Cablegate: Anti-Dumping Duties On U.S. Poultry

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

270502Z May 05

UNCLAS PRETORIA 002082

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR AF/EPS; AF/S TCRAIG
USDOC FOR 4510/ITA/IEP/ANESA/OA/J DIEMOND
COMMERCE ALSO FOR HVINEYARD
TREASURY FOR OWHYCHE-SHAW
DEPT PASS USDA FOR FAS TPOMEROY, RHENDERSON AND HWETZEL
DEPT PASS USTR FOR FLISER, PCOLEMAN, AND CMOORE

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD EAGR ECON SF
SUBJECT: ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON U.S. POULTRY

REF: (A) STATE 98082, (B) 2004 PRETORIA 2504

(U) This cable in sensitive but unclassified. Not for
internet distribution.

1. (SBU) Deputy Econ Chief and Agricultural Counselor raised
reftel points with three officials of ITAC, the
International Trade Administration of South Africa, on May
26: Nomonde Maimela, Chief Commissioner; Carina Grove,
Director: Trade Remedies 1; and Niki Kruger, Senior lawyer.
The U.S. Embassy officers asked that the anti-dumping duties
be allowed to expire; underlined their unfair discrimination
against U.S. exports to the benefit of other countries, such
as Brazil; and pointed out flaws in the methodology used to
calculate the duties, noting the unhelpful signal this would
send to other countries.

2. (SBU) The South Africans confirmed that they had received
a petition from the South African domestic poultry industry
to extend the anti-dumping duties. ITAC did not expect a
decision on the extension until later in the year. (Note:
As noted in reftel B notice of the sunset review, the date
of expiry of the duty is listed as December 27, 2005.) The
South Africans also responded that it would be very helpful
if the U.S. companies affected, namely Tyson Foods and Gold
Kist, would respond fully to the questions contained in the
sunset review documents that ITAC will send out to concerned
parties in the next few months, if ITAC decides to initiate
a review. In particular, they recommended that the U.S.
companies provide ITAC with factual information about prices
on their poultry exports to other countries as well as on
their pricing for sales in the U.S. market to make their
case that they are not dumping and would not be dumping.

3. (SBU) It will not help their case if the U.S. companies
do not submit any information, as that will leave ITAC in
the position of hearing only from the petitioners seeking
the continuation of the anti-dumping duties. The best
prospect for getting the anti-dumping duties to expire, or
reduced, is for U.S. companies to provide ITAC with
information to show their prices are fair. They are open to
information from any U.S. companies, not just Tysons Food
and Gold Kist. This would provide ITAC with arguments ITAC
can factor into its written recommendation to the DTI
Minister on deciding the case.

4. (SBU) Ms. Maimela pointedly advised, however, that the
companies not argue questions about methodology.

5. (SBU) Comment: There is no change in ITAC's views about
the methodology used in South Africa's analysis of the
issue. ITAC's position is the same today as it was in
September 2001 when then USTR Ambassador Zoellick and then
Trade and Industry Minister Alec Erwin discussed this issue
in a digital videoconference. Companies will not help, but
hurt, their case by contesting the methodology. On the
positive side, Maimela did indicate an open mind about
receiving more information regarding market prices. ITAC
has generally treated companies that cooperate by providing
information more favorably than those who ignore requests
for information.

FRAZER

© Scoop Media