Trending Now

Shippers Frustrated as Spot rates Rise With Demand

New Articles

Ratifying USMCA the Only Responsible Option at this Point

kelly international trade policy SelectUSA
Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Ratifying USMCA the Only Responsible Option at this Point

Leave a comment

The fate of free trade in North America is hanging in the balance.

That sentiment would have been true 18 months ago when negotiations of NAFTA began. It would have been true six months later when the parties failed to meet their self-imposed first deadline. It would have been true last October when it appeared the U.S. was prepared to sign a bilateral deal with Mexico and exclude Canada. And it’s still true today as the agreement gets lost in the fracas of politicking in Washington.

The impending release of the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) report, which provides members of Congress with in-depth analysis of the potential economic impact of the proposed United States-Canada-Mexico Agreement (USMCA), may very well have minimal impact in swaying Congressional opponents of the deal.

According to a recent report in Politico, the ITC’s analysis is likely to suggest the USMCA will have a negligible impact to U.S. GDP, which won’t serve as a bulwark against complaints by House Democrats that the agreement is short on enforcement mechanisms for its labor provisions. If that weren’t threatening enough, Ottawa has now suggested it may not ratify the USMCA unless Washington removes the Section 232 tariffs on aluminum and steel imports.

Yet, regardless of the ongoing warfare on Capitol Hill and the potentially uninspiring data in the ITC report, the reality is that at this point in time the ratification of the USMCA is the best possible option. The handful of alternatives available will only serve to further destabilize confidence in and certainty around the future of trade within North America.

Renegotiation

Democrats have been demanding stronger enforcement of the USMCA’s labor provisions. These demands are in keeping with the party’s longstanding complaint that NAFTA offered Mexico’s low-wage, low-regulation economy a leg up on attracting manufacturers. While the USMCA’s new labor provisions are intended to address this, Democrats argue the agreement lacks teeth in ensuring Mexico holds up to its end of the agreement.

However, creating an enforcement mechanism means going back to the negotiating table, something none of the parties are interested in doing, particularly since it took a great deal of intense negotiation over more than a year to come up with the agreement that’s currently on the table. It’s quite likely Canada and Mexico will demand significant concessions in exchange for a stronger enforcement mechanism, which may negate some of the agreement’s other benefits.

The Trump card

Whether or not the agreement is negotiated is, in some ways, irrelevant. U.S. President Donald Trump has already threatened that if Democrats attempt to quash the USMCA – either before or after a renegotiation of its enforcement provisions – Washington will simply pull the U.S. out of NAFTA, pitting the administration against Congress in a legal battle over trade-agreement decision making that is certain to become a wedge issue in the 2020 presidential campaign. The president recently reiterated his threat to withdraw from NAFTA during a recent interview on the Fox Business Network.

The result would be a return to a trade environment of uncertainty that would surely result in reduced cross-border investment that would adversely impact the economies of all three USMCA countries and potentially stymie Washington’s efforts to negotiate bilateral trade deals with Japan, the European Union and the United Kingdom – all important trade partners.

Forget the whole thing

If the threat to withdraw from NAFTA is simply bluster on the part of the President and ratification of the USMCA ends up locked in a Congressional stalemate, the other alternative is to simply do away with the renegotiated agreement and revert back to the original NAFTA deal. While that would certainly be a viable – and minimally disruptive alternative – the truth is that the USMCA made substantial gains in modernizing free trade in North America, addressing critical issues such as regulatory harmonization, the digital economy and intellectual property protection and host of other aspects that are not addressed in NAFTA. Whether these updates result in tangible gains to GDP and/or employment only time will tell. But at the very least they serve to incentivize those engaged in cross-border trade to continue doing so and perhaps even broaden the scope of their activity. Given that North American trade represents more than a trillion dollars annually, it’s critical to – at the very least – maintain the gains already made over the past 25 years. The USMCA does exactly that and more.

It took very seasoned negotiators and trade experts more than a year of intense talks to arrive at the agreement that’s currently on the table, including the chapters that serve to bring free trade into the 21st century in a fair and equitable manner. It would be irresponsible to do away with these gainful additions in the name of partisanship, and voters would presumably hold their elected representatives to account should they choose to do so.

The best course of action

The responsible and most advantageous thing for Congress to do at this point would be to ratify the USMCA. That’s the opinion of approximately 400 businesses and business associations that are now part of the USMCA Coalition, a collective of like-minded enterprises that believe in the importance of free trade to the U.S. economy and to U.S. jobs, and of which Livingston International is a member.

Given the impressive gains made by the USMCA in fostering an environment of fair and free trade across the continent, and the risks associated with returning to the negotiating table and/or drawing out the ratification of the agreement into the political fray of the 2020 election campaign, it is critical that lawmakers on Capitol Hill make ratification of the new deal a key priority in the coming months.

Failing to do so would put into peril the advantages of free trade on which so many jobs rely, and would serve to reinforce the perception that lawmakers are all too eager to put partisanship ahead of effective representation. 

Candace Sider is vice president of Government and Regulatory Affairs North America at trade-services firm Livingston International. She is a frequent speaker and lecturer at industry and academic events and is an active member of numerous industry groups and associations.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Auto Tariffs Spark Lawsuit Against Department of Commerce

Leave a comment

Once again, auto tariffs have made the news. This time, it involves the Cause of Action Institute (CoA), the Department of Commerce , and a lawsuit. The lawsuit, at the request of the CoA, is in response to an information request that the Department of Commerce did not release. Originally, the CoA requested a copy of Commerce Secretary’s final report to the President regarding the Section 232 investigation.

“Commerce claims that the information contained in their report justifies the proposed auto-tariffs, but the government refuses to release this report. The public should not have to take the government’s word that the report supports tariffs when the administration withholds the document it claims support its position. The tariffs will harm American consumers and businesses, and the public has a right to see the information contained in the report. We are dedicated to placing this vital information into the public sphere, ensuring that the government complies with its statutory obligations, and we look forward to a robust debate about the merits of the report,” said James Valvo, counsel and senior policy advisor at Cause of Action Institute.

This request occurred on two occasions, with the Department of Commerce stating it wouldn’t release the report to the public. Now the CoA is fighting in the name of transparency by holding the Department of Commerce accountable for not releasing the report within the statutory time-frame.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

What to Consider when Planning for the Post-Brexit Period

Leave a comment

The past weeks have seen a flurry of parliamentary activity in London, none of which has yielded any more clarity regarding the status of the UK’s membership in or relationship with the European Union. At time of writing, British lawmakers have twice voted down a proposed Brexit deal that EU officials have said is non-negotiable, and subsequently voted against leaving the EU without a deal.

Even in the likely event the EU agrees to delay the Brexit deadline, the future of Brexit remains very much in question, as Britain’s divided Parliament won’t be any more likely in the coming months to reach consensus than European officials are likely to re-open negotiations.

The innocent bystanders, of course, are the countless businesses on both sides of the English Channel, which have hitherto relied on seamless trade between the two entities, and which are increasingly reconsidering their relationships with suppliers and vendors across what has the potential to become a hard border.

Unprepared for Brexit

While the impending Brexit deadline has generated expected urgency in Britain’s parliament, the inevitability of Brexit has been known for nearly three years. Yet, as it stands today, many businesses are unprepared for the very real possibility of a hard Brexit. In fact, a recent report in the Wall Street Journal, citing a study by the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS), notes only 40 percent of British businesses would be prepared to comply with a new customs compliance regime.

That’s a daunting number and serves as a call to action for those who have yet to prepare for Brexit’s rapid approach. Should a hard Brexit occur, it will serve as much more than a milestone; it will turn Britain’s customs regime on its head, sowing confusion and uncertainty that will inevitably result in disruption to supply chains, administrative headaches and unexpected costs. Industries heavily integrated with European supply chains, such as aerospace, pharma, food manufacturing and autos will face acute disruption.

Increasing Landed Costs

Perhaps the most urgent consideration for those who engage in trade will be the spike in associated landed costs. In the event of a hard Brexit, the current European customs regime will cease to apply to imports. The immediate effect will be the application of tariffs and Value-Added Taxes (VATs). Those tariffs will be based on Most Favored Nation (MFN) rates, which will vary by product and could be quite substantial. While the British government has already stated that, in the event of a hard Brexit, it plans to waive seven percent more tariffs than which  currently exist, VATs will still apply as will tariffs on virtually all imports from non-EU origins. That includes countries with which the EU currently maintains free trade deals, such as the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) recently signed between the EU and Canada.

Compliance (New customs regime)

While tariffs for EU imports may be reduced for the most part, customs declarations will still be required. This is a critical development. Given that approximately half of the UK’s imports come from the EU, and the EU has several trade agreements with key trading partners, there’s been little need for customs declarations in the UK to this point. However, after Brexit, the number of customs declarations is estimated to increase almost 400 percent (from 55 million to 205 million) at a cost of approximately £6.5billion or USD $9.1 billion to businesses. In addition, there will be 180,000 British business who will be filing a customs declaration for the first time, while those who have already been filing declarations will need to adjust to a new regime of customs classification.

The importance of correctly classifying these cross border movements cannot be overstated. In a best-case scenario, such as declarations with missing information, importers will face delays at UK border crossings, which are already anticipated to be backlogged. In a worst-case scenario in which goods are misclassified, importers may face retroactive payments on top of financial penalties and – in extreme cases – lose their authorizations to import.

Border Delays

According to CIPS, 10 percent of UK businesses could lose EU business if there are delays at the border, and about 20 percent will see their EU buyers demand discounts for delays of more than a day.

The organization notes 38 percent of EU businesses have already changed suppliers because of Brexit and up to 60 percent of EU businesses would look to switch suppliers if border delays were to extend to two weeks or more.

Delays are almost inevitable given the more robust customs administration requirements. Today, tractor trailers pass through the UK-EU border without stopping. At the Port of Dover, the UK’s busiest and closest port to mainland Europe, some 17,000 tractor trailers pass through on a daily basis with only about two percent being stopped. After Brexit, almost all of them are likely to be stopped. Even if that stop is only for a few minutes, it’s going to result in a significant backlog of transports.

In short, importers into the UK and exporters out of the UK will need to factor in additional time in transit and set expectations with their trade partners on the other side of the English Channel.

Preparation is Key

Given the shrinking time window for preparation, businesses that haven’t done so already should be working with their trade services partners – carriers, freight forwarders, trade lawyers and consultants and customs brokers – to ensure they’re able to minimize the negative impact of Brexit on their trade activity.

The UK’s official leave from the EU may very well be imminent, or potentially months or even more than a year away, but given the consequences of inaction, getting prepared late is still better than not being prepared at all.

Mike Wilder is vice president of Managed Services at trade services firm Livingston International. He has 30 years of experience in trade compliance. He can be reached at mwilder@livingstonintl.com.

David Merritt is a director in the Global Trade Consulting division of trade services firm Livingston International. He can be reached at dmerritt@livingstonintl.com.

 

 

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

Tariffs Raise Concerns Among Business Leaders

Leave a comment

In response to the U.S. – China trade deal meeting delay,  American business leaders continue expressing concerns, stating that the end of the tariff impact is far from over and continues to negatively impact business operations. Freedom Partners Executive Vice President Nathan Nascimento commented on the current situation, adding that damages brought on by the tariffs situation affects growth, job creation, and more.

“From lost sales to increased costs, higher tariffs give America’s job creators big headaches and endanger our prosperity. We urge the administration to work with other nations to drop the tariffs and eliminate all barriers to trade. The time is now because, the longer this standoff drags on, the markets and suppliers that closed overnight to U.S. producers may take years to re-open. Tariffs are destructive taxes that sow only fear and confusion, where free trade fosters job creation and gives American consumers more choices at affordable prices to stretch paychecks further.”

Additionally, Freedom Partners reported on information released by the Census Bureau back in February that stated an additional $2.7 billion was spent in tariffs by business in November compared to the $375 million spent in November 2017.

“Tariffs Hurt the Heartland, a nationwide campaign against recent tariffs on American businesses, farmers and consumers, today released new data that shows American businesses paid an additional $2.7 billion in tariffs in November 2018 — the most recent month data is available from the U.S. Census Bureau due to the government shutdown. This figure reflects the additional tariffs levied because of the administration’s actions and represents a $2.7 billion tax increase and a massive year-over-year increase from $375 million in tariffs on the same products in November 2017.” (Press Release, “New Data Shows Trump Administration Tariffs Cost U.S. Businesses $2.7 Billion In A Single Month, Exports of American Products Targeted For Retaliation Plummet 37 Percent,” Tariffs Hurt The Heartland, 2/14/19).

Other executives, such as Brown-Forman Corporation CEO, Lawson Whiting add that international sales are feeling the impacts from tariffs from the EU’s retaliation:

“Brown-Forman owns Jack Daniel’s, Woodford Reserve and numerous other spirits brands. While most of its products are made in the U.S., most of its sales (about 60 percent) are made in international markets. And the cost of tariffs on American whiskey implemented by the European Union in retaliation for new U.S. tariffs were a drag on earnings. A key part of Brown-Forman’s global strategy is to focus on building a market for its super-premium brands, such as Gentleman Jack and Woodford Reserve,” (David Mann, “Brown-Forman Shares Sink After Earnings Release,” Louisville Business First, 3/6/19).

Source: Freedom Partners

Archives, Commentary, Global Trade Daily

4 TRAITS SUCCESSFUL LEADERS MUST EMBRACE AS SUPPLY CHAINS CHANGE

Leave a comment

The current state of international trade has only added to the chaotic and unpredictable nature of supply chains. This is the reality for many industries, and leaders who hope to stay competitive must adapt—quickly.

In healthcare, for instance, institutional buyers purchase steel products such as bedpans, trays and carts. These buyers traditionally get steel goods from suppliers in China at significantly reduced prices—thanks to high purchase volumes—compared with the steel products bought by smaller organizations or sourced from North American manufacturers. New tariffs on Chinese goods, however, have shaken things up and prompted buyers to re-evaluate their strategies.

Automation and other game-changing technologies are also shaping modern supply chain management. While technological innovations were once limited to tasks like negotiating better shipping rates, savvy supply chain leaders must now consider technology’s long-term implications and how those innovations can have profound effects on their operations.

Confronting Change Effectively

Global supply chain managers have several tools at their disposal for streamlining operations. But tools are useless without someone to use them, and leaders must be agile and innovative enough to integrate these methods into their supply chains.

Consider blockchain, which IBM is using to increase food chain and supply chain transparency. The company recently unveiled IBM Food Trust, a blockchain-based network that allows food supply companies to share data free of charge.

Evolving supply chain expectations necessitate new levels of transparency, and blockchain is one of many burgeoning technologies that leaders will need to leverage to respond effectively to society’s shifting needs. Another such avenue of change is enhanced data and analytics. In fact, 50 percent of supply chain organizations surveyed by Digitalist Magazine ranked data and analytics above the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence as the primary source of change in the industry.

With increased worldwide uncertainty, global supply chain managers must take steps to build systems that can be responsive to change. This worldview goes beyond just having the latest technology; it means maintaining a vision for how an organization can be future-proof.

The Qualities of Effective Supply Chain Leaders

Prudent application of business principles to the supply chain can yield positive results, yet many companies still use outdated management models instead of embracing lean management strategies. Successful innovators among supply chain leaders will instead evolve by embodying these four traits:

Technological fluency: In one GEODIS study, 70 percent of supply chain professionals described their operations as “very” or “extremely” complex. Supply chains are more complex than ever before, which means leaders must focus on improving their domestic supply chain practices.

Gaining a clearer understanding of IT and its benefits is one way to create clarity. Although supply chains essentially are all about people, those people are using technology to get the job done. For that reason, companies should stay up-to-date on the industry’s product options around IT and automation and should understand how best to leverage them.

Short- and long-term focus on the bottom line: A nuanced understanding of technology should be complemented by a clearer idea of a business’ cost to serve. Whether they are running operations or overseeing buying practices (or even automation upgrades), leaders must ask themselves how every decision will affect their bottom line.

That question should not solely focus on earnings in six months or a year. Leaders should look beyond that window to position their supply chains for shifts that could come five or 10 years down the line. In such a rapidly changing environment, a proactive approach will ensure their companies are ready to pivot when it matters most.

Willingness to delegate: Leaders should not assume they have to shoulder their missions alone. Working closely with a team is the most effective way to get the critical insights necessary to make a difference. The ability to direct, manage, influence and inspire the right people can help leaders build teams that will be responsive to modern supply chain challenges.

Because technology is so integral to supply chains, put together a team in which each member has a specific area of expertise. This team should include people who are investigating blockchain, attending AI conferences, or finding ways to integrate new technology within the company culture. Team members should embrace new technologies and go out of their way to spread this enthusiasm throughout the organization.

Experience managing projects, negotiating, and collaborating: Successful leaders should have project management acumen and the skills to negotiate for resources and budgets—including a high degree of personal organization and a pre-emptive approach to managing risks. Leaders must be willing (and able) to negotiate internally and externally for resources or an expanded budget.

Along these lines, leaders also should be willing to cooperate with partners for data. Considering data is the fuel that powers so many advances in supply chains, this collaboration should be a win-win scenario for all parties. Leaders who embrace supply chain management advances—technological or operational—will be positioned to prosper despite any transformations the market might undergo.

These tips can help leaders take care of their supply chains, but they must start now. As the industry and the world surrounding it become increasingly fluid, anticipating these shifts early can keep your supply chain relevant and optimal for years to come.

Greg MacNeill is the senior vice president of Worldwide Sales at TECSYS, an enterprise supply chain platform and solution provider. Possessing a wealth of knowledge in the areas of supply chain best practice, enterprise logistics software and supply chain technology, MacNeill uses his decades of experience to craft pragmatic solutions to complex supply chain challenges that enable—and empower—his customers.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Air Partner Announces Houston Location

Leave a comment

Following the most recent opening of its Los Angeles office, global aviation group Air Partner confirmed the opening of its newest headquarters in Houston, Texas this week. The new Woodlands office supports the company’s vision to continue efforts in expansion to better serve its clients in various regions.

“We are excited to open an office in Houston as we expand our reach and services across the U.S., providing local Air Partner representation to both established and new customers,” said David McCown, president of Air Partner U.S. “Houston is one of the fastest-growing major cities in the United States and is a hotbed of economic activity.  We see massive potential for growth in the region.”

In addition to extending reach for customers, the Houston office is in favorable proximity to the major oil and gas hub in the region, creating opportunities for Air Partner to extend its freight and corporate jet shuttle programs. With the Port of Houston currently serving as a top foreign trade zone, the company’s strategic location for the new office will also provides ample opportunities for the expansion of large freight and cargo operations.

The London-based company offers services including air charter,cargo services, private air travel solutions, specialist travel management, emergency planning, aircraft remarketing and aviation safety consultancy and training, including air traffic control and wildlife management

Air Partner currently has U.S. office locations in Fort Lauderdale, New York City and Washington, D.C. and shows no plans of slowing down expansion efforts in key regions.

Archives, Commentary, Global Trade Daily

Essential Tips on Writing International Trade Policy Op-eds

Leave a comment

Op-eds express the opinions of the writers by conveying a response to an argument or a call to action. They react to a published article either in the newspaper or a website with the aim of reaching the public. Concerning international trade policy, op-eds can be used to reshape the public opinion, especially since in this platform the writer represents the local voices. The article aims to analyze some of the tips on writing international trade policy op-eds that will enable the writer’s opinions to connect with the reader.

Use a hook that attracts attention

The hook of the argument should be reflected in the headline as it assists the readers to catch the essence of the op-ed quickly. It is essential to highlight how the trade policy will affect businesses and communities and this is reflected in the hook. The argument of the op-ed is presented on the first line and demonstrates the stand of the writer based on the mater. The hook shows the reader why they should care about the issue especially if it is getting little media attention. Use a tone that is incontrovertible and highlight irony and contradictions to emphasize the argument. According to Amanda Sommer, Head of Content Writing at APA Outline service, the hook should tell the readers why they should care by telling them how the existing policy impacts their life in one way or another.

Present opinions clearly and uniquely

The opinion editorial should demonstrate importance by expressing an opinion and backing up the facts and ultimately present a solution. The argument should be based on a timely topic regarding the international trade policy topic and talk about the benefits and drawbacks of the new trade policy. The argument should be based on a timely topic and should quickly grab the attention of the reader. Before establishing the problem of the argument, it is essential to analyze why the readers should care.

Understanding what the public needs to hear and demonstrating predominance through a news hook ensures that the message gets to a multitude of people and might lead to the intended change. “Clearly express one major opinion early on in the argument to avoid leaving the readers wondering what the goal of the op-ed is,” advises Jill Peters, Senior Content Creator at ConfidentWriters. Give a concrete call to action to the reader on the way forward and recommendations on how they can take part in bringing change on public policies, especially since their voice carries more weight on policy formulation.

Know your audience

It is essential not to underestimate the level of information that the audience has concerning the topic as well as overestimate their intelligence. It is vital to comprehend that using simple and compelling language that attracts their attention should be the goal of the op-ed as it will influence their readership and their response to the call to action. Knowing the intended audience assists the writers in using a reliable outlet to reach them. Matters on international trade policies can be published on a website, especially since the world has become digitally connected.

Matters on international trade policies can be published on a website, especially since the world has become digitally connected. This ensures that members from the global community can pitch in and share their opinions with the intended audience to have an impact on change. Personalizing the op-ed by using local anecdotes grabs the attention of the reader, especially if the argument is based on facts. Audiences are more intrigued by writing that connects with them, especially since lawmakers make their decisions based on their opinions. Tapping into their emotions by emphasizing the impacts the policy will have on their livelihoods and their communities may drive the readers to respond to the call to action.

Suggest feasible solutions

Feasibility emphasizes that solutions be actionable and practical. This is necessary if the writer is basing their argument on international trade policies that arguably seem to put particular groups at a disadvantage. The solution is mainly summarized at the end of the argument and it is meant to make the argument credible and convincing.

Emphasize on the key messages which may include the importance of trade currently on the global community and the impact of lack of trade deals on certain organizations. Give an example of a context where the solution has shown change and present credible sources to prove this fact. Provide practical steps and recommendations that avoid appealing for political will as it will show the readers that the op-ed has no solution. If the situation has no solution yet, it is also critical to state that some problems are insoluble to enable the readers to critically think of potential solutions.

The article analyzed some of the tips in writing international trade policy op-eds to ensure that that the readers understand how policies impact their lives. Thinking about the audience and how to grab their attention with an engaging hook and a personal note improves their readership as well as their response to the call to action.

Paul Bates is a writer and editor at Paper-Research.com and SwiftPapepers.com. He also contributes to HuffPost, Medium, and Paperadepts.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

USMCA Coalition Formed During 116th Congress

Leave a comment

In an effort to support fastidious implementation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, a group consisting of trade associations, businesses, and other advocacy groups joined forces to create what is now known as the “Pass USMCA Coalition.”
The bipartisan group is led by Democrat Gary Locke, known for his previous role as a former ambassador for China between 2011-2014 and his former role as Washington’s governor.
“The USMCA sets a modern precedent for freer and fairer trade not only in North America, but throughout the world,” said chairman Gary Locke. “Ratifying the agreement quickly will improve our trading relationships with Canada and Mexico, create more jobs for American workers, and propel international trade into the 21st century.”
“The USMCA is a win for America,” said Rick Dearborn, executive director of Pass USMCA. “It will launch the nation into a new era of economic and creative prosperity. Congress must seize this opportunity to strengthen our North American trading partnerships.”
For more information visit http://www.PassUSMCA.org.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Freight Forwarders Defended by BIFA General Director

Leave a comment

In response to HMRC’s Transitional Simplified Procedures  for Customs in a post-Brexit environment, BIFA General Director Robert Keen released the following comments stating his concern of the impact and fairness between freight forwarders and other players in global trade:
“As the trade association for freight forwarders, which are responsible for managing the supply chains that underpin the UK’s visible international trade, we have long campaigned for friction-less borders post Brexit.
We note the publication of these Transitional Simplified Procedures by HMRC in the event of a non-deal Brexit, and are led to believe that they are aimed at making importing easier by simplifying the declarations at the border and postponing the payment of import duties that would otherwise be due.
However, having reviewed the documentation that has been released, BIFA believes that they are aimed solely at those traders, which have not been previously engaged in international trade, giving an overview of the procedures available to those traders.
Whilst some of the easements that they contain regarding simplifications and special procedures may make it easier for new applicants to obtain these authorizations, there does not appear to be equivalent liberalization of the regimes for existing holders, such as freight forwarders.
In many ways the documentation appears skewed in favor of new applicants for authorizations and actually discriminates against existing holders, particularly relating to special procedures.
It appears to us that TSP allows traders without any customs expertise, and tried and tested systems, to by-pass the strict authorization requirements which otherwise apply to freight forwarders and customs agents.
If the above are the case this will be highly unpopular amongst freight forwarders and customs agents as they appear to be excluded from them and no-one seems willing to say why this is so. That is something on which we will be seeking clarification from HMRC. If this is a true picture of the situation, we question whether the preparations are far enough advanced and whether the systems that will be needed are fully tested.
It is all very well to write down these procedures, but the unanswered question is will they work when systems are largely untried, communication links between the parties involved on the processes are not established, many will be unaware of their responsibilities, and the freight forwarding companies that are at the heart of international trade movements appear to be excluded from them.
TSP should be for all involved in visible international trade movements, including freight forwarders.”
Source: Impress Communications

Archives, EU Trade, Global Trade Daily

Brexit: BIFA Responds to UK Parliament’s Deal Rejection

1 Comment

The most recent response from Director General of the British International Freight Association (BIFA), Robert Keen, makes a clear indication  the decision made  by the UK Parliament to reject a deal must be acknowledged and prepared for to keep importers and exporters in a good place for the sake of UK’s visible trade, come March 29.

“The decision taken by Parliament is historic and needs to be acknowledged.  With just a couple of months to go before the exit date, the rejection of the deal leads BIFA to recommend that our members, which are the companies that handle the processing of most of the UK’s visible trade, to prepare on the basis that there will be a hard Brexit,” commented Robert Keen. “Speculating about any other outcome is inadvisable until UK Government provides us with clear guidelines. A hard deal may well be very disruptive and damaging for the UK economy as a whole, but freight forwarders – many of whom are Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) accredited – will play a key role in tidying up the mess left by the politicians by ensuring UK importers and exporters can continue trading without undue disruption with the rest of Europe after March 29.”

The theme is proactivity and planning next steps as the deadline approaches. Implementing trade strategies earlier than later significantly reduces the risk of trade barriers making an appearance after the fact, while preparing the region for a major shift.

“BIFA has always stated its belief that a disorderly Brexit would be the worse outcome, as it is likely to increase trade barriers and impose significant restrictions on the exchange of goods between the EU and the UK.

“Whilst BIFA’s executive management has engaged with various government departments over the last two years in regards to issues that affect the movement of visible trade post March 29th, our members have also been discussing the possible impacts with their clients.

“Large and small, BIFA members have taken actions to review all options to overcome the disorder that a no-deal Brexit could bring to international trade in order to define sustainable solutions as the set of Brexit conditions becomes clearer,” Keen said. “BIFA will be renewing our appeals to the responsible bodies in London and Brussels to do the utmost to prevent this scenario. As far as we are concerned, our members are focused on ensuring the ongoing efficient flow of freight for our customers.”

Hew concludes:

“One thing is certain, our members are ready, willing and able, to clear up the mess that has been left by politicians.”

 

Source: Impress Communications