‘Save These Jobs,’ Urges Element in Last-Ditch Appeal to Defeat LCD Panel Tariffs
Element Electronics has worked “diligently” to source LCD panels and motherboards “from various countries throughout Asia but is only able to source them from China,” commented the TV maker in docket USTR-2018-0026 in perhaps its last opportunity to convince the Trump administration to spare the company Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on those components. Element said again it will be forced to close its Winnsboro, South Carolina, LCD TV assembly factory (see 1807200056) if the administration imposes tariffs on the LCD panels and motherboards it imports from China under the 9013.80.90 and 8529.90.13 line items.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The TV-making industry “is centered in China,” making it virtually impossible to source components from other countries of origin, said Element. "While some sub-components may originate in other Asian countries, the parts necessary for Element’s US factory are only available from suppliers in China.”
The South Carolina operations “add significant value in the production of the finished TV,” said Element. The plant “contributes to savings in logistics costs and environmental strain through shorter and more efficient supply chains,” it said. TVs produced in Winnsboro also “have an approximately 33% higher product quality when compared to imported products,” it said, without explaining how it came up with the figure. Element didn’t comment Thursday.
Element is the largest private employer in South Carolina’s Fairfield County, and “contributes significantly” to the local economy and community,” it said. “Closure of this facility will dramatically affect an already struggling community.” Winnsboro is in a “most tenuous state,” it said. “Those operations are planning a wind-down resulting in the lay off of hundreds of American workers” if the tariffs go through, it said. The administration “has a very narrow window of opportunity to save these jobs,” it said.
Fossil Group, Fitbit and the American Watch Association (AWA) all weighed in with comments opposing tariffs on smartwatches imported to the U.S. under the 8517.62.00 classification that includes a broad assortment of connected devices and networking products (see 1808170014). “American consumers will ultimately feel the brunt of this tariff when they seek to purchase watches, innovative wearable devices, and accessories,” commented Fossil. “Our U.S. workforce will likely also be affected, as domestic resources will be reduced to partially offset this tariff burden.”
Going to bat for Fossil, House Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, worries that because of the proposed "misguided" tariffs on the "wearable technology watches" that Fossil markets from its Richardson, Texas, headquarters, "many North Texans in my district could lose their jobs," he wrote U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer in an Aug. 29 letter posted Thursday. Should the tariffs "prove to be a net negative" to the companies like Fossil that drive the U.S. economy, "please know that I will work with my colleagues to reassert Congress' authority and oversight capability on trade actions," said Sessions.
For the “significant and unavoidable economic harm to American companies” that tariffs on 8517.62.00 goods will cause, Fitbit urges the administration to remove that entire subheading from the targeted duties list, commented the company. “Alternatively,” the administration should “remove wearable devices such as fitness trackers and smart watches classifiable under this subheading" or “at the very least,” delay implementation of tariffs on those products to give Fitbit and others in the wearables space more time to plead their case, it said.
The smartwatch industry “has become increasingly important not only to technology companies but also to traditional watch companies,” many of which are AWA members, commented the association. “As our members continue to expand into this area, they have made significant investments in research and development of these products,” including in the U.S., it said. “Tariffs on smartwatches from China will increase costs for these members and, in turn, could result in fewer dollars invested in research and development in this sector in the United States.”