Back to Squawk list

U.S. imposing 220% duty on Bombardier CSeries planes

Übermittelt
 
Rival Boeing was seeking an 80% duty on the CSeries (www.cbc.ca) Mehr...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


canuck44
canuck44 24
I would expect the Canadian government to impose equivalent duties on Boeing Aircraft to be sold in Canada using all the same logic demonstrated in this political decision. Likewise Bombardier will probably begin to shift its parts manufacturing out of the USA to Canada and to Ireland. PW will be under pressure to shift their engine production to Canada or lose to European engine makers. In essence, Boeing has started a trade war.

Boeing does not realize evidently that they are handing Trudeau a political gem for I doubt Boeing (or the US) will have too many fans North of the border. This has been a popular political tactic as long as I can remember back to the days of the Avro Arrow..."vote for us against the bully". Trudeau has every reason to milk this with retaliatory actions right up to the next election.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 10
Amen canuck44..Those duties would slap Boeing really hard...talk of obtaining the Super Hornet, Westjet has up to 85 or more new Boeing aircraft ordered, AC still has new craft not yet delivered, a couple new start-ups out west could transition to an Airbus fleet.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-bombardier-1.4309000
Well Chrystia...time for you and JT to put your foot down!
dabeed
Dave Fisher 4
this is crazy since Boeing doesn't even produce an aircraft to compete with the C series, which is the aircraft Boeing claims Canada was subsidizing in the Delta deal (the deal upon which they based their complaint to the WTO)
canuck44
canuck44 5
There can be a trade off on that. Shifting the US manufacturing to China might kill two birds with a single stone.
bentwing60
bentwing60 0
So,let's go ahead and hasten the price of oil being valued in the Renminbi.
FredRio
Fred J. 8
This is narrow minded geopolitcs on the part of Boeing.

Let's not be innocent, it's part of the game and which aircraft manufacturer CAN'T be accused of receiving some form of benefit from their respective governments? But I think maybe Boeing let the lawyers and lobbyist's have the final say on what could, at the end, bet a net loss for Boeing (but not for the lawyers and the lobbyists...)

This play is only begging and it will have many other moves yet. Sad to see the direction this has taken (and I'm a Brazilian, so in theory I would be all for screwing Bombardier which competes directly - today and at the foreseeable future, at least - with Embraer, not Boeing or Airbus). I will be cheering for Bombardier on this one, for sure. We need more competition, not less.

Or, like a certain person likes to say "Sad....".
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 7
Here is another posting below...makes me furious..."guilty until proven innocent", is obviously what the US Department of Congress is saying..the financials arent even released yet...and for what?..for an aircraft niche Boeing isnt even into and acting like they dont get government subsidies or "dump" aircraft?..selling a $75 mil USD aircraft for $22 mil USD isnt dumping???

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/bombardier-hit-hard-in-boeing-dispute/ar-AAsuRI8?li=AAggFp5&ocid=mailsignout
canuck44
canuck44 8
This is political...garbage in, garbage out. Boeing has told the world that the bully owns the politicians on this side of the border...and the Swamp Creatures who all go to work for Boeing when they retire with a taxpayer pension.

Imagine the mischief Trudeau could get into with this like charging Boeing aircraft to fly over Canadian airspace to offset the duties. Probably illegal somehow but given the current decision as it relates to the law, there would be no reason not to do it. This will certainly stir the Swamp.
joelwiley
joel wiley 5
Oligopolies rarely welcome new players into the group. This is just the most blatant example that I can recall seeing.
ConcordeNick
Nick Blazanovic 14
Hopefully this is not allowed to stand. This is too good an aircraft to be denied entry into the American market due to sleazy politics.
scott8733
scott8733 6
Agreed. And let's add 'sleazy politics' to the list of ironies including: time management & marital bliss, LOL
jcarey805
Jeff Carey 1
Agreed
tbpera
Tom Pera 5
Canada will not order the F18 now... Boeing will lose in long run...sad sad sad
canuck44
canuck44 6
Not just the F/A 18. Add to that the Chinook helicopters, the Poseidon Maritime patrol aircraft, battlefield drones and a host of other defense projects. Big dollars over the next decade. Boeing can only hope for a change in government to get a foot back in that door.
tomtreutlein
tom treutlein 1
Canada's entire defense budget is about 15 billion US$ Obviously can't buy much hardware with that
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
When you figure that they had planned for 65 F35's at 9 Billion, better deals can be made..ohh and it is $52 Billion USD over the next 20 yrs..so yea...Im sure other contracts can now be obtained at a great cost to Boeing..Airbus or Sikorsky for the helo's, Viking Air Corp for maritime patrol aircraft..just a few examples.
tomtreutlein
tom treutlein 0
f35 not Boeing aircraft.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
I was replying to your remark..I know the 35's arent Boeing..but the F-18 Super Hornets are that they planned on buying instead..I was trying to show more hardware can be bought..and the budget is more than $15 Bil.
n914wa
Mike Boote 4
Let's see - Boeing is whining about a plane being subsidized by a foreign government (when in fact, Boeing has no plane to compete with it), yet has no qualms selling their aircraft to airlines that are heavily subsidized by foreign governments (Emirates, Qatar, Etihad). Be careful what you wish for, Boeing. You may get it.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
Maybe its about time, through the "Freedom of Info" act, that we find out how much Boeing have been dumping er selling their aircraft for..after all they have been getting govt subsidies for years..sorry Boeing..you "put your mouth into gear before that brain into motion" conundrum and now it's time to pay the piper!
bentwing60
bentwing60 -4
First of type 737 delivered to Lufthansa in 1968 100 seats,
CS100 108 to 133 seats. First of type.

737-700 of which SWA owns 232, 137 pax.
CS300 130 to 160 seats.

Proposed CS500 160 to 180 seats.

"when in fact, Boeing has no plane to compete with it", I suppose
"in fact" was used loosly in your statement.
n914wa
Mike Boote 4
No. I meant it literally. Where is Boeing's current 100 seat aircraft? Keep in mind, with the Delta deal, Boeing only offered 20 used E-190's and future used 717's.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
And what is even funnier Mike...Delta is trying to get rid of their 717's and Mad Dog's, not acquire more
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 5
We are talking about aircraft that Boeing now builds..SWA 737-700 are old and getting replaced by newer larger capacity MAX...they have no aircraft that the C-Series will directly compete against and if you are all up in the face and worried that the little C will take away from the Boeing MAX line?...don't because it wont and Bombardier already accepted that and agreed with Westjet (owner of a large 737 fleet who have ordered MAX replacements for their aging, no longer built, 737's )
"The 100- to 160-seat C Series, which is scheduled to carry its first passengers during the second quarter, is too small for WestJet's mainline service and too big for its Encore regional network, which uses the turboprop Bombardier Q400 plane, Mr. Saretsky CEO WestJet, said."..that was back in Q1 2016
yr2012
matt jensen 0
BW: Boeing didn't even bid on the order.

[This comment was deleted.]

sparkie624
sparkie624 4
Your language is not acceptable here.. Please re-frame and use something a little lighter. There are some younger eyes here and others that just don't want to see it.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 4
Language, sir.
23allkimm
Randall Kimm 0
Thank you, AWAALUM. There is no room for profanity by anyone on line. This is a sign that separates the professionals from the pretenders.
jdaustin294
James Austin 7
What happens if Delta takes delivery in Canada instead of ATL GA?
canuck44
canuck44 5
It will probably go by registration. Either Delta or a Canadian entity could set up a leasing company in Canada and lease them to a Delta Canadian subsidiary with Canadian. This would guarantee full employment for at least 200 attorneys.

If Delta is to participate, the most effective action is to put their remaining 737-900ER order on hold with the option to cancel. So far they have been a spectator but Boeing has now disrupted their cost projections for both capital acquisition and operations and Delta probably has a case for "tortious interference" against Boeing which they could file in a friendly court of the 11th Circuit (Florida, Alabama, Georgia).

Now that would provide discussion on this forum for years remembering Airbus is in Alabama and will get dragged in.
sparkie624
sparkie624 7
Seems a little excessive...
btweston
btweston 9
The US government has been taken over by shallow thinkers eager to please even shallower thinkers. Now we have counterproductive protectionism creeping in serving no purpose other than to make idiots cheer at rallies.

Awesome.
pilot62
Scott Campbell 3
moronic asinine stupidity
tarbaby
phil gibson 3
A really big mistake!!
A lot of jobs throughout the American industry....you just can't imagine....
Hmmm....don't like the competition??
All about the dollar...sad.
The American side will suffer the most.
The products are all overpriced anyway...
didi216
Michael Messina 3
Some at Boeing has a Lobbyist in their back pocket.
didi216
Michael Messina 1
Someone.
yr2012
matt jensen 2
A lot of someones
vanstaalduinenj
Great aircraft with bright future. Fuel burn better then forcasted, quiet, comfortable. Swiss and Baltic love them, so do passengers.
vanstaalduinenj
Boeing schoolyard bully tactics... I really hope canadian carriers both current and future remember this.
yr2012
matt jensen 0
They have long memories
patpylot
patrick baker 5
this nonsense flies in the face of the tight cooperation between Canada and the us. This is gross stupidity- 220%? The aircraft in question represents a quantum improvement, and both the swiss airline and delta see it correctly as such. The whole boeing stable of great airliners come from the federal funding lines that created the kc135, and undeniably so. ;Government funding on vital projects is normal and usual, and results in the regular improvements we have come to depend on.
PegLegJim
Jim Welch 4
I can't remember the specific details, but I seem to recall Boing "dumping" a bunch of airplanes at a loss some years back, and screaming "Free Enterprise!"
I guess their memory has suffered more than this old mans.
How convenient.
vector4traffic
vector4traffic 4
Bombardier to add Ivanka purses to their on-board duty-free - problem solved. What kind of world do we live in where that is a serious possibility?

[This comment was deleted.]

sparkie624
sparkie624 0
There are younger eyes that does not need your language... and many of us do not want to see it. Please re-frame in the future.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
Language, sir.
iaincmaciver
Iain Maciver 1
Another thought - it’s a pre-emptive strike.... Boeing sees the C300series as a threat....
upchucked
C. WESLEY GRADY 0
Boeing just won a similar case with Airbus... AB had accused B of getting unfair tax breaks from WA and Everett to secure manufacturing for that city. Stupid on the part of the gov., but that is what gov. do, they act stupid, do stupid things and then say it is for the good of all. Anyway, AB filed a similar case and it was just decided in B's favor. How soon they forget..... to quote our fearless leader..... "sad, so sad".
iaincmaciver
Iain Maciver 0
Having a suspicious mind, the following thought for you. Boeing gave up on small jet manufacturing many years ago. Obviously there is no damage, etc caused by bombardier since Boeing simply was not in the game. So it is a ruse. Boeing knows how badly managed Bombardier is, further hamstrung by its Canada & Quebec political supporters. Bring the company down, then buy bombardier at a fire sale price. Then suddenly Boeing is back into the small jet business with no startup costs, etc. Bombardier has been propped up too long and at tremendous expense to the Canadian and Quebec taxpayers and Boeing knows it. Further bombardier is a political item, not a business item. Also Boeing has a big investment in Manitoba so they are not going to scuttle that by a nonsense complaint. It is one big poker game with high stakes. My money is on Boeing.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
It is totally a nonsense complaint..Do you, Boeing or the US Government know how much the planes were sold for? NO.. Boeing isn't "hamstrung" by its US and state supporters?..Boeing hasn't "dumped" aircraft(seems to me a 737 with a price tag of almost $85USD mil gets sold for $22USD mil, I'd say that was dumping)...see the funny thing is, we basically own Bombardier Aerospace division..WE as in the Canadian taxpayer both at federal and provincial levels..you obviously know little of Canadian laws..Boeing can;t just come in all willy-nilly and buy Bombardier.
I'm sorry but my money is on Canada!
iaincmaciver
Iain Maciver -2
The taxpayer owns zero but your pension funds do. The largest the CPP but who only owns 1/2 of 1% of the voting shares though.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 4
Umm no...as I stated "basically".."basically" at the federal level until the final installment of the loan is paid..provincially, as in Quebec..40.5% of the C-series and that pension fund you mentioned is Caisse de Depot BUT Bombardier had sold a 30% stake ($1.5 Bil) in it's rail division to it, not the C-Series..you would be surprised how many pension fund/plans own what or have a stake in what..
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
Are you familiar with Gleaton's Law?
"No matter how paranoid you are, they are doing more than you realize".

Do you think Boeing could effectively manage Bombardier after the coup?
iaincmaciver
Iain Maciver 0
Another possibility is Boeing acquires bombardier, then immediately shuts down all operations, transfers technology and manufacturing to a US facility (not overnight though). This will satisfy Trump’s Make America Great, and ingratiate them to him. Like I said there is a bigger game going on, more than the C series. Does the Avro debacle come to mind?
yr2012
matt jensen 0
Boeing is gonna be the loser, when the other airlines cancel their orders. Look for the pandas to buy BBD jets. It wasn't so long ago, they were whining that if DAL didn't buy their jets, they'd go out of biz.
bentwing60
bentwing60 0
Read this,

https://aviationdoctor.wordpress.com/2016/02/28/update-bombardiers-5th-round-of-layoffs-in-26-months-to-affect-7000-employees-as-the-company-posts-a-5-34-billion-loss-after-special-items-like-writing-off-part-of-the-cseries-learjet-85-an/

This guy knows somethin. And it's a longer read than the link! And old. Seems we talked about some of this. Seems Boeing has been deliverin airplanes forever and they are "still around". They are in bidness, as is Bombardier and the fact is that the case will be determined by "politics", and Boeings dumb lawyers. Bet the Preach would be rootin for Boeing, and the US. But He is now using the anointed button, Not to be read. Boeing bids for, wins contracts, and delivers airplanes to the US government, and the highest bidder in the airline bidness. If that is a subsidy, I rest my case. When will the Quebecois take delivery of the CS airplanes they have paid for?
AllanRostic
Allan Rostic -3
Just too good! The Liberal governments past & present has subsided Bombardiers to the tune of over a billion Canadian tax dollars. Bombardier should have stood on its own or fallen by the wayside like their C$2.10 stock.
This Quebeckistan company has been fleecing Canadian taxpayers for years regardless of their product.
Boeing caught them at it finally!
So what if the airforce cannot buy F-18's, we can get a similar Russian fighter for less money and faster.. And don't count on US carriers to buy & keep them in Canada. Air Canada doesn't like competition, plus our airport landing fees & related costs amply demonstrate why smart Canadians only fly out of US airports like Buffalo, NY.
joelwiley
joel wiley 4
Subsided:
1. to sink to a low or lower level.
2. to become quiet, less active, or less violent; abate:
3. to sink or fall to the bottom; settle; precipitate:

Subsidized:
support (an organization or activity) financially.
pay part of the cost of producing (something) to reduce prices for the buyer.

How much has the Canadian Government sunk into the subsidies?
How much has the American Government sunk into Boeing on cost overruns on projects upon which they were the selected low bidder?
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
And your long winded point is?...The US has subsidized Boeing over $14USD Bilion...I guess I must be a "dumb" Canadian then, because I fly out of Canada...oh look..dumb Canadian paid $373CAD out of Toronto to LA return while "smart Canadian paid $261USD out of Buffalo..factoring in tolls at the bridge, extra gas to get there, the more expensive weekly parking and the exchange rate, I think I will stay dumb.
yr2012
matt jensen 2
AR: Our AF can buy anything we want. We just don't like being screwed 6 times over list. My recommendation is the Saab JAS39 Gripen jets - more useful for our purposes and waaaay cheaper. Plus plenty of parts at nominal costs.
abekhechi
a wrong trade war at a wrong time ! this is, as said rightfully by others a political garbage full of money and opportunities for lawyers and lobbyists. It won't help as precedent when time will come to see the new Chinese and Russian airliners coming to the markets. For sure it's a lost battle for Boeing and the US just as is the ongoing war against NAFTA and free trade agreements.
honzanl
honza nl 0
simple solution: create a Delta Canada and let them have the planes C-registered; and then let Delta Canada rent the planes to Delta USA. Then there is no import anymore and so no import duty.
canuck44
canuck44 1
That had been suggested, but then they run up against more regulators who take a dim view of foreign registered aircraft being used for domestic service. It would be fun to watch though.
bentwing60
bentwing60 -4
In defense of Boeing and the "homeland" where some might recall this site originates,

This all misses the historical perspective that EADS was backed by government money on all fronts on the A380, and who knows what else, but, on the 380, even the AB consigliere now admits those costs will never be recouped. Or repaid, I suspect. Concorde anyone? The fact remains that subsidies may take many forms. To argue that Canada will never forgive these loans and "investments" is a presumption Boeing is unwilling to take. Not that Boeing hasn't had a subsidy or "who knows", over the years, but they didn't wind up the last commercial airframer standing in the USA because of their dumb lawyers. And don't kid yourself, any time 49% of a major manufacturing companies stock moves at one fell swoop, it affects the stock price and thus the underlying value of said entity. Who bought that stock, the Canadian government. Who also extended some not inconsiderable loans to Bombardier to keep the machine going because they were about out of money. Lear 85 anyone? Gotta still be around to sell airplanes. If Trudeau and company have painted themselves into a "retaliatory" strategy based on being "essentially investors in this product" where do you draw the line between a government subsidy and an investment. I suspect the Beaudoin family will never have to inquire about the price of a bottle of wine, and no one here owned or owns any Bombardier common stock. And really, nobody here thinks the C series will not "stretch" into a single aisle 737 equivalent? Kinda like the NFL, it seems easy to take a knee when you don't really know why you are doin it, and your "Ox" is not being gored. Division, the not so new norm.
cordery
Alan Cordery 5
Boeing, as an integral part of the Military Industrial complex receives billions in taxpayer money for "defense" contracts which, in effect, are subsidies way beyond whatBombardier and Airbus receive.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
Amazing..in 1 fell swoop you go defending a company (Boeing) who has been taking government "subsidies" for years..guess what..THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY IT BACK..https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/wto-upholds-ruling-against-washingtons-tax-reduction-for-boeing/ the Canadian and Quebec governments have admitted they provuded finacial help to Bombardier, have taken shares in the company AND are being paid back.
And no...C-Series wont stretch in a single isle 737 equivalent because the new 737's are pushing close to 200+ seat mark and the old 737's are done.
yr2012
matt jensen 2
Like in the form of grant money - never has to be repaid.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 5
It's been calculated that over the years, Boeing has acquired over $14 Billion USD as subsidies..and that is only what can be seen.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 5
I stand corrected..this is from a US firm who investigates subsidies in the US "The company received $457 million in federal grants, which are typically non-repayable, between 2000 and 2014. In addition to that, there was a whopping $64 billion in federal loans and loan guarantees" "But that’s not all. Boeing also received an eye-popping $13 billion in state and local subsidies over the same 15-year period"
iaincmaciver
Iain Maciver 4
The subsidies exceed $2 billion... not $457 million.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
Yes they exceeded $2 billion...The $457 million was in the form of grants on top of the others..$800 million from Washington state for "tax reform" for a year etc
KineticRider
Randy Marco -4
The NFL knows EXACTLY why they are taking a knee.

It's to show drumpf ignorance and racism has no place in America and further to school drumpf that America is NOT a dictatorship, it is the land of FREEDOM which includes FREEDOM of expression and FREEDOM to oppose oppression and ignorance, all of which drumpf and his supporters believe in.
yr2012
matt jensen 2
TROLL - go back under your bridge
KineticRider
Randy Marco -5
@Matt obviously YOU ARE an ignoramus and/or a racist but you certainly do not understand FREEDOM nor what our Constitution says!

Get an education.
yr2012
matt jensen 2
Randy: Canadian here. Neither. I know more about your Constitution than probably you do about our Charter of Rights.
lynwilliams
lyn williams 0
I thought this site was about aircraft. I've already canceled all the rest of my hollywood and nfl subscriptions. Reckon this one has to go too.
bentwing60
bentwing60 -1
No lyn, it doesn't. Sooner or later, we weed them out with the down button and if they don't go away, a concerted effort has been known to work. Randy probably doesn't.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -2
@bent, all you incoherent ramblings just cement your ignorance. You are a complete embarrassment to yourself and this site, as evidenced by all the thumbs down you receive!

Have another drink, go back to watching faux news and the anti-American trumpf debacle.

Anmelden

Haben Sie kein Konto? Jetzt (kostenlos) registrieren für kundenspezifische Funktionen, Flugbenachrichtigungen und vieles mehr!