
U.S trade body backs Bombardier against Boeing - rbanffy
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-itc-ruling/u-s-trade-body-backs-canadas-bombardier-over-boeing-in-tariff-spat-idUSKBN1FF2MB?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social&__twitter_impression=true
======
foobarbazetc
Good. This was complete protectionist BS.

~~~
ubernostrum
Consider me 'meh'. Boeing and Airbus got to do some grandstanding, and the
nice lucrative pile of corruption that goes on behind the scenes of the whole
industry keeps on turning. I don't consider it a win or a loss for anyone.

~~~
the_mitsuhiko
Even if the involved parties are corrupt it’s a good ruling. Replace the
players and that outcome is preferrable over the alternative.

~~~
ubernostrum
I've said it elsewhere, but:

This was basically a case about just how publicly and openly corrupt aircraft
manufacturers can get away with being. Previously, they at least put some
effort in to hide how much they were secretly being subsidized by their
respective home governments and how much of a discount their customers got as
a result. But this time around Bombardier either didn't bother or didn't
succeed in keeping that mostly under wraps, and that seems to've violated an
unspoken norm of the industry, which provoked Boeing to go after them. Which
then provoked Airbus to get involved to try to spite Boeing. Which then made
it a major story that people actually heard about.

I find it hard to conclude that there's a "good" or "winning" outcome here
that doesn't involve addressing the underlying industry-wide corruption.

------
tropo
It's moot. Bombardier already made an agreement with Airbus to build those
planes in the USA.

~~~
Maxious
> Boeing said after the [Airbus] agreement “the announced deal has no impact
> or effect on the pending proceedings at all. Any duties finally levied
> against the C Series (which are now expected to be 300 per cent) will have
> to be paid on any imported C Series aeroplane or part, or it will not be
> permitted into the country.”"

[https://www.ft.com/content/91968476-b41c-11e7-a398-73d59db9e...](https://www.ft.com/content/91968476-b41c-11e7-a398-73d59db9e399)

Bombardier’s wing-making factory is in Northern Ireland so if the levy stood,
that would have still affected the part prices?

------
jimjimjim
protectionism eventually devolves into semantics.

if they can't block something they'll put a tariff on it.

if they can't put a tariff on they'll subsidize the local producer.

if they can't subsidize they'll award some bs government contract which
achieves the same thing.

looking at you boeing.

~~~
ubernostrum
If every large aircraft manufacturer weren't corrupt as hell you might have a
point.

But, well, every large aircraft manufacturer is corrupt as hell. All that
happened here was one of the industry spats over just how _openly_ corrupt
it's OK to be spilled out into major media.

------
igravious
Ladies and Gentlemen, the rule of law at work. I think breaking the
Boeing/Airbus duopoly has to be a good thing in the long run.

~~~
markvdb
Only because of this Boeing pressure, Bombardier sold its Cseries to Airbus.
So no breaking the duopoly for now until the Chinese start building
competitors to the A320 or the 737...

~~~
Coincoin
Sold? They gave it away: 51% for $0.

~~~
tankenmate
In return for non cash consideration.

------
brndnmtthws
Something tells me this battle isn't over. What's stop stop Trump from issuing
another executive order that reinstates the tariffs? That's what he's been
doing in a battle with the supreme courts on his Muslim ban for the past year.

~~~
brndnmtthws
Edit: *what's to stop

