• About Us
  • Activity
  • Advertising
  • Books
  • Business
  • Contact
  • Entertainment
  • feedback
  • Government
  • Home
  • Interviews
  • Members
  • National
  • Nevada
  • Nevada News and Views
  • Newsmax
  • NN&V Ads
  • Opinion
  • Politics
  • Polls
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Confirmation
  • Survey
  • Survey
  • Terms of Service
  • Today’s Top 10
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Welcome!
  • Yop Poll Archive
Nevada News and Views
  • Home
  • Muth’s Truths
  • Politics
  • Government
  • Entertainment
  • More
    • Nevada
    • Opinion
    • Business
    • Travel
    • News
    • Sports
  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Pinterest

  • RSS

Business

In Defense of Sugar Tariffs and Quotas

In Defense of Sugar Tariffs and Quotas
N&V Staff
May 29, 2019

(Chuck Muth) – A recent op-ed by Alison Winters of Americans for Prosperity criticized the U.S. sugar program – which includes modest tariffs and limited quotas on imported sugar – arguing that “quotas are more insidious than tariffs.”

To make her case, Ms. Winters referred to quotas imposed by President Reagan on Japanese automakers in the early 1980s.  Once quotas were in place, she wrote, “American auto companies simply raised prices.”

But that’s exactly where her argument as it relates to sugar falls apart.

Contrary to her claim that once quotas are in place American producers will raise prices, the targeted quotas on imported sugar have been around since well before Reagan’s presidency.

And the fact is, the cost of domestic sugar today is almost exactly what it was when Reagan was president.

So American sugar producers have NOT raised sugar prices on American consumers despite those import quotas.

Ms. Winters continued…

“Sugar has enjoyed protection almost since our country’s founding, while U.S. sugar quotas were first introduced in 1934. Today, we have tariff rate quotas on both refined and raw sugar, which means any imports over a certain level are subject to tariffs: the worst of both worlds.”

As for tariffs, they are generally applied to imports from foreign countries whose governments unfairly subsidize their sugar industries, often resulting in prices below the cost of production and distorting the global market.

The U.S. sugar program is a reasonable protection for a key agricultural industry against such unfair international trade policies.  If a genuine threat didn’t exist, protection wouldn’t be necessary.

The solution isn’t for the United States to embrace universal disarmament.  The solution is for foreign governments to stop cheating and propping up their comparatively inefficient industries.

A true global free market must be free from foreign government subsidies.

Mr. Muth is president of Citizen Outreach and publisher of Nevada News & Views.  His views are his own.

Prev postNext post

Related ItemsbusinessFeatured ArticleGovernment
Business
May 29, 2019
N&V Staff

Related ItemsbusinessFeatured ArticleGovernment

More in Business

Trump, Biden and U.S. Sugar Policy

N&V StaffJanuary 11, 2021
Read More

GUEST COMMENTARY: How the Whiskey Industry Could Point Way for Sugar Sector

N&V StaffDecember 14, 2020
Read More

What Congress Can Learn from Vietnam on Sugar Policy

N&V StaffDecember 8, 2020
Read More

Preserve U.S. Sugar Policy Regardless of Presidential Election Result

N&V StaffNovember 20, 2020
Read More

Two-Cents Worth: The Cost of Protecting American Sugar Farmers

N&V StaffOctober 19, 2020
Read More

Dear Congress: Reject the “Profit Protection for Optometrists” Bill

N&V StaffOctober 4, 2020
Read More
Scroll for more
Tap

Subscribe Free By Email

Looking for the best in breaking news and conservative views? Let Chuck do all the work for you! Subscribe to his FREE "Muth's Truths" e-newsletter.

* indicates required
Nevada News and Views
Nevada News & Views is an educational project of Citizen Outreach Foundation, a non-partisan IRS-approved 501(c)(3) organization. It is not associated or affiliated with any political party or group. Nevada News & Views is accessible by the public at no cost. It funds its operations through tax-deductible contributions from donors and supporters and does not accept government money or grants.

TAGS

Featured Article Nevada Politics Muth's Truths business government Government Opinion Obama News Donald Trump GOP Republicans Ron Knecht Adam Laxalt

Copyright © 2021 Citizen Outreach | Maintained by VirtualAlly

9 Words to Help Protect Women from Getting Their Teeth Knocked Out – or Worse
Proponents of open record reforms question why Nevada’s Democratic leadership won’t vote on bipartisan bill