand orderFacts and Myths about Thailand order

►Shrimp sunset reviewShrimp sunset review

►ASPA’s commitment to the industryASPA’s commitment to the industry

3

I. BackgroundI. Background

► In 2005, antidumping orders were imposed on In 2005, antidumping orders were imposed on imports of frozen shrimp from six countries: imports of frozen shrimp from six countries: Brazil, China, Ecuador, India, Thailand and Brazil, China, Ecuador, India, Thailand and VietnamVietnam

► From 2003 (the year before duties were From 2003 (the year before duties were provisionally imposed), to 2008, combined provisionally imposed), to 2008, combined imports from all subject countries fell by 13%imports from all subject countries fell by 13%

► Though imports from Thailand have remained Though imports from Thailand have remained significant, they would likely have risen much significant, they would likely have risen much more without the orders in place more without the orders in place

4


050

100150200250300350400450

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 200910 mos

Million

s of

kilog

ram

s

Thailand China Vietnam India Brazil Ecuador

► Since preliminary duties were imposed in August of 2004, Since preliminary duties were imposed in August of 2004, overall volume of subject imports has remained at or below the overall volume of subject imports has remained at or below the 2003 peak in almost every year (2006 anomaly largely 2003 peak in almost every year (2006 anomaly largely attributed to hurricanes)attributed to hurricanes)

► Antidumping Orders have successfully maintained import levels Antidumping Orders have successfully maintained import levels (2008 saw the lowest import levels since 2004)(2008 saw the lowest import levels since 2004)

5


0

50

100

150

200

250

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 200910 mos

Mill

ions

of k

ilogr

ams

Nonsubject Countries

► Meanwhile, imports of frozen shrimp from Meanwhile, imports of frozen shrimp from countries not subject to the orders have countries not subject to the orders have increased dramaticallyincreased dramatically

6

I. BackgroundI. Background2003 Share of Volume2003 Share of Volume

Bang.2%

Indo.4%

Malay.0%

Brazil5%

China16%

Ecuador7%

India9%

Thailand26%

Vietnam12%

All Other19%

7

I. BackgroundI. Background2008 Share of Volume2008 Share of Volume

Bang.3%

Indo.16%

China5%

Ecuador11%

India3%

Thailand32%

Vietnam9% All Other

15%

Malay.6%

Brazil0%

8

I. BackgroundI. Background► Under the orders, the average unit values of Under the orders, the average unit values of

subject imports ($/kg) subject imports ($/kg) have increased modestly, have increased modestly, or declined slightlyor declined slightly

$2.00

$4.00

$6.00

$8.00

$10.00

$12.00

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009 1

0m

os.

Thailand China Vietnam India Brazil Ecuador

9

II. Evasion and CircumventionII. Evasion and Circumvention

► Importers and foreign producers routinely Importers and foreign producers routinely evade or circumvent orders. evade or circumvent orders.

► Challenges that often occur once an order is Challenges that often occur once an order is in place include:in place include: Transshipment Transshipment

Failure to Collect Duties Owed (China)Failure to Collect Duties Owed (China)

Shift to Exports of products not covered by the Shift to Exports of products not covered by the order.order.

10


► TransshipmentTransshipment is the shipping of subject product is the shipping of subject product from a country subject to the order to the U.S. from a country subject to the order to the U.S. through a third country to avoid paying antidumping through a third country to avoid paying antidumping dutiesduties

► Most of the increase in U.S. shrimp imports from Most of the increase in U.S. shrimp imports from nonsubject countries has been from Bangladesh, nonsubject countries has been from Bangladesh, Indonesia, and MalaysiaIndonesia, and Malaysia

► These same three countries were also receiving These same three countries were also receiving growing exports from their neighbors in subject growing exports from their neighbors in subject countries: China, India, and Thailand countries: China, India, and Thailand

► Customs has been able to identify and address some Customs has been able to identify and address some transshipment. In 2008, it recovered $2.5 million in transshipment. In 2008, it recovered $2.5 million in duties due on shrimp from China transshipped duties due on shrimp from China transshipped through Indonesia.through Indonesia.

11


20062006 20072007 20082008 20092009

BrazilBrazil $362,182.87 $362,182.87 $ 81,253.13$ 81,253.13 $553,412.84 $553,412.84 00

ChinaChina $241,099.08$241,099.08 $14,381,694.1$14,381,694.19 9

$38,400,687.2$38,400,687.233

00

EcuadorEcuador $471,733.46$471,733.46 $2,717.12 $2,717.12 $104,258.53$104,258.53 00

IndiaIndia $6,342,653.8$6,342,653.877

00 $3,023,064.29$3,023,064.29 $418,425.6$418,425.60 0

ThailandThailand $2,682,242.9$2,682,242.944

$22,238.22$22,238.22 $326,940.60$326,940.60 00

VietnamVietnam $1,038,391.2$1,038,391.233

$342,900.95$342,900.95 $68,234.14$68,234.14 00

► The issue of uncollected dutiesThe issue of uncollected duties is not a serious is not a serious problem in the shrimp orders with the problem in the shrimp orders with the exception of China. Congress can strengthen exception of China. Congress can strengthen the new shipper review law to help Customs the new shipper review law to help Customs collect monies owed. collect monies owed.

12

II. Evasion and CircumventionII. Evasion and Circumvention► Some subject countries, particularly China, Some subject countries, particularly China,

shifted to shipments of nonsubject products, shifted to shipments of nonsubject products, such as breaded shrimp, after the orders went such as breaded shrimp, after the orders went into effect. into effect.

0

50

100

150

200

250

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Million

s of

kilog

ram

s

Imports of Breaded Shrimp from Subject Countries

13

III. CDSOAIII. CDSOA

► Dumping has continued under each of the Dumping has continued under each of the orders and the duties collected have been orders and the duties collected have been important to the continued operation of many important to the continued operation of many producers. producers.

► The Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset The Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (“CDSOA”) requires duties collected on all Act (“CDSOA”) requires duties collected on all entries prior to Oct. 1, 2007 to be distributed entries prior to Oct. 1, 2007 to be distributed to the domestic industryto the domestic industry

► CDSOA was enacted effective 2001—2 years CDSOA was enacted effective 2001—2 years before the shrimp investigations beganbefore the shrimp investigations began

14


► Nearly $172 million has been distributed to Nearly $172 million has been distributed to the domestic shrimp industry under CDSOA the domestic shrimp industry under CDSOA since 2006since 2006

► Another $14 million in duties has been Another $14 million in duties has been collected but withheld from distribution for collected but withheld from distribution for the time being due to pending litigation the time being due to pending litigation regarding CDSOA and other disputes with regarding CDSOA and other disputes with CustomsCustoms

15


► As of Oct. 1, 2009, the total remaining in As of Oct. 1, 2009, the total remaining in shrimp clearing accounts and potentially shrimp clearing accounts and potentially available for future CDSOA distributions to available for future CDSOA distributions to the industry was $188 millionthe industry was $188 million

► Once administrative reviews and litigation Once administrative reviews and litigation over entries subject to CDSOA conclude, over entries subject to CDSOA conclude, final duties will be assessed and distributed final duties will be assessed and distributed to the industryto the industry

16


► CDSOA distributions are made to those CDSOA distributions are made to those domestic producers of the like product that domestic producers of the like product that supported the initial petition and that have supported the initial petition and that have “qualifying expenditures” as defined by law“qualifying expenditures” as defined by law

► The intent of the law is to compensate The intent of the law is to compensate producers in accordance with their producers in accordance with their qualifying expenditures, not simply because qualifying expenditures, not simply because they are part of the industry or supported they are part of the industry or supported the petition the petition

17

III. CDSOAIII. CDSOA► Some domestic producers that did not support the Some domestic producers that did not support the

original petitions have sued, claiming the CDSOA original petitions have sued, claiming the CDSOA support requirement is unconstitutionalsupport requirement is unconstitutional These suits have been stayed pending the outcome of a lead These suits have been stayed pending the outcome of a lead

CDSOA constitutional caseCDSOA constitutional case

In the lead CDSOA case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the In the lead CDSOA case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently rejected these constitutional claims, Federal Circuit recently rejected these constitutional claims, upholding the law’s support requirement upholding the law’s support requirement See SKF-USA v. US, See SKF-USA v. US, 2008-1005 2008-1005

While a petition for certiorari may be filed with the Supreme While a petition for certiorari may be filed with the Supreme Court, the court has the discretion to accept or reject any such Court, the court has the discretion to accept or reject any such petition.petition.

Any suggestion that US affiliates of Chinese companies like Any suggestion that US affiliates of Chinese companies like Singleton or Tampa are receiving Byrd funds is completely falseSingleton or Tampa are receiving Byrd funds is completely false

Any suggestion that ASPA is somehow responsible for these Any suggestion that ASPA is somehow responsible for these companies making claims is completely falsecompanies making claims is completely false

ASPA’s DC counsel are the attorneys that succesfully defeated ASPA’s DC counsel are the attorneys that succesfully defeated this claim in Courtthis claim in Court

18

III. CDSOAIII. CDSOA► (c) (c) Qualifying expenditures.Qualifying expenditures. Qualifying expenditures which may be Qualifying expenditures which may be

offset by a distribution of assessed antidumping duties must fall offset by a distribution of assessed antidumping duties must fall within the categories described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(10) within the categories described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(10) of this section. of this section.

(1) Manufacturing facilities;(1) Manufacturing facilities; (2) Equipment;(2) Equipment; (3) Research and development;(3) Research and development; (4) Personnel training;(4) Personnel training; (5) Acquisition of technology;(5) Acquisition of technology; (6) Health care benefits for employees paid for by the employer;(6) Health care benefits for employees paid for by the employer; (7) Pension benefits for employees paid for by the employer;(7) Pension benefits for employees paid for by the employer; (8) Environmental equipment, training, or technology;(8) Environmental equipment, training, or technology; (9) Acquisition of raw materials and other inputs; and(9) Acquisition of raw materials and other inputs; and (10) Working capital or other funds needed to maintain production.(10) Working capital or other funds needed to maintain production.

19 Code of Federal Regulations 159.61 (c)19 Code of Federal Regulations 159.61 (c)

19


► All domestic industry processors of natural All domestic industry processors of natural products incur greater qualifying expenditures products incur greater qualifying expenditures than harvesters based upon the letter of the than harvesters based upon the letter of the lawlaw

► Law provides greater compensation for those Law provides greater compensation for those industry sectors with capital investments in industry sectors with capital investments in manufacturing facilities, personnel, healthcare manufacturing facilities, personnel, healthcare costs, working capital and lines of credit costs, working capital and lines of credit needed to continue productionneeded to continue production

► ASPA did not draft the law and had no input ASPA did not draft the law and had no input into the law, which applies the same way to all into the law, which applies the same way to all industries, including lumber, catfish, steel, etc. industries, including lumber, catfish, steel, etc.

20

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai Order►Thailand is the top exporter of shrimp to Thailand is the top exporter of shrimp to

the U.S., accounting for 33% of all the U.S., accounting for 33% of all imports in 2008 (Vietnam-9%, China-imports in 2008 (Vietnam-9%, China-5%, India-3%, Brazil-0%) 5%, India-3%, Brazil-0%)

►While imports from Thailand grew by While imports from Thailand grew by 35% from 2003 to 2008, they likely 35% from 2003 to 2008, they likely would have grown much more without would have grown much more without the orderthe order

► Imports from countries not subject to Imports from countries not subject to the order jumped 61% during the periodthe order jumped 61% during the period

21

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai Order► The Department of Commerce has found The Department of Commerce has found

consistent dumping from Thailand since 2005consistent dumping from Thailand since 2005

► While the order was revoked for two While the order was revoked for two companies effective January 2009, it remains in companies effective January 2009, it remains in place for the vast majority of importsplace for the vast majority of imports

► Thailand has not had the same problem with Thailand has not had the same problem with uncollected duties as China – on average over uncollected duties as China – on average over 99% of the duties owed have been collected99% of the duties owed have been collected

22

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai OrderCategory of Category of

DutiesDutiesSubject to Subject to CDSOA?CDSOA? AmountAmount NotesNotes

Amounts Amounts already already distributeddistributed

Yes - Yes - already already distributeddistributed

$75 $75 millionmillion

Amounts Amounts withheld from withheld from distributiondistribution

YesYes $6 million$6 million Will be distributed when pending Will be distributed when pending Customs matters are resolvedCustoms matters are resolved

Clearing Clearing account account balancebalance

YesYes $117 $117 millionmillion

The actual amount available for The actual amount available for distribution will depend on the final distribution will depend on the final assessment rate, pending the assessment rate, pending the outcome of litigationoutcome of litigation

Duties owed Duties owed under bondunder bond

YesYes UnknownUnknown $500 million in imports entered under $500 million in imports entered under bond between the preliminary and bond between the preliminary and final determinations – these amounts final determinations – these amounts are in addition to the clearing are in addition to the clearing account balanceaccount balance

Duties on Duties on entries after entries after Oct. 1, 2007Oct. 1, 2007

NoNo UnknownUnknown Customs reported $62 million in duty Customs reported $62 million in duty deposits on entries from Thailand in deposits on entries from Thailand in fiscal year 2008; possibly similar fiscal year 2008; possibly similar amounts for fiscal year 2009amounts for fiscal year 2009

23

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai Order► Clearing Account Balance:Clearing Account Balance:

$117 million is only an estimate of amounts that $117 million is only an estimate of amounts that will finally be owed by importerswill finally be owed by importers

Amount ultimately assessed may be higher or Amount ultimately assessed may be higher or lower, depending upon outcome of on-going lower, depending upon outcome of on-going litigationlitigation

The courts have upheld Commerce margins in a The courts have upheld Commerce margins in a number of cases; one case which would result in number of cases; one case which would result in revocation for a single producer has been revocation for a single producer has been appealed (Thai-I-Mei)appealed (Thai-I-Mei)

Rubicon Group’s revocation was after CDSOA Rubicon Group’s revocation was after CDSOA repealed so no effect on amount available for repealed so no effect on amount available for distribution distribution

24

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai Order► Entries Under Bond:Entries Under Bond:

Any duties collected on entries made under bond Any duties collected on entries made under bond from Aug. 4, 2004 – Jan. 31, 2005 will be in from Aug. 4, 2004 – Jan. 31, 2005 will be in addition to the clearing account amountsaddition to the clearing account amounts

Nearly $500 million in imports entered during the Nearly $500 million in imports entered during the period, subject to an average assessment rate period, subject to an average assessment rate over 5%over 5%

Unknown how much of these imports are already Unknown how much of these imports are already liquidated and duties assessed have been liquidated and duties assessed have been distributeddistributed

Amount ultimately assessed may be higher or Amount ultimately assessed may be higher or lower, depending on outcome of litigation; capped lower, depending on outcome of litigation; capped by the bonding amount.by the bonding amount.

25

IV. Facts on the Thai OrderIV. Facts on the Thai Order► Duties on Entries Not Subject to CDSOA:Duties on Entries Not Subject to CDSOA:

Duties are still collected on entries after Oct. 1, Duties are still collected on entries after Oct. 1, 2007, but are not distributed under CDSOA2007, but are not distributed under CDSOA

Instead, they go to the U.S. TreasuryInstead, they go to the U.S. Treasury Customs reports $62 million in deposits was Customs reports $62 million in deposits was

collected in fiscal year 2008 – amount collected collected in fiscal year 2008 – amount collected in 2009 is unknown at present but likely similar in 2009 is unknown at present but likely similar to 2008 to 2008

► Thai group estimates total amount in Treasury close to Thai group estimates total amount in Treasury close to $120 million (money would go back to Thais under $120 million (money would go back to Thais under proposed settlement)proposed settlement)

Revenue to government from duties could be Revenue to government from duties could be tracked to justify funding for federal programs to tracked to justify funding for federal programs to assist the industryassist the industry

26

IVIV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai Order. Myths versus Facts on the Thai Order

27

IVIV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai . Myths versus Facts on the Thai OrderOrder

► MythsMyths If no settlement, only If no settlement, only

$60 million available to $60 million available to industryindustry

► FactsFacts $117,674,180.50 for $117,674,180.50 for

distribution as of distribution as of 10/1/200910/1/2009

Reduction possible due to Reduction possible due to certain appeals (Thai-I-Mei) certain appeals (Thai-I-Mei) estimated at perhaps 15%estimated at perhaps 15%

Proposed settlement would Proposed settlement would refund approximately $120 refund approximately $120 million from US Treasury to million from US Treasury to Thai exportersThai exporters

If no settlement, If no settlement, approximately $230 approximately $230 million (not $60 million) million (not $60 million) potentially available to the potentially available to the domestic shrimp industrydomestic shrimp industry

28


► MythsMyths Under proposed settlement, Under proposed settlement,

funds would distributed to funds would distributed to states and industry states and industry organizationsorganizations

► FactsFacts ASPA has been directly ASPA has been directly

involved and there is NO involved and there is NO plan on how to distribute plan on how to distribute funds funds

Highly unlikely that any Highly unlikely that any money would be distributed money would be distributed directly to individual directly to individual fishermen or processors fishermen or processors because of constitutional because of constitutional problemsproblems

State governments cannot State governments cannot discriminate when making discriminate when making payments so money is likely payments so money is likely to go to marketing, etc. to go to marketing, etc.

ASPA proposes to use the ASPA proposes to use the Thai funds in Treasury for Thai funds in Treasury for marketingmarketing

29


► MythsMyths If no settlement, If no settlement,

CDSOA funds will be CDSOA funds will be tied up for 5 yearstied up for 5 years

► FactsFacts Appeals of all Appeals of all

relevant Thai relevant Thai decisions are already decisions are already underway and ASPA underway and ASPA is actively is actively prosecuting those prosecuting those appealsappeals

30


► MythsMyths ASPA is responsible ASPA is responsible

for allowing for allowing importers of foreign importers of foreign shrimp to obtain shrimp to obtain Byrd distributionsByrd distributions

► FactFact ASPA’s DC attorneys are ASPA’s DC attorneys are

counsel of record in the counsel of record in the lead case seeking to lead case seeking to prohibit importers from prohibit importers from claiming distributions. claiming distributions. See See SKF v. USASKF v. USA, 08-1005 , 08-1005 (2/19/09)(2/19/09)

Our counsel prevailed at Our counsel prevailed at the Court of Appeals and the Court of Appeals and only a US Supreme Court only a US Supreme Court reversal will change reversal will change outcome and allow outcome and allow importers to claim Byrd importers to claim Byrd fundsfunds

31

IV. IV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai Myths versus Facts on the Thai OrderOrder

32

IV. IV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai Myths versus Facts on the Thai OrderOrder

►Facts:Facts: SSA obtained $18 million in settlements SSA obtained $18 million in settlements

and spent approximately $6.5 million in and spent approximately $6.5 million in legal fees from 2006-2008legal fees from 2006-2008

Assuming same pace for 2009, Assuming same pace for 2009, organization running out of money and organization running out of money and needs income to surviveneeds income to survive

SSA has not spent any money assisting SSA has not spent any money assisting Louisiana fishermen in wake of Louisiana fishermen in wake of devastating hurricanes devastating hurricanes

33

IV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai IV. Myths versus Facts on the Thai OrderOrder

► Thailand settlement has been in negotiations Thailand settlement has been in negotiations since February, 2007 when shrimp prices were since February, 2007 when shrimp prices were highhigh

► Revocation of Thailand order will have Revocation of Thailand order will have devastating impact on domestic shrimp marketdevastating impact on domestic shrimp market

► Thailand reduced production and capacity by Thailand reduced production and capacity by 20% in 2009 and is now forecast to increase 20% in 2009 and is now forecast to increase production by 5% each year through 2012production by 5% each year through 2012

► 2010 production is predicted to be at record 2010 production is predicted to be at record levels with excess capacity waiting to flood the levels with excess capacity waiting to flood the market in anticipation of settlementmarket in anticipation of settlement

34

IV. Thai ProductionIV. Thai Production

35


36


37


38

IV. Other Thai IssuesIV. Other Thai Issues

► Thailand is producing shrimp with forced Thailand is producing shrimp with forced labor and child laborlabor and child labor

► United States is prohibited from importing United States is prohibited from importing goods made with forced labor or the worst goods made with forced labor or the worst forms of child labor forms of child labor See See 19 U.S.C. 130719 U.S.C. 1307

► Prohibition is not automatic but through Prohibition is not automatic but through work with Customs an import ban is possiblework with Customs an import ban is possible

► ASPA is committed to working with federal ASPA is committed to working with federal delegation to implement bandelegation to implement ban

39


40


► Thailand has joined with China, Indonesia Thailand has joined with China, Indonesia and Vietnam to cooperate in eliminating and Vietnam to cooperate in eliminating tariffs on shrimp tariffs on shrimp

► Together these three countries account for Together these three countries account for 80% of world’s farmed shrimp80% of world’s farmed shrimp

► As shown later, if Order on Thailand is As shown later, if Order on Thailand is revoked, unlikely to sustain orders on other revoked, unlikely to sustain orders on other countries at sunset reviewcountries at sunset review

► Thai settlement means our market will face Thai settlement means our market will face influx of imports not only from Thailand, but influx of imports not only from Thailand, but also China, Indonesia and Vietnam who are also China, Indonesia and Vietnam who are working closely with Thailandworking closely with Thailand

41


42

V. Sunset ReviewV. Sunset Review► The statute requires the Department of Commerce and The statute requires the Department of Commerce and

International Trade Commission to review an order every five International Trade Commission to review an order every five years to determine:years to determine:

Whether revocation of the antidumping duty order, or termination of a Whether revocation of the antidumping duty order, or termination of a suspended investigation, would be likely to lead to continuation or suspended investigation, would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and of material injury?recurrence of dumping and of material injury?

19 U.S.C. § Sec. 1675 (c)(1)19 U.S.C. § Sec. 1675 (c)(1)► The sunset review on the shrimp orders has commenced effective The sunset review on the shrimp orders has commenced effective

January 4, 2010 (75 Federal Register 103) January 4, 2010 (75 Federal Register 103) ► Where affirmative decisions are made, the anti-dumping orders Where affirmative decisions are made, the anti-dumping orders

will remain in place, correcting unfair foreign trading practices and will remain in place, correcting unfair foreign trading practices and leveling the playing field for the U.S. shrimp industry for five more leveling the playing field for the U.S. shrimp industry for five more years. years.

► However, if a negative determination is made, one or more of the However, if a negative determination is made, one or more of the orders would be revoked and imports would enter the US without orders would be revoked and imports would enter the US without paying punitive antidumping tariffspaying punitive antidumping tariffs

43

V. Sunset ReviewV. Sunset Review► A sunset review typically takes 12 – 18 months to A sunset review typically takes 12 – 18 months to

complete; the shrimp sunset will run from January complete; the shrimp sunset will run from January 2010 to possibly mid-20112010 to possibly mid-2011

► Import volumes are critical component and if Import volumes are critical component and if Thailand is removed through settlement, very Thailand is removed through settlement, very unlikely that remaining orders would stay in place unlikely that remaining orders would stay in place because of low volume from other countriesbecause of low volume from other countries

► To defend the orders, the domestic industry must To defend the orders, the domestic industry must participate actively both at the Department of participate actively both at the Department of Commerce and the International Trade CommissionCommerce and the International Trade Commission

► Southern Shrimp Alliance has not committed to Southern Shrimp Alliance has not committed to defending the ordersdefending the orders

44

V. Sunset ReviewV. Sunset Review► Active participation includes:Active participation includes:

Gathering and reporting industry data regarding Gathering and reporting industry data regarding production and employment, prices, and financial production and employment, prices, and financial performanceperformance

Analyzing trade patterns and developments in foreign Analyzing trade patterns and developments in foreign industries (both subject and nonsubject) including industries (both subject and nonsubject) including capacity, production, exports, and pricingcapacity, production, exports, and pricing

Reviewing and rebutting factual information submitted by Reviewing and rebutting factual information submitted by foreign producers and importers seeking revocation of the foreign producers and importers seeking revocation of the ordersorders

Researching and writing legal briefs and rebuttal briefsResearching and writing legal briefs and rebuttal briefs Working with agency staff to review issues, and possibly Working with agency staff to review issues, and possibly

arranging site visitsarranging site visits Testifying at a public hearing at the International Trade Testifying at a public hearing at the International Trade

Commission, and responding to Commissioner questionsCommission, and responding to Commissioner questions

45

VI. ASPA’s Commitment to the IndustryVI. ASPA’s Commitment to the Industry

► ASPA rejects SSA & Thai request for ASPA rejects SSA & Thai request for settlement of ordersettlement of order Thai Union contacted ASPA to negotiate a direct Thai Union contacted ASPA to negotiate a direct

dealdeal ASPA could have negotiated a deal for itself but ASPA could have negotiated a deal for itself but

long-term benefit of industry is more important long-term benefit of industry is more important than settlementthan settlement

► ASPA begins direct lobbying efforts to seek ASPA begins direct lobbying efforts to seek distribution of Thai money in US treasury to distribution of Thai money in US treasury to industryindustry Working closely with LA and MS state and federal Working closely with LA and MS state and federal

representatives to re-direct funds entering general representatives to re-direct funds entering general treasury to industry with primary focus on treasury to industry with primary focus on benefitting shrimp harvestersbenefitting shrimp harvesters

46

VI. ASPA’s Commitment to the VI. ASPA’s Commitment to the IndustryIndustry

► ASPA commits to import ban of certain shrimpASPA commits to import ban of certain shrimp Working with state and federal representatives to implement Working with state and federal representatives to implement

ban on shrimp from any country using forced or child laborban on shrimp from any country using forced or child labor► ASPA commits to implementation of strict safety ASPA commits to implementation of strict safety

standardsstandards Working with state and federal representatives to impose Working with state and federal representatives to impose

standards similar to those in EUstandards similar to those in EU► ASPA commits to fighting transshipmentASPA commits to fighting transshipment

Working with state and federal representatives to strengthen Working with state and federal representatives to strengthen enforcement mechanisms and increase penaltiesenforcement mechanisms and increase penalties

► ASPA commits significant monetary investment in ASPA commits significant monetary investment in funding legal battle to defend orders at Sunset Reviewfunding legal battle to defend orders at Sunset Review Sunset review initiated January 4, 2010 and legal battle will Sunset review initiated January 4, 2010 and legal battle will

likely last 12-18 monthslikely last 12-18 months

47

VI. ASPA’s Commitment to the VI. ASPA’s Commitment to the IndustryIndustry

► ASPA supports efforts of Shrimp Task Force ASPA supports efforts of Shrimp Task Force CertificationCertification: ASPA fully supports efforts to : ASPA fully supports efforts to

develop a certification program to increase develop a certification program to increase market price for domestic, wild-caught shrimpmarket price for domestic, wild-caught shrimp

LabelingLabeling: ASPA fully supports efforts to ensure : ASPA fully supports efforts to ensure proper labeling of domestic shrimp and full proper labeling of domestic shrimp and full prosecution of violatorsprosecution of violators

StandardsStandards: ASPA fully supports efforts to develop : ASPA fully supports efforts to develop uniform food standards for additives and uniform food standards for additives and preservativespreservatives

SafetySafety: : ASPA fully supports efforts to develop ASPA fully supports efforts to develop stronger food safety laws (like EU) and increase stronger food safety laws (like EU) and increase inspection of imported shrimp for banned inspection of imported shrimp for banned substances and reduce harmful importssubstances and reduce harmful imports

presentation by: edward t. hayes, esq. leake & andersson llp imports of certain frozen warmwater...

Documents