News & Events - Archived News

[ Up ]
 
U.S. bakers urge congress to reject high sugar syrup tariff
By Kim Archer; Dow Jones Newswires
October 26, 2000
 
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- A national group of independent bakers are urging Congress to reject a proposal to impose high import tariffs on certain sugar syrup imports.

In a letter delivered to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and other congressional leaders, the president of the Independent Bakers Association said imposing such a tariff would violate the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

"The...(agreement) removed the President's authority to impose new tariff rate quotas on imports from other World Trade Organization member countries," wrote Robert N. Pyle, IBA president.

Sen. John Breaux, R-La., has offered legislation that would subject certain sugar syrup imports to stiff duties.

The bill is aimed at a small Michigan company, Heartland By-Products, that has been importing sugar syrup from Canada outside the high duties imposed under the U.S. tariff-rate quota.

The company received a ruling by the U.S. Customs Service in 1995 that allows it to import the sugar syrup without paying the stiff duties and to extract the sugar from the mixture once in the U.S.

This has angered the U.S. sugar industry, which says Heartland's practice is unfair because it circumvents U.S. sugar import policy and contributes to the instability of sugar prices.
Last week, 18 U.S. senators from sugar-producing states urged Lott in a letter to insert the provision in one of the final bills making its way through Congress and to approve it.

But the IBA, which consists of 400 family-owned bakeries who produce more than half the bread baked in the U.S., said the legislation "would adversely affect U.S. sweetener markets" and hamper bakers' ability to remain competitive.

In recent days, the Chocolate Manufacturers Association, the National Confectioners Association, and the Consumer Federation of America also voiced opposition to the legislation.

Heartland says it has followed the law and if stiff duties were imposed, the company would have to shut down permanently.