US appeals WTO ruling over prohibited subsidies

Dec. 16, 2016: The US filed a notice of appeal today of the WTO ruling that  Washington State tax breaks granted to entice Boeing to locate a wing plant for the 777X and assemble the airplane at Everett ((WA) was a prohibited subsidy.

The move was expected.

At issue were $8.7bn in tax breaks.

12 Comments on “US appeals WTO ruling over prohibited subsidies

  1. Interesting- if tax breaks are considered subsidies under WTO- how about Airbus in Alabama ?? State gave bucu tax breaks to get Airbus there- but not as much as WA state to Boeing . And Ala tied employment rates to payback and tax issues – read whole article at

    http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/big_incentives_at_stake_as_air.html

    ” Airbus, an international aerospace giant that generated more than $68 billion last year, did not decide to locate its $600 million assembly plant in Mobile for free.

    The arrangement took state money, and lots of it.

    Luring Airbus to Alabama required the promise of state and local investment of more than $158 million. So far, the state has paid the company $41.2 million, with $29.3 million still to go. Alabama Industrial Development Training is kicking in another $51.8 million.

    Mobile County has given $10.5 million of $14 million that it pledged, and the city of Mobile has contributed more than $10 million of a potential $18 million.

    The money is being spent to build Airbus’ plant as well as improve roads and regrade soil at the company’s location at Mobile Aeroplex at Brookley. Airbus also will benefit from significant tax breaks while the manufacturing operation grows out of its infancy.

    Right now, the employment level at the Airbus plant is at about one-quarter of its capacity. Airbus will need to more than double its direct and supporting workforce to keep all of the incentives that it’s due from the state.”

      • Those are considered breaks available to many industries, Washington State made its deals specific to Boeing.

    • As I pointed out in a previous post I think this is one very good reason for EU to pursue this now. Airbus might move more operations to the USA.

  2. And to add a twist to this, GE moved its natural gas engine business out of Waukesha Wisconsin to Canada.

    Cited reason, they know how important international trade is and are willing to support it. With the EX Import bank shutdown, the US obviously does not.

    So if you can’t play states off against each other, you move across a border.

    Modern world, not a very rosy picture.

      • Sure it wouldn’t have anything to do with Boeing being in bed with the state and their highly successful, lean and frugal F-35 program? The new adminstrstion have some problems with this colossal cronyism and I don’t blame them. Maybe th next Air Forc One will be an Airbus if they dont watch themselves.

        • …” Boeing being in bed with the state and their highly successful, lean and frugal F-35 program?..”

          Uhhh- BA does not build or assemble any significant part of the F-35..

          Try Lockheed for your rant ..

          • Sorry. Remembered tgat after I typed it and couldnt delete. Brainfart. Dont know how I got those wired crossed.

  3. If there are no consequences, why don’t Airbus and the EU bother with it?. Boeing has effectively destroyed the WTO along with the Chinese. Its been exposed for what it is, a bullying tool for big nations.

  4. “Airbus will need to more than double its direct and supporting workforce to keep all of the incentives that it’s due from the state.”

    What Washington State seems to have forgotten as a conditional?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.