Competing sugar subsidy battles headed to WTO? | Michigan Farm News

Competing sugar subsidy battles headed to WTO?

Category: Politics

by Farm News Media

Sugar-Competition_MFN_11.2.18
Michigan Sugar Company received its 100,000th load of sugar beets of the season on Oct. 30, and is now estimating the 2018 harvest is about 75 percent complete.

Tensions among subsidized sugar exporters are mounting, and U.S. sugar producers are saying, “It’s about time,” according to the American Sugar Alliance (ASA), which is promoting its “zero-for-zero” concept to eliminate U.S. sugar policy once foreign subsidies are addressed.

That strategy, according to ASA, is a free market approach that rewards the best business people, not the most subsidized. “For far too many years, big sugar exporters around the globe have been embroiled in a subsidy arms race by one-upping each other with egregious handouts,” ASA said. “But now, the biggest producer and a major subsidizer itself, Brazil, has had enough as prices reach ludicrously low levels.”

Brazil blames India’s overproduction for the recent price freefall, and they have a compelling argument. Driven by pervasive government support, India's sugar production has bounced back from a disappointing 2017 crop in stunning fashion. Indian sugar production this year is expected be record high – 52 percent higher than just two years ago – and match or surpass Brazil’s world-leading 34 million metric tons.

According to ASA, the Brazilian sugar industry is urging its government to file suit against India in the World Trade Organization over a $760 million subsidy package aimed at incentivizing the export of 5 million metric tons of sugar.

“In its march to become the world’s biggest sugar producer and to build political support for the country’s prime minister, India has announced a slew of new programs ranging from producer payments to transportation aid,” ASA claims. “And that’s on top of the $1.7 billion subsidy program and excessive debt forgiveness packages that have punctuated its industry in recent years.”

Brazil is courting help in its quest to end Indian subsidies, too. Another big sugar subsidizer, Thailand, and other sugar exporters are joining the fight as part of the Global Sugar Alliance. “If the subsidy is not repelled, terrible economic and social consequences will be felt by sugar-producing countries around the world,” explained Greg Beashel, the Global Sugar Alliance’s chairman.

ASA contends that the U.S. doesn’t dole out subsidy checks to prop up its producers, and instead has a WTO-compliant, no-cost sugar policy based on government-backed loans that are repaid with interest.

“America doesn’t export sugar,” ASA said. “So, while we are not directly affected by India, we are concerned about the subsidy-driven chronic depression of the world market. That’s why U.S. sugar producers hope Brazil and its allies are successful in ripping apart India’s complex web of government supports.”

ASA goes on to suggest that India should dig into government supports in Brazil, too, which has used roughly $2.5 billion in sugar subsidies a year, and Thailand which pays $1.3 billion annually in subsidies might be another target.

“The global sugar market is so screwed up that America’s top agriculture trade negotiator recently made this observation: ‘I can’t think of a commodity that is more distorted … If you think there’s a problem in steel, take a look at the sugar market,’” ASA said.

According to ASA, the only way to dry up the global glut of sugar and return prices to true market-based principles is to dry up the subsidies that wrecked the market in the first place. “That’s the thinking behind the Zero-for-Zero sugar policy that U.S. producers have championed for years. No subsidies. No trade-distorting policies. Just producers competing on a level playing field, as it should be.” ASA said.