million pounds. This import level, less than half of 1 percent of domestic consumption, represented a decline from 1962 and 1963 levels of more than 2 million pounds, and less than 2 million pounds in 1964. The representatives of the domestic producers agreed with the Tariff Commission estimates, but argued that there was now a threat of a flood of imports in the next few years. The industry argued that we should act now to forestall this possibility. The further argument was made that potential threat of foreign competition could be seen in a comparison of domestic with foreign costs and prices. However, the evidence on costs and prices put to the Tariff Commission and the agencies was inconclusive. The recent decline in imports does not support the contention that domestic producers are noncompetitive. Finally, in recent years employment has been rising in the throwing mills, which provide a major portion of domestic production. Thus the available evidence does not indicate that imports are adversely affecting the domestic industry at the present time, nor does it appear to support the industry's concern over potential future economic threat. However, as a safeguard, the initiation of separate statistical tabulation of imports of textured yarns would enable the executive branch, the Congress, and the industry to watch import levels in the future for evidence of adverse impact, should a threat of a substantial rise in imports materialize. A separate but important consideration is whether a change in classification and duty rates would affect our trade relations with other countries, and raise problems in the context of the Kennedy round of trade negotiations in the GATT. The Tariff Commission stated the issue as follows: any increase in present import restrictions on textured yarns would be inconsistent with existing trade agreement obligations of the United States, and that such action, if taken, would no doubt require compensatory concessions by the United States with regard to imports of other products. In this regard, even if compensatory concessions are likely to be small, it is well recognized that increases in tariff duties without clear overriding reasons could call into question the consistency of U.S. trade policy. 58-346 0-66 TEXTURED Report to the President on Under Section 332 of t Pursuant to the Pres October TC Public Washingto Decemb TEXTURED YARNS Report to the President on Investigation No. 332-46 Under Section 332 of the Tariff Act of 1930 Pursuant to the President's Request of October 1, 1965 TC Publication 166 UNITED STATES TARIFF COMMISSION Joseph E. Talbot Glenn W. Sutton James W. Culliton Dan H. Fenn, Jr. Penelope H. Thunberg Donn N. Bent, Secretary Address all communications to United States Tariff Commission Washington, D.C. 20436 CONTENTS Pa To the President---- Conclusions of the Commission- Description and uses Processes as her we can we met tas tas tas t Description of processes-------- Technological improvements. U.S. tariff treatment-. U.S. consumption------ U.S. producers--- U.S. production--- U.S. imports U.S. prices---- Contentions of interested parties- Domestic producers' contentions- Importers' contentions--an and was an Feasibility and desirability of separate classification for Desirability Drafting considerations and techniques------- Appendix A.--Letter from the President-------as fast and that we can Appendix B.--Part 1E, Schedule 3, TSUS, and excerpts from U.S. Appendix C.--Tables-- on (TC29127) |