WASHINGTON -- Asked about the collateral damage caused by the trade war with China: Saudi Basic Industries Inc. (Sabic) stated that hiring high tariffs on polycarbonate exported from the United States to China may lead to The company shifted some of its production from the United States to other countries.
This is a Sabic executive stated at a hearing in Washington on May 15 that the potential trade war between the two countries will lead to unexpected consequences, causing varying degrees of damage to plastics and chemical manufacturers.
Sabic is not the only company that believes that tariffs will unduly promote part of overseas production. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) told the panel that China’s retaliatory tariff may lead to some US specialty polymer producers. 'Reduce or terminate production in the United States' in order to maintain its competitiveness in the Chinese market.
But Sabic's statement is the most powerful, especially the 25% tariff imposed on the resin exported to the United States by the United States, which is linked to the possible harm to the company's US factories and jobs.
Says Greg Skelton, head of public relations for the Americas Region of Sabic, said: 'If China implements these retaliatory tariffs, we will try to maintain our market share in China. This may mean shifting US production to our existing areas elsewhere. Polycarbonate factory. '
Skelton specifically mentioned the company's polycarbonate plants in Mount Vernon, Indiana and Burkeville, Alabama, and said: 'The good manufacturing jobs we provide will suffer from China's high tariffs. The adverse effects of long-term demand disruptions. '
He also said that reducing the production of polycarbonate in the United States would damage American plastic product processors and their customers who rely on Sabic materials.
Skelton said: 'This will cause a corresponding cost impact on downstream industries in the United States, such as automotive, electronics and medical devices. The polycarbonates used in these industries are currently derived from our production in the United States. It is not the original intention of the government to propose measures to bring a negative blow to the company, but it is very important to take into account the impact on the real world.
U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) convenes a panel of experts to discuss the Trump administration’s proposed US$50 billion tariff and the adverse consequences of China’s retaliatory actions, Sabic, the ACC Council and other organizations The testimony was given on the opening day of the three-day hearing.
Although many people in the US plastics industry are supportive of tariffs, the Washington hearing gave skeptics to the Trump tariff plan an opportunity to refute the plan with more detailed views than ever before.
For example, the ACC Council pointed out that its testimony reflected new concerns of the plastics industry. These companies are concerned that Chinese tariffs will push them out of the growing Chinese market. The head of the international trade director Ed Brzytwa of the ACC Board of Directors, said: ' Some ACC board members are producers of specialty polymers that serve the global market through U.S. factories and compete with non-U.S. suppliers.
He said: 'China’s retaliatory tariffs will weaken the competitiveness of US producers in very important export markets. Some producers will reduce or terminate production in the United States to maintain seats in the Chinese market, while others The situation will be very passive. '
The ACC Council also cited an example of a company that relied on 'special plastic products produced in the United States', worried about the direct impact of the multi-million dollar brought by China's tariffs, and stated that China's tariffs' will stimulate overseas production. The company hopes Transfer the production of these materials to their European or Asian plants.
Brzytwa declined to disclose the company's name or details, but repeatedly stated that the ACC Council believes that 40% of China’s retaliatory tariffs are for US chemical and plastic manufacturers.
The manufacturing groups at the hearing tried to follow the same route, proving that they were also concerned about the Trump administration’s concerns about China, but did not think that the general increase of tariffs was the solution.
The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) praised the government's tax reduction measures and regulatory retreat and expressed its enthusiasm for China’s great concern.
However, the NAM Association pointed out that even if there is an overall deficit in China’s exports, US manufacturing exports to China have increased five-fold since 2001 to reach US$97 billion, and China is now the third largest export of U.S. manufacturers. market.
Linda Dempsey, vice president of international economic affairs at the NAM Association, said: 'Our manufacturers need to be able to continue to use economic growth to win more sales in China to support and create more high-paying manufacturing jobs within the United States.'
The NAM Association, the ACC Council and other groups urge more targeted approaches. The NAM Association advocates that a comprehensive trade agreement be negotiated with Beijing, which will better open the Chinese market for US merchandise.
According to the written testimony of the Plastics Industry Association (PAI), which is based in Washington, DC, the plastics industry itself is also divided on tariff issues. The organization did not appoint delegates to provide testimony at the hearing.
In the testimony, the Association’s deputy head of government affairs, Scott DeFife, wrote: 'There are direct competitors from China and companies that do not directly come from China’s competitors have disagreed on the issue of supporting tariffs. In general, we believe that There will be more targeted ways to solve the problem that plagues China-US trade relations -- measures that do not place the country in the risk of trade warfare.'
Milacron Holdings Corp., the largest plastics machinery manufacturer in the US, stated in its written testimony that it supports the Trump administration's tariff of 25% on Chinese injection molding machines.
However, Milacron opposed the collection of approximately 100 million U.S. dollars in tariffs on Chinese-made components heavily dependent on U.S. equipment, demonstrating the complexity of the global supply chain.
In short, in the testimony, there have been recurring views that benefited and damaged him. This may be a challenge for the tariff.
For example, an association representing users of presses stated that they opposed the imposition of tariffs on plastic equipment made in China.
The Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (MEMA), which represents 1,000 auto parts manufacturers, specifically requested that the USTR office cancel tariffs on Chinese injection molding machines and plastic molds. This is the association's desire to exempt from tariffs. Two of the long list of other equipment.
The association argued that these tariffs would undermine the competitiveness of its member companies and would not be able to solve China's tariff threats. This view coincides with the NAM Association's statement at the hearing.
Dempsey said: 'Although tariffs may solve short-term problems for some people, we often receive feedback from manufacturers across the United States. They are deeply concerned about the possible negative impact of proposed tariffs. These tariffs will weaken many manufacturers that rely on imports. Strength. '