Download - FDCL

companies in the Caribbean tax havens. 164 ”
The positioning of European corporations in the Latin American domestic markets
by means of direct investment also has to be seen in the context of geostrategical
economic competition with the U.S.A. And this competition in the course of
2003 has significantly approached the barrier of tariff –wars, which is not only being
led in a disguised way anymore: The falling value of the US-dollar combined with the
simultaneous rise of the Euro deteriorates the foreign trade position of Europe insofar
as European exports become more expensive and US-American exports become
cheaper. As the Euro continued to rise throughout 2003, four crucial events occurred
in terms of foreign trade:
• First of all the WTO, within the framework of the long-lasting dispute between
the EU and the U.S.A. on the U.S. practice to indirectly subsidize the exports of
US-companies by means of so-called “Foreign Sales Companies” (FSC), granted
the EU the right to place trade related sanctions like import tariffs on US-American
commodities for up to four billion US-dollars, which constitutes the highest
ever trade –sanction. 165 The products affected by this measure do not have to be
equivalent products. The EU, in the framework of cross-retaliation, can also place
tariffs on other products. 166 The EU initially did not make use of the sanctions,
allegedly not wanting to damage the multilateral negotiation process within the
WTO, until
• Secondly, the fifth ministerial conference of the WTO in Cancún, México, “failed”
in September of 2003 and
164 Own translation of the following original text: “Es fällt auf, dass nach Angaben der Zentralbanken und
Fachministerien Lateinamerikas ein Fünftel der ausländischen Direktinvestitionen aus anderen Ländern, d.h.
hauptsächlich aus Steueroasen, kam. Die Steueroasen scheinen aber lediglich Durchgangsstationen für die
Investitionen der Unternehmen der Industrieländer zu sein. Denn die Statistiken der Industrieländer nennen ähnlich
hohe Beträge für die Direktinvestitionen ihrer Unternehmen in den Steueroasen der Karibik.” Taken from: Rösler,
Peter: Auslandsinvestitionen in Lateinamerika, Ibero-Amerika verein, July 30, 2003.
165 http://europa.eu.int/comm/trade/issues/respectrules/dispute/pr051103_de.htm.
166 “Cross retaliation” in this context is a circumstance, which has a side-effect for the “old Europe” governments which
is not undesired: The creation of brawl and displeasure between the different US- American export sectors, when,
e.g., citrus farmers have income losses due to the punitive tariffs imposed on their product in Europe because other
U.S. export firms infringe the WTO norms through the preferential tax treatment granted by the U.S. government
– and the citrus farmers lastly have to pay for this – a circumstance which is not negligible in the 2004 U.S. election
year: “Nach Angaben aus EU-Kreisen wurden Warengruppen ausgewählt, die den “maximalen politischen Effekt
haben”. Orangensaft kam beispielsweise deshalb auf die Liste, weil davon US-Staaten wie Florida direkt betroffen
sind, in denen die Präsidentenwahl entschieden wird.” Carsten Matthäus: Bushs riskantes Spiel mit Stahl und
Büstenhaltern, in: Spiegel Online, http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,275552,00.html. Own translation:
“According to EU-information groups of goods were chosen, which have the “maximum political effect.” Orange
juice, e.g., was included in the list, because states like Florida, which are crucial for the outcome of presidential
elections, are directly affected.”
65