Trans Pacific Partnership Is A First Step To Cheap, Small Pickups In The U.S.

NoDak

Senior Member
The landmark Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement got signed today and it could mean the end of the most restrictive tariff in the American auto industry. But it’s only the start of a difficult and secretive process.

I am talking about the Chicken Tax, implemented by LBJ as some cold-as-ice revenge on France and Germany back in the ‘60s. France and Germany had the nerve to put a tariff on American chickens going into their countries, so LBJ and the UAW’s Walter Reuther hit them with a 25% import duty on potato starch, dextrin, brandy, and small pickups.

**** with our chickens and we shut down the sales of your Volkswagen Microbus, we told the world.
But that was half a century ago. In the meantime, the Chicken Tax has done much more to mess with the American auto market than anything else. Automotive News, interviewing former head of Hyundai in the U.S. John Krafcik, explains how the tax helped dumb down this country’s biggest car segment.

To sell a pickup truck in America while avoiding the Chicken Tax, a truck has to be built in the America, too. And for a foreign carmaker, that means building a new factory to build the truck. That’s not cheap. Krafcik puts the cost in the billions. With such a big investment, the foreign carmaker has to be sure it can recoup that initial cost, and that means they play things safe and avoid risk. So they invariably choose to build full-size trucks, as full-size trucks are the most common, profitable trucks in the U.S. They are the safest bet.

Krafcik elaborated, stating, “I think what is lost the most is low-volume experimentation and innovation in pickups. As soon as you get to that level of investment, the risks become so great that the solutions become fairly mainstream.”

That’s what Nissan did when they redoubled their efforts in the American truck market with the Titan, that’s what Toyota did with the Tundra. Both companies had made names for themselves in the U.S. with little trucks like the HiLux and the Datsun King Cab.

So you can see that the Chicken Tax has had two key influences in the U.S.: it has kept foreign truckmakers who build exclusively small trucks from importing into the U.S., and it has encouraged those companies that do actually build trucks in the U.S. to keep them large, and simple, and unadventurous.

And now the Trans Pacific Partnership may do away with all of that.

As the New York Times reported today, one of the final sticking points of the agreement was “a slow phaseout—-over two to three decades—of the tariffs on Japan’s autos sold in North America.”

In another article published today, Automotive News also noted that “the deal includes provisions to eliminate U.S. import tariffs of 2.5 percent on cars and 25 percent on trucks” from Japan, again with a two-decade timeframe. AN went further, explaining that there was a push to allow foreign carmakers building cars and trucks in the U.S. to source more parts from back home in Asia without incurring the 25% tariff. That would again make life easier for anyone wanting to get a small, imported truck into the U.S.

The trouble is we don’t know the specific wording of the partnership because it’s secret. So we don’t know if the Chicken Tax will only get cut for states that have signed on to the partnership or not. If that’s the case we’re still left with a big hole in the range of trucks we could get. We’re still leaving out all kinds of weird little trucks from even smaller markets. The European truck market, home of the VW Amarok, would get left off, for instance. Even worse, we’d miss out on tiny compact El Camino-esque trucklets like the Chevrolet Montana, based off of an old Opel and built in Brazil and South Africa.

Uruguay gets the Montana and America does not! It’s madness.
Surprisingly, not even all Asian trucks would get a break in a deal only involving members of the Trans Pacific Partnership. Thailand has not signed on, and their truck production is staggering. They build the Ford Ranger, the related Mazda BT-50, the Mitsubishi Triton, and the Toyota HiLux. Not that any of those trucks are really small. The HiLux is actually longer and taller than the Tacoma.

And even if all of these vehicles were suddenly allowed entry into the U.S. without a 25% tariff, they’d still have to comply with the America’s unique emissions and safety requirements. Ask Volkswagen’s diesel department if you’re wondering how much of a hurdle that can be for success in the U.S.

So this might be the end of the Chicken Tax. It’s just probably a bit more complicated than Obama signing a lease on a new Ford Ranger tomorrow.

original article : The Trans Pacific Partnership Is A First Step To Cheap, Small Pickups In The U.S.
 
Register to hide this ad
Meh. Small trucks have never served a purpose for me so I don't see the benefit. All I see is America slowly turning in to the rest of the world with tiny cars. I like my big trucks.
 
Will the sticker price of our beloved 4Runners go down; further, will the 4Runner depreciate a lot quicker? I think an increase in 4Runner supply will de-value our rigs. Can I claim the depreciation on my taxes? I'll file a T4R-EZ-Form :usa:
 
Why do you want the bad Asian copy of a Ford Ranchero (yes I mean Ranchero since it was a bad copy of an El Camino :P)

Why not? I do not need to tow anything heavy nor am I in construction biz. I just need space to haul stuff for home improvement/landscaping stuff. At the same time, I need something that is smooth riding, roomy inside for 3 kids, safety (crash scores) and (hopefully this time) good on gas. If it can get close to fuel economy of Honda Pilot, then that is great!

As for it being a copy...why do I care? As long as it works as advertised, it can copy whoever it wants!
 
Why not? I do not need to tow anything heavy nor am I in construction biz. I just need space to haul stuff for home improvement/landscaping stuff. At the same time, I need something that is smooth riding, roomy inside for 3 kids, safety (crash scores) and (hopefully this time) good on gas. If it can get close to fuel economy of Honda Pilot, then that is great!

As for it being a copy...why do I care? As long as it works as advertised, it can copy whoever it wants!

Can't believe I a going to say this, but that actually sounds like a reasonable use for a Ridgeline... I'm going to go shoot myself now...
 
I am not certain that, just for the sake of small pickup trucks coming to american shores, I can fully support the TPP. Considering what NAFTA did to US manufacturing (who knew Ross Perot would be right) I am leary of seeing SE Asian countries with shitty working conditions and no labor laws taking more manufacturing jobs away from the world.
 
The Chicken Tax is not why Ford dropped the Ranger or Dodge dropped the Dakota.

And I remember the true small trucks from Datsun, Toyota, Nissan, Chevy, Ford, and Dodge well after the 60's.

Besides, the new "small" trucks are not really small at all. They are closer to what full size was back in the 80's. And full size trucks now are just huge.

Personally, I like small trucks. They definitely fit a niche, are easier to maneuver in the Lowes or Home Depot parking lot, and for the majority of people they will do all that's ever asked of them. Would be nice if you could get a basic small truck with a 6.5' bed, 4 cylinder, manual transmission with AC and basic radio for about $12K again...
 
Would be nice if you could get a basic small truck with a 6.5' bed, 4 cylinder, manual transmission with AC and basic radio for about $12K again...

I would still have my old '86 Mazda B2200 if not for a wanton drunk driver cutting in front of me a few years ago, and even after that it was still driveable.
Sadly, we cannot get vehicles built simply and priced like that anymore because we have to be protected from ourselves, between overarching safety features adding weight and complexity and increasing emissions controls adding a lot of cost. I guess its all for the best, though.
 
back when the warden and I was first married, this was the used truck we bought for her.

2wd brown manual and decent overall (minus the hubcaps on this example). was great while it lasted but eventually we moved on to bigger and better things.

.
 

Attachments

  • old truck toyota.jpg
    old truck toyota.jpg
    34.6 KB · Views: 194
Sadly, we cannot get vehicles built simply and priced like that anymore because we have to be protected from ourselves, between overarching safety features adding weight and complexity and increasing emissions controls adding a lot of cost.

Unfortunately I haven't seen any evidence from the general public recently to argue otherwise. People are barely responsible enough these days to tie their own shoes.

I guess its all for the best, though.

:doh: :tape: :smash:
 
Last edited:
Remove chicken tax within 20 year time frame? Did I read that right? I'm willing to bet a shiny nickel that self driving cars will be main stream by then.
 
The landmark Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement got signed today

This treaty has not been "passed" yet.

It sounds awful. It's modeled off the 2011 South Korean free trade agreement which was supposed to bring new jobs and new markets but only increased the trade deficit and resulted in 75,000+ job losses in the US. The TPP if passed could lead to millions in job losses.

U.S.-Korea Trade Deal Resulted in Growing Trade Deficits and More Than 75,000 Lost U.S. Jobs | Economic Policy Institute

March 15th was the third anniversary of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS). President Obama said that the agreement would support 70,000 U.S. jobs. This claim was supported by a White House fact sheet that claimed that the KORUS agreement would “increase exports of American goods by $10 to $11 billion…” and that they would “support 70,000 American jobs from increased goods exports alone.” Things are not turning out as predicted. Far from supporting jobs, growing goods trade deficits with Korea have eliminated more than 75,000 jobs between 2011 and 2014.

Expanding exports alone is not enough to ensure that trade adds jobs to the economy. Increases in U.S. exports tend to create jobs in the United States, but increases in imports lead to job loss—by destroying existing jobs and preventing new job creation—as imports displace goods that otherwise would have been made in the United States by domestic workers. Thus, it is changes in trade balances—the net of exports and imports—that determine the number of jobs created or displaced by trade and investment deals like KORUS.

In the first three years after KORUS took effect, U.S. domestic exports to Korea increased by only $0.8 billion, an increase of 1.8%, as shown in the figure below. Imports from Korea increased $12.6 billion, an increase of 22.5%. As a result, the U.S.trade deficit with Korea increased $11.8 billion between 2011 and 2014, an increase of 80.4%, nearly doubling in just three years.
 

Attachments

  • 147-body.png
    147-body.png
    48.6 KB · Views: 128
Last edited:
This treaty has not been "passed" yet.

It sounds awful. It's modeled off the 2011 South Korean free trade agreement which was supposed to bring new jobs and new markets but only increased the trade deficit and resulted in 75,000+ job losses in the US. The TPP if passed could lead to millions in job losses.

U.S.-Korea Trade Deal Resulted in Growing Trade Deficits and More Than 75,000 Lost U.S. Jobs | Economic Policy Institute

This x 1000. Its too simple to think that "opening the trade borders" is going to allow for a balanced flow between two nations. One becomes the maker, the other becomes the buyer if there is any sort of difference between the two nations labor and wage standards. And where is there a huge difference in labor and wage standards in regard to the TPP? Southeast Asia and pretty much any other nation involved. I have agreed with a lot of what Obama has accomplished, but this is a misstep, especially while the administration is speaking out of the other side of their mouths about increasing domestic production and "not every kid needs to go to college". I firmly believe in that, FWIW, so long as there are good paying middle class manufacturing and production jobs. Shit I don't want to wear a collared shirt every day but I can't make what I make getting my hands dirty so I only do it on the weekends.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
278,317
Messages
3,554,129
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top