The conflict over Airbus Aid started in 2004, when United States asked for a study of wher re was a favourable treatment to manufacturer in Europe, which was a disadvantage for or competitors. Specifically, for its main rival, American manufacturer of Boeing aircraft. The WTO partly gave it reason and asked to change certain behaviors, which it now considers to have not been corrected. "Today's decision puts an end to dispute and makes it easier for US trade representative to apply for compensation in form of tariffs on European imports to United States," warns Boeing on Tuesday in a statement after Report. However, application of se tariffs and ir scope should be considered in anor separate process, which may last for months.
The conflict has been stuck in reports and appeals for more than 14 years. In 2010 a report was issued and some irregularities were verified. The EU appealed, but finally, after a new report on it, in 2011 it announced that it would implement resolutions ordered by WTO. The United States considered that it was not complying and requested arbitration. After a long process with more cross-claims and appeals, on 15 May WTO Appellate Body issued its report on issue.More information
- USA prepares measures against Europe for aid to Airbus
- Airbus and Boeing, a war of gold
- The World Trade Organization ratifies that aid to Boeing was illegal
"We conclude that European Union and certain Member States have not implemented DSB's recommendations and rulings that y should put ir measures in conformity with ir obligations under SCM Agreement. As long as European Union and certain Member States have not complied with DSB's recommendations and rulings in initial dispute, se recommendations and resolutions remain operational. " That is summary that WTO itself carries out after a report of almost 300 pages where one by one analyses fulfillment or not of demands that y made, giving in good part reason to United States.
The WTO does not check all allegations of damage that US claims to have suffered (in fact, it rejects about 200 claims). But it does note that EU did not withdraw when it demanded subsidies for several models (many of those that were stopped from being implemented, simply because y expired, he says) and that Airbus was provided, for example, financing at lower-market rates for L Anzar new models. and points out that European Union "has not shown that alleged partial privatization of Aérospatiale in 1999, transactions leading to creation of EADS in 2000 and sale of BAE Systems to EADS in 2006 of its 20% stake in Airbus SAS were event Intermediates that gave rise to extinction of benefit of all subsidies in litigation. "The threat of multi-millionaire tariffs
Boeing has celebrated victory. It says in a statement that published report shows that EU "has provided 22 billion of dollars in illegal subsidies to European aircraft manufacturer Airbus". And that EU must "end se unfair trade practices and remedy continued damage caused by illegal subsidies."
The company recalls that, as a counterpart, United States can now apply huge tariffs on importing European aircraft. And even venture to point out that y will be billionaires, although that process can still take months to materialize. "The value of se authorized tariffs would, predictably, reach billions a year, unless Airbus redresses illegal subsidies received by European governments for ir newer model aircraft. Tariffs are expected to be authorized by United States up to an amount equivalent to annual damage caused by this market-distorting practice, and se tariffs could begin to be applied in 2019. It would be WTO's most important licensing of tariffs to date, "he warns.
Airbus is not only one who has received accusations of illegal aid. Boeing itself recognizes that, after several lawsuits, "re is an adverse opinion for United States by WTO on a fiscal measure of state of Washington." The decision has been appealed and a firm opinion is envisaged at end of this year or at beginning of 2019.