Washington -- Is food wrap high-tech or low-tech? This issue is in front of US government officials who are discussing the preparation of tariffs on Chinese imports.
President Trump’s important reason for imposing tariffs on Chinese imports is that he hopes to end unfair trade practices, such as China’s forced foreign companies to transfer high-tech technologies to China, such as electric vehicles and those included in 'Made in China 2025’. project.
But plastic films and other low-tech plastic products are also included in the latest tax increase list. Many US companies are telling the Trump administration: 'Thank you, no. We don't have this pressure, we don't want to be a trade war. Part. 'They believe that plastic film technology and polypropylene technology that has existed for decades are common commodities, and it has nothing to do with China's hope to enter the next generation of new manufacturing.
Reynolds Consumer Products, a polyethylene stretch film company based in Lakefield, Ill., was represented at the US Government Hearing on July 25. At the meeting, the company representative said that PE film produced in China was used for the In the company's new kitchen food packaging products, this film is not important for China's high-tech development, and should not face a 25% tariff.
Lisa Burns, vice president of marketing for the Reynolds brand, said: 'The production of plastic PE packaging film is not a critical product of China's manufacturing 2025, nor does it contain important industrial technologies. On the contrary, the technology and know-how of producing PE plastic packaging has been It has been open to the world for many years. The focus of China Manufacturing 2025 is on areas that China believes drive future economic growth, such as artificial intelligence, aerospace, incremental and virtual reality, high-speed rail transit and new energy vehicles.
At the hearings from July 24th to 25th, this argument was repeated, because many companies hope that the products they need are not subject to tariffs. From a company perspective, this is understandable. But the Trump administration It believes that its targets are unfair trade, compulsory technology transfer and intellectual property infringement, and the Chinese government's ambitious 'Made in China 2025' program. But the US government opened the door to debates for companies such as Reynolds, announcing that if the company can show Their products are 'no strategic importance' or have nothing to do with 'Made in China 2025' to attend a congressional hearing.
Polyester importer K2 Polyurethanes seized the opportunity.
K2 boss Mark Bradley said at a government hearing that the technology used to import polyurethanes that are subject to a 25% tariff has been in existence for decades, and is not part of the Chinese government's pressure to apply proprietary knowledge. He said: 'American company Without pressure to provide technology to Chinese companies, polyester production is also not related to the China Manufacturing 2025 program.
The Trump administration said that US companies are reluctant to publicly criticize China because of fear of retaliation, and said that tariffs will force China to resolve its trade surplus with the US$375 billion a year. Another goal is to let the Chinese government relax some strategic industries. Requirements, such as the automotive industry, the Chinese government requires GM and other companies to form joint ventures with Chinese companies, the highest shareholding ratio has been 50%.
The Trump administration announced in May the first round of a list of goods subject to a 25% tariff. The government said that these imported goods 'have important industrial technology and are related to China Manufacturing 2025'.
But this time the plastics and chemical industry has become the mainstay. In the second round of the catalogue of tariffs to be imposed on July 24th to 25th, there are a total of 10 pages of catalogues, 5 pages of plastic and chemical products. Value calculations, of the total $16 billion in products, plastics and chemicals account for only $2.2 billion).
US government officials explain why so many plastic imports are listed, saying that these products benefit from the Chinese government's policy. The US Trade Representative press officer told Plastics News: 'All listed products benefit Industrial policies in China, including the China Manufacturing 2025 Program.'
But some plastics trade groups, including the American Plastics Industry Association, expressed doubts about this assertion.
In response to the May issue of the tariff list, the association's written documents stated: 'Our industry is also worried about China's intellectual property infringement, fearing to weaken the ability of US companies to compete in China, but the association and its members found few incidents. Can prove that there is a reasonable reason for the addition of tariffs. '
This is also the argument given by Reynolds. Burns told the hearing that consumer goods companies were not required to transfer sensitive technologies or intellectual property related to plastic film, and as far as they know, their Chinese suppliers did not receive 'Made in China 2025'. 'Support for the plan.
She said: 'This further explains that the manufacture of PE plastic packaging film in China has nothing to do with sensitive technology.'
The importer Impak Film USA hopes that the PVC-coated PET film imported from China will be exempted from tariffs. The company claims that the basic technology has been available for 50 years, and its Chinese suppliers have accumulated their own know-how for many years.
The company expressed its sympathy with the Trump administration's goal of unfair trade, but the packaging industry is not a China-made 2025 project, so targeting the plastic film industry will not help achieve the broad goals of the United States.
Impak Business Director Ed Jenkins said: 'The manufacture of coated films is not in the high-tech field at all. Our company or consumers are not required by Chinese manufacturers to share intellectual property rights or be forced to transfer technology, or are forced to set up joint ventures.'