Pisani & Roll PLLC

https://www.worldtradelawyers.com
Jan 12, 2009, 12:50 PM EST
Author picture

Robert J. Pisani

The state of the global economy is dramatically changing the landscape for international trade. The litany of discouraging news seems endless — failing businesses, spending cuts, reductions in sales/profits, lagging orders for new goods, layoffs and significant unemployment levels.

If you add increased government regulatory actions to the mix plus the unknowns surrounding the transition to the new administration, you end up with a very cloudy outlook. So the No. 1 challenge facing many in the international trade community seems obvious to me: “How can industry afford to pay (or continue paying) for trade-related programs in this economic environment?”

In my view, the desire to be trade-compliant or supply chain-secure is not the issue. I don’t know of a single client who questions the need for improved food and/or product safety or the need to protect the supply chain from the terrorist threat. Instead, the real questions seem to involve how to better prioritize policy objectives and develop more “cost-conscious” law and rule-making (e.g., do we really need new origin rules?) that squarely address limited resource availability. Complex government laws and initiatives involve considerable costs — for all of us.

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 is a case in point. Despite the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s laudable and best efforts, there has been considerable confusion about the quickly enacted law and rule-making, including scope of product coverage and how to properly certify that products comply with the law . . . and the impact extends well beyond U.S. borders to thousands of overseas suppliers. Now add 10+2 and Lacey Act amendments, and the economic repercussions clearly come into focus.

The international trade community is adaptive and responds to challenges with alacrity and innovation. The need for strong industry leadership and increased industry-government collaboration is apparent. Customs, for one, has done a remarkable job in providing frameworks for partnerships, and those efforts must be expanded and continue if we truly expect to enhance trade compliance and trade security.