| Florida Tomato Exchange
February 7, 2007
The Honorable Charles B. Rangel
Chairman
Ways and Means Committee
1102 Longworth House Office Building
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515-6348
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On behalf of the Florida Tomato Exchange (FTE or
Exchange), I submit the following comments on the above-referenced issue.
The Exchange represents tomato handlers, who
pack and ship a substantial majority of fresh tomatoes from Florida throughout
the U.S. and Canada in the months from October through June. For the past 40
plus years our growers and handlers have experienced increasing competition
from imports primarily from Mexico and we have attempted to use the trade
remedy laws available to us. We have had little success even though in each
case tomato imports were being sold at less than fair market value.
We have been involved in several antidumping
cases against Mexican producer-exporters and in an action involving greenhouse
tomatoes from Canada. We have testified before this Committee in opposition to
NAFTA, which we believed would exacerbate unfair competition and specifically
because the trade remedies provided would be ineffective for perishable
agricultural commodities. We have also testified in support of country of
origin labeling, and in support of legislation amending the antidumping laws to
address the seasonal nature of tomatoes and other perishable commodities.
We are currently involved in a Suspension
Agreement negotiated by the Department of Commerce with the Mexican
producer-exporters that basically sets a reference (or floor) price, under
which tomatoes cannot be sold in the United States. This Agreement was
negotiated in response to a preliminary determination by the Department of
Commerce that fresh tomatoes were dumped in the U.S.
We have reviewed the Department of Commerce’s
Final Modification; Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin During
an Antidumping Investigation, 71 Fed. Reg. 77722, December 27, 2006. We are
concerned when any proposal that could affect perishable agricultural producers
makes no mention of the impact of the proposal on our growers, most of whom are
small businesses. We want to know what the impact of this modification will be
on us and on all growers of perishable agricultural commodities.
It appears to us that we and other perishable
producers would be harmed by the modification proposed by the Commerce
Department. Based on the comments made in the Federal Register, we believe perishable
commodity producers bringing an antidumping case with the Commerce Department
could face the elimination of dumping margins in an investigation because the
Commerce Department would no longer focus on which sales are dumped but would
deduct from those sales the amount of non-dumping sales. If so, we believe the
modification would be harmful to us and make it even more onerous to
successfully bring an antidumping action against imports sold here for less
than fair value.
In addition, we believe the Commerce Department
is responding to an issue it need not respond to. We do not believe the WTO
panel decision to which the Commerce Department is responding is founded on the
applicable WTO agreements. Accordingly, there is no basis for taking this action
now and, certainly, there should be no action taken until the economic and
procedural impact of this modification is determined on U.S. industries, including those in agriculture. Congress should insist that in its
investigations the Commerce Department continue its practice, which it has used
for sometime, of capturing 100% of dumping when calculating dumping margins.
We also believe the Committee should oppose the modification proposed by the
Department of Commerce and insist that negotiations of the U.S. rights be pursued in the ongoing WTO negotiations.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate your raising this
matter at this time. We hope the Committee will consider our comments and take
action to ensure that growers and handlers like us are not effectively
prevented or limited by this modification from bringing and succeeding in an
antidumping action.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our
views to the Committee.
Sincerely,
John
M. Himmelberg
Washington Counsel
| 
