페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

ATTACHMENT V
Value of United States foreign trade in agricultural products,
July 1, 1956, through June 30, 1957

(In thousands)

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors]

1 Excludes wheat unfit for human consumption.
Source: Compiled from official records, Bureau of the Census, January 1958.

ATTACHMENT VI. TRADE LIBERALIZATION UNDER GATT BY COUNTRY Austria: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Rice
Soybean and cottonseed oils
Oranges, lemons
Dried fruit
Tree nuts
Pineapples
Certain canned fruit juices (grapefruit and pineapple juices, and mixtures)
Certain canned fruit (pineapples, guavas, grapefruit, and peaches)

ATTACHMENT VI. TRADE LIBERALIZATION UNDER GATT BY COUNTRY-Con.
Belgium: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Tobacco
Corn and sorghum
Barley and oats
Pulses
Oilseeds
Prunes and raisins
Oranges and lemons
Canned fruits, nuts, figs
Flour and groats, except of wheat and rye
Tallow
Condensed milk, milk powder
Poultry

Honey
Denmark: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Tobacco
Oilseeds
Rice
Hops
Pulses
Various seeds
Feedstuffs (oilcake, bran, etc.)
Sorghum
Undressed hides and skins

Casings
West Germany: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Tobacco
Oilseeds
Vegetable oils, raw, for technical use (inedible)
Hogfat and tallow for technical use
Hydrogenated fats and oils for technical use
Dried fruit (except raisins and currants)
Tomato juice and powder

Eggs, liquid, frozen, or dried
Greece: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Oilseeds
Vegetable oils
Meats
Dairy products

Cotton
Italy: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Cotton linters
Inedible tallow
Hides and skins
Oilcake and meal

Fats from bones, kitchen and slaughterhouse residues
The Netherlands: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Tobacco
Corn and sorghum
Rye, barley, and oats
Flour and groats, except of wheat and rice
Oilseeds
Raw vegetable oils
Canned fruits
Nuts and figs
Canned vegetables, except tomatoes
Frozen beef and mutton
Poultry

Honey

ATTACHMENT VI. TRADE LIBERALIZATION UNDER GATT BY COUNTRY-Con. Norway: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Cotton
Tobacco
Oilseeds
Citrus fruits
Nuts
Dried fruits
Hops
Hides and skins
Tallow

Casings
Portugal: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Hops

Canned meat, fruit, and vegetables (except sweetened fruit and capers)
Sweden: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Wheat and wheat flour
Rye and rye flour
Corn
Rice
Cotton
Dried fruit, nuts, canned fruit and juices
Flaxseed, soybeans, peanuts
Crude linseed oil
Oilcake and other feeds
Hops
Smoked and salted horsemeat

Hides and skins
Switzerland: Liberalized, i. e., no quantitative restrictions:

Citrus fruit
Tobacco

Cotton
United Kingdom: Liberalized, i, e., under open general license:

Wheat and wheat flour
Rice
Corn and sorghums
Barley and malt
Oats and oatmeal
Starches and starch preparations (not packed for retail sale)
Hops
Dried beans, peas, lentils
Animal fats, except butter
Soybeans, flaxseed
Vegetable oils
Oilcake and meal
Cotton linters
Hides and skins

ATTACHMENT VII. RESTRICTIONS TO EXPANDING INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Which SHOULD BE REDUCED UNDER THE RECIPROCAL TRADE AGREEMENTS PROGRAM

Particularly since the war a great many restrictions have been imposed by governments to limit international trade. These restrictions apply, of course, to industrial and agricultural products, and the authority contained in H. R. 10368 is needed to remove them from both. However, we shall again limit our observations and examples to the areas with which we are most familiar-those affecting international trade in farm products.

1. IMPORT LICENSING AND QUOTAS Heading the list of restrictions to international trade is import licensing and quotas. Three-fourths of agricultural exports go to the so-called soft currency nations who use import licensing and impose import quotas. There are a variety of reasons for the use of these practices. They are imposed (a) to protect domestic producers, (b) to conserve certain foreign currencies, particularly dollars, (c) to promote markets for home products, (d) to balance trade with important marketing areas and (e) to attain predetermined desirable levels of foreign exchange reserves. American dollars are one of the bardest and therefore one of the scarcest currencies in international exchange, The dollar shortage, including a need to establish adequate dollar reserves. is the principal basis given by countries for imposing import quotas. Therefore, the imposition of import quotas by foreign countries has been the principal limitation on the exports of United States products.

II. IMPORT DUTIES AND TAXES Import duties are the traditional restrictions to trade. They are imposed for the purpose of protecting certain domestic producers from competition from abroad. Many duties in effect today are of such an amount as to increase the price in consuming countries to a point that either restricts or destroys the market. For example, one country has an import tax on dried skim milk which has the effect of doubling the price to the consumers. It makes dried skim milk so high that we have little opportunity to expand a market in that country, even though the need is great.

III. CUSTOMS PROCEDURES Customs procedures are needed to account for imports and to evaluate them as a basis for imposing duties. Customs procedures designed to facilitate this work are essential. Unfortunately, these procedures are often rigged so as to provide additional hindrances to imports.

IV. HEALTH AND SANITARY RESTRICTIONS

It is only logical that a nation control imports to make sure that they do not bring in injurious products or introduce plant or animal diseases. However, these provisions are also used by protectionist groups to add unnecessary impediments to imports over and above the duties and taxes.

V. FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANIPULATIONS

Many countries resort to the manipulation of the rates of exchange between their own currency and others in order to profit on imports, to increase the competitive advantage of their exports or as a device for protecting domestic producers, depending upon the administrative policies of the government.

VI, GOVERNMENT AND QUASI-GOVERNMENT EXPORT AND IMPORT MONOPOLIES

In many countries, governments operate import and export monopolies. In the case of export monopolies they determine export prices, the rates of exchange on various currencies and other practices which promote their national interests. We are particularly conscious of this in American agriculture. Practically all major competing exporting countries of all major farm products entering foreign markets operate such export monopolies. The United States is hard pressed to find ways of marketing farm products in foreign markets in competition with these monopoly practices of other nations. The problem is further complicated by the fact that so long as certain United States farm products are priced above market levels, the CCC becomes the sole buyer for these products for export. In these cases the United States indulges in monopolistic practices similar to those of other countries. On the other hand, many American products are priced competitively in world markets. Yet the exporters of these products are placed at a disadvantage by the operations of competing monopoly exporters and further by monopoly importers.

VII. PRIVATE CAPITAL DISCOURAGED The flow of private capital is an essential prerequisite to expanding international trade and to improve the United States balance of payments. Many countries impose restrictions and handicaps on foreign investment which discourages its flow.

The seven points above constitute the major restrictions to expanding international trade among nations. These restrictions are all restrictions imposed on trade by governments. They are restrictions which limit the exports of United States industrial and farm products. They result in contraction of the most efficient industries, they result in enforced contraction of the most efficient agricultural production.

Therefore, one part of the foreign trade program supported by the American Farm Bureau Federation is to authorize the President of the United States to

negotiate with foreign governments to reduce or eliminate these restrictions imposed against United States products. Along with this authority the President must be given some trading stock in the form of United States trade concessions.

We believe that enactment of H. R. 10368 would give the President the authority to negotiate agreements which will result in expanding mutually profitable trade and in increasing exports of industrial and farm products and still give reasonable protection to domestic industrial and agricultural producers from disruptive rates of increased imports.

Senator Long. Please proceed.

Mr. HARRIS. Now, with the chairman's permission I would just like to hit the high points of this statement, and then answer whatever questions the committee might have, sir.

Senator Long. Thank you, sir. Mr. HARRIS. We support the House bill, H. R. 12591. We feel that as far as our national security is concerned, the reciprocal trade agreements program is extremely important.

We shall not discuss at length the current economic offensive of the Soviet Union. The committee is familiar with these facts.

We feel that an expanded and dynamic foreign trade program is essential if we are to meet this Communist threat.

Now, we would like to discuss the reciprocal trade program in the framework of a program which is not new. It has been tried. It is a 24-year-old program.

We do not feel it is unreasonable to contend that the high and increasing standard of living in this country is in large respect due to the establishment of this program.

We consider this legislation as more important to the fundamental needs of American agriculture than such temporary programs as Public Law 480 and other Government interim-type programs.

As a matter of fact, last year when our agricultural exports were at record levels, $4.7 million dollars, over 40 percent of those exports went under a Government program such as Public Law 480, section 402 and the like. We feel that this is a danger sign, that we are putting agricultural exports in a very precarious position.

It is important that agricultural exports be based on long-term markets, permanent markets for dollars, and this is the real answer to some of agriculture's problems.

Now, we all are familiar with the commodities in agriculture, that are so very dependent on exports, wheat, cotton, rice, and so forth, but even other products, which do not have a large export market, share in the benefits of exports because we know if this 60 million acres of cropland that is devoted to exports now were shifted over to another type of production they would compete with and bring down the price of these domestically consumed products.

We would like to point this out: Over 90 percent of our soybean exports, 80 percent of our cotton exports and a like percentage of our fruit and fruit products exports and about 70 percent of our unmanufactured tobacco exports moved abroad under a trade-agreement concession.

This, we think, dramatizes the importance of reciprocal trade agreements program and GATT, if you will, to American agriculture.

We have listed as attachment VI the many trade liberalizations that we have obtained under the general agreements on tariffs and trade.

« 이전계속 »