tunities for U.S. textile yarn manufacturers that export to qualifying markets in the Western Hemisphere. U.S. companies enjoy duty-free benefits for the finished goods they import back to the United States.

But U.S. yarn makers say unscrupulous competitors have flooded the U.S. market with Asian products falsely identified as U.S. in origin. The result: Over the last year, at least nine plants closed in North Carolina, South Carolina and Alabama. Two companies have been forced to close entirely this year, and others could follow.

Dan Nation, president of Gastonia, N.C.-based Parkdale Mills, the largest yarn spinner in the U.S., testified in Congress that his company regularly sees false affidavits of U. S. origin attached to shipments of yarn imports from China and Pakistan. Textile yarn makers hope to pressure Customs to expand funding for monitoring compliance with CAF TA and NAF TA preference rules.

Effective monitoring of textile and apparel imports is important “because duties on textile and apparel products account for a significant share of U. S. duty collections,” said Loren Yager, director of international affairs and trade at the U.S. Government Accountability Office. In fiscal 2008, Customs collected more than $34 billion, making it the second-largest generator of federal revenue after the Internal Revenue Service.

But Yager said the GAO identified three major challenges that inhibit Customs’ ability to “fully address the risk of textile transshipment.” Customs identifies those countries, manufacturers, shipments and importers that present the greatest risks. The agency targets high-risk countries for overseas factory visits, sending teams to verify foreign factories are really able to manufacture what they claim they manufacture, and to look for evidence of transshipment.

That approach may make sense, Yager said, but Customs doesn’t have the budget to target and review more than “a small share of textile and apparel trade.”

Brenda Jacobs, Washington trade

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

■ In billions of dollars.

$25

Imports Exports

 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, www.census.gov '08 '07 '06 '05 '04

Certified Environmentally Sustainable

Source Reducing/ Recyclable

Water Resistant

Export Approved IPPC-ISPM15

Mold & Bark Free

No Treatment/Bug Free

As Low As US $5.00 Each Quality made in the USA B Y AMERICAN WORKERS

Cradle to Cradle CertifiedCM as Sustainable

Export Approved IPPC-ISPM15

Source Reducing/Recyclable

Water Resistant

Certified Environmentally Sustainable

Mold & Bark Free

No Treatment/Bug Free

As Low As US $5.00 Each

 

counsel to the U. S. Association of Importers of Textile and Apparel, questions how extensive the problem is. “I’m not saying there’s no fraud, but that the problem is not as huge as they make it out to be,” she said. “Customs says that in 35 percent of cases, there is inadequate paperwork. But this is not all fraud. It can also be incomplete and inadequate paperwork. The rules are not easy, and they are different in every trade agreement.”

Jacobs said Customs often rejects paperwork because the agency hates to get “blanket documents” that don’t show details of specific shipments.

“It is not easy for many companies to comply with a Customs request,” she said. “Customs wants importers to create a story about how the shipment was made. If you want to claim preference, you have to be able to present your documents in a way that enables the Customs officer to see a story.”

Jacobs doesn’t believe Customs has underfunded textile sector compliance. “Textiles are only 5 percent of the entrees, but they are 42 percent of the revenues,” she said. “A lot of people at Customs are dedicated to textiles, given the volume of entries.”

With hundreds of textile specialists at the agency, “I can’t imagine what should happen. The scrutiny level in this industry is higher than in any other.” With good reason, she said. “Textile duties are so high.” JOC

JOC_ADV0209.INDD410-2/09

Contact Us TODAY! 330-539-5433 www.litco.com