It’s deja vu all over again (again) in U.S.-Canadian lumber trade politics, as United States trade authorities slapped Canadian lumber companies with punitive tariffs last week. The New York Times had the story (see: “In New Trade Front, Trump Slaps Tariff on Canadian Lumber,” by Peter Baker and Ian Austen). “The Commerce Department determined that Canada had been improperly subsidizing the sale of softwood lumber products to the United States, and after failed negotiations, Washington decided to retaliate with tariffs of 3 percent to 24 percent,” the Times reported. “The penalties will be collected retroactively on imports dating back 90 days.”
If you’re just joining us, the United States lumber trade dispute with Canada dates back to the 1980s — well, actually, to the 1840s. This round of the argument is different only because it’s taking place in the context of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which is also a political football this year. For a brief history, here is Builder magazine coverage from February 2006 (see: “Untangoing the Trade Mess,” by Ted Cushman). Generally speaking, the Canadian side has typically won out after appealing U.S. actions in various international trade courts. But in order to avoid the cost of long, drawn-out battles, in the end the Canadians have usually agreed to negotiated settlements that impose some sort of export limits or fees on Canadian wood shipped to the United States.
Business Insider offered a thumbnail description of the various kinds of trade actions the United States can bring (see: “Trump has decided to go with the ‘nuclear option’ on some of his trade investigations,” by Linette Lopez). “The softwood lumber case against Canada is a countervailing duty case,” Business Insider explains: in other words, “Is a trading partner government illegally giving an industry in their country a subsidy that gives it an advantage over competitors?” Specifically, “Canadian timber lands are state owned, which ultimately makes for cheaper lumber for timber companies, and so the US government is claiming Canada is giving its industry an unfair advantage. The US has tried this argument against Canada before the World Trade Organization a couple of times in the past and lost.”
This time around, Canada is taking a tough rhetorical stance in response to U.S. posturing on the issue, while also playing up the extensive and generally friendly trade partnership between the two nations. CNN interviewed Canada’s top diplomat, Chrystia Freeland, on Tuesday (see: “Canada foreign minister on Trump tariffs: ‘We’re going to play hard’,” by Patrick Gillespie). “Politeness is something we believe is a national virtue, but it’s not an accident that hockey is our national sport,” said Freeland, and she noted that Canada has won every court case on lumber in the past. But Freeland accentuated the positive, saying, “Canada and the United States have probably the most successful, most mutually beneficial relationship in the world. We do two billion dollars of trade every day… This is a big relationship. It is balanced.” And she pointed out that Canada’s lumber exports to the U.S. amount to just 2 percent of total U.S. imports of Canadian goods and services. Meanwhile, U.S. builder interests are warning that tariffs on Canadian wood will increase the cost of home production in the United States, and threaten U.S. construction jobs. Read more:
- “In Canadian lumber town, real fears over a trade war with Trump,” by Ana Swanson – The Washington Post
- “Editorial: Lumber industry stuck in Groundhog Day loop,” by Edmonton Journal Editorial Board
- “Lawyers and lobbyists big winners in softwood scrap,” by Charles Lane – Waterloo Region Record
STATE BY STATE
California: If you want to see a crazy housing market, look no further than the Los Angeles metro area, reported The Los Angeles Times (see: “Writing love letters, bidding $100,000 extra: Buying a Southern California home is ‘insane’,” by Andrew Khouri). “Bidding wars are common and prices are rising during the popular spring buying season,” the paper reported; many home buyers have resorted to making offers far above the asking price. Read more:
- “Leaving coastal California is a ‘no-brainer’ for some as housing costs rise,” by Andrew Khouri – The Los Angeles Times
- “L.A.’s reality: More people want to live here than there are homes being built,” by Andrew Khouri – The Los Angeles Times
- “One solution to Southern California’s housing crisis: building in tight spaces, small lots,” by Andrew Khouri – The Los Angeles Times
Nevada: Henderson and Clark Counties have announced amnesty programs for homeowners who failed to get permits for work on their homes, the Las Vegas Sun reported (see: “Homeowners who’ve violated building codes may get amnesty in May,” by April Corbin). “North Las Vegas and Las Vegas already offer year-round amnesty for residential homeowners who self-disclose work that should be inspected,” the paper reported. ““The goal with the amnesty program is to educate and not penalize people,” says Stacey Welling, a public information officer for Clark County. “We know many people don’t realize they need a permit.”
Indiana: A general contractor can have workplace safety duties to a subcontractor’s employee based on language in the contract, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. Ordinarily, subcontractors assume the full responsibility for providing a safe workplace for their own employees. But in this case, the general contractor’s contract with an owner included a promise to manage workplace safety, leaving the general contractor liable to a worker lower down the food chain, the court ruled. The Indiana Lawyer has a report (see: “Supreme Court: General contractor assumed duty to sub-subcontractor through contract,” by Olivia Covington).
