Thailand Will Dump Rice: U S Group

[webfact]

RICE

Thailand will dump rice : US group

THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- The USA Rice Federation fears Thailand will eventually dump rice on the global market, according to Oryza Rice Recap, a website specialising in providing rice information.

In a letter submitted to the US Trade Representative, the USA Rice Federation outlined its comments on rice policy in Brazil, Thailand, Taiwan, Japan and the EU. The most interesting part of the comments may be the federation's concerns about Thailand essentially dumping rice on the market if and when it finally sells its stocks. The federation expressed concern about Thailand's rice mortgage scheme and the effect it may have on increased Thai production and eventually exports, if all the stored rice is released on the market. The USA Rice Federation is urging the World Trade Organisation to investigate the nation's compliance.

As a counterpoint to the Thai rice scheme, which aims to boost export values but has severely dampened sales, is the pace and continuation of India's rice exports. Shipments of about half a million tonnes are about a month behind at Kakinada port but India is expected to remain a top world rice exporter. The market is keeping all eyes on India and its production in summer, which is harvested in winter.

The federation said Brazil's highly subsidised rice industry has escaped WTO oversight partly because the policy is so complex. Brazil's rice exports soared in 2009 and 2010 as one of the nation's four programmes, Premium for Product Outflow, "provides a minimum guaranteed price to producers and cooperatives by paying the difference between the minimum guaranteed price and the market price to purchasers in Brazil who agree to move the rice out of the area of production and/or to the export market".

The US remains essentially locked out of the EU market with rice exports falling from about 300,000 tonnes in 2005 to average just 89,000 tonnes in 2007-11 after the 2006 discovery of the genetically engineered Liberty Link 601 trait in the US long grain rice crop.

-- The Nation 2012-10-19

[pedro01]

And of course, Thailand is pretty much guarateeing that they will depress prices when they try to dump their stocks of rice...

[BookMan]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

[Ricardo]

So a specialist rice-trading organisation also declines to believe government claims that major government-to-government sales have been made, and prefers to report that a rice-mountain is rapidly building, they must have been reading TV !

Never mind, it's only public-money which is being spent on the government's attempts to "manipulate the market", as the Big Boss put it in his recent interview ! And the third-biggest exporter's lone-attempts to try to rig global prices is bound to succeed ... isn't it ?

[asiawatcher]

Further proof of the insanity of the Thai Govt spendthrift policies at the tax payers expense to line the pockets of the corrupt official and no due care when time to sell at less than current market prices. The USA Rice Federation is spot on and Yingluck should heed their words even if she lacks the intelligence of free thought to act by herself against her brothers criminal ways.

[toybits]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

[hellodolly]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

At a cost to their tax payers that make the Thailand rice scam scheme look nickel and dime.

[hellodolly]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

If Thailand releases it's rice at less than what they pay for it it is called dumping.

This is a real possibility as they are running out of places to store their rice and may have to get rid of some to make room for the new year's crop.

[kerrysum]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

No truer words said, after all someone has to be in control.....

Kerry

[kerrysum]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

If Thailand releases it's rice at less than what they pay for it it is called dumping.

This is a real possibility as they are running out of places to store their rice and may have to get rid of some to make room for the new year's crop.

Kinda funny huh? Back in the old days, the farmers stored their rice, yes in their own bins.... Hand built of teakwood, and yes lined with pest control ideals..... Now you have a government that will do it for them.... Boy oh boy... I sure like the old days

!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kerry

[OzMick]

I sincerely hope that the backers of this scheme are buying and storing rice in anticipation of the promised major increase in price. Failure to do so when profits are guaranteed by the world's greatest businessman could be considered hypocrisy.

[Markaew]

US Rice Federation fears Thailand. Where do they make this stuff up? Nobody fears Thailand.

[Screws]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets.

It helps to have a monopoly - Thai don't have on rice.

[Screws]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

If Thailand releases it's rice at less than what they pay for it it is called dumping.

This is a real possibility as they are running out of places to store their rice and may have to get rid of some to make room for the new year's crop.

Let's have another red barby in middle of BKK! Half a mill tonnes or so!

[dickyknee]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

If Thailand releases it's rice at less than what they pay for it it is called dumping.

This is a real possibility as they are running out of places to store their rice and may have to get rid of some to make room for the new year's crop.

Let's have another red barby in middle of BKK! Half a mill tonnes or so!

I wonder if the rice is insured.

[tragickingdom]

The US should shut up, they support their farmers in all possible ways and in the process they poison the entire world with Genetically Modified crops and with dangerous growth hormones in farm animals that gives a three year old breasts.

[DieterBernhardKristiansen]

The US should shut up, they support their farmers in all possible ways and in the process they poison the entire world with Genetically Modified crops and with dangerous growth hormones in farm animals that gives a three year old breasts.

I totally agree !! well said.

[dcutman]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

At a cost to their tax payers that make the Thailand rice scam scheme look nickel and dime.

Where do you get that info at. The US produces several of 100's of tons more than Thailand, and this year Thailand's rice scam alone in dollars, is going to roughly equal of us subsidies. Edited October 19, 2012 by dcutman

[dcutman]

The US should shut up, they support their farmers in all possible ways and in the process they poison the entire world with Genetically Modified crops and with dangerous growth hormones in farm animals that gives a three year old breasts.

European Union

Main article: Common Agricultural Policy

See also: Intervention storage

In 2010, the EU spent €57 billion on agricultural development, of which €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies.^[1] Agricultural and fisheries subsidies form over 40% of the EU budget.^[2] Since 1992 (and especially since 2005), the EU's Common Agricultural Policy has undergone significant change as subsidies have mostly been decoupled from production. The largest subsidy is the Single Farm Payment.

In fact, government money has been flowing steadily to Canadian farmers for decades. Over the past 20 years, direct payments to farmers by the federal and provincial governments have tripled, and total spending on agriculture now tops $8-billion annually. Despite all that spending, farm incomes in Canada haven't budged much in decades, and farm debt levels have soared. Farm incomes are rising in the United States, where farmers carry much less debt. The debt-to-income ratio for Canadian farmers is about five times higher than for U.S. farmers, according to researchers.

Seems everybody should shut up.

Edited October 19, 2012 by dcutman

[rotary]

The USA needs to worry about China dumping everything from ladies stockings to Obamas neck tie to dangrous toys. Maybe this rice thing is not so big. ha ha

[maidu]

If stored rice gets even a little bit moist, it can rot. Quality of rice may show its fuzzy head in the equation. Thailand's giant stockpile may lose value faster than you can say; "Thaksin wants the program to continue for private reasons which he won't articulate. Yet surely those reasons revolove around making money or political gain."

[comserve]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

Here, here. The US has been subsidising their farmers for as long as I can remember,

yet they are the first to whinge about anyone else doing the same.

[DagonKhan]

The US should shut up, they support their farmers in all possible ways and in the process they poison the entire world with Genetically Modified crops and with dangerous growth hormones in farm animals that gives a three year old breasts.

Seems everybody should shut up.

I think dcutman you'll find that you completely missed the point...

[rubl]

The US should shut up, they support their farmers in all possible ways and in the process they poison the entire world with Genetically Modified crops and with dangerous growth hormones in farm animals that gives a three year old breasts.

    European Union

Main article: Common Agricultural Policy

See also: Intervention storage

In 2010, the EU spent €57 billion on agricultural development, of which €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies.^[1] Agricultural and fisheries subsidies form over 40% of the EU budget.^[2] Since 1992 (and especially since 2005), the EU's Common Agricultural Policy has undergone significant change as subsidies have mostly been decoupled from production. The largest subsidy is the Single Farm Payment.

    

In fact, government money has been flowing steadily to Canadian farmers for decades. Over the past 20 years, direct payments to farmers by the federal and provincial governments have tripled, and total spending on agriculture now tops $8-billion annually. Despite all that spending, farm incomes in Canada haven't budged much in decades, and farm debt levels have soared. Farm incomes are rising in the United States, where farmers carry much less debt. The debt-to-income ratio for Canadian farmers is about five times higher than for U.S. farmers, according to researchers.

Seems everybody should shut up.

To put things in perspective

The E57 billion is 40% of the EU budget which is 1.12% of EU-27 GNI.

http://ec.europa.eu/...012/2012_en.cfm

[caughtintheact]

For what it's worth, dumping is defined by the WTO as if/when "...a company exports a product at a price lower than the price it normally charges on its own home market, it is said to be “dumping” the product.

[astral]

Better than Uncle Ben's rice.................

[DeepInTheForest]

I find it slightly amusing to hear a US food growing organisation crying foul about grower subsidies. US producers have been the masters of this game for many years.

At a cost to their tax payers that make the Thailand rice scam scheme look nickel and dime.

Where do you get that info at. The US produces several of 100's of tons more than Thailand, and this year Thailand's rice scam alone in dollars, is going to roughly equal of us subsidies.

It is difficult to determine accurately the amount spent on ag subsidies by individual nations. This is because it can be done in such a variety of ways. There are direct payments, price supports, crop insurance subsidies, disaster payments, price floors, payments for keeping land out of cropping (for environmental reasons), agricultural extension services-- whoa, stop me from going on, you get the picture. Much of the ag aid is indirect, and thus difficult to quantify.

The amount of ag aid to domestic producers by the US and other OECD countries would astound you.

Libertarian websites (which I do not generally hold in special regard) regularly rail against ag subsidies. Here's a quote from one:

Among OECD members (a group of high-income countries), “producer support estimate” rates average about 31 percent of total revenue for the main grain, oilseed, sugar, and livestock products.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/AgriculturalSubsidyPrograms.html

The same website says that farm supports in the US have totaled about $20 billion per year in recent years. Certain commodities are favored. Again from the website:

The average rate of “producer support estimate” for the heavily supported commodities in the United States ranges from about 55 percent of the value of production for sugar to about 22 percent for oilseeds.

The subsidies in developed countries generally favor large farmers. In 2003 the WTO reported that the US gave 90% of its subsidies to large farms.

http://www.slideshare.net/probalmojumder/agricultural-subsidies-by-developed-countries-its-pros-and-cons

Such price supports lead to the regular dumping of US and European ag products on the world market that destabilize entire countries' economies. Ghana and Haiti are two cases in point, where cheap US rice has undermined local economies.

Haiti:

Nearly two centuries of rice cultivation shows that Haiti was self-sufficient in its rice supply up until 1980. However, following a severe flood in the 1970’s that drastically reduced the island’s yield, U.S. companies began to send shipments of rice to the island, soon using their subsidized crop to undersell local farmers.

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/10/editorials/chavla.htm

Ghana:

Between them, the US, Japan and the EU subsidised their rice production by $16bn (£8.48bn) in 2002, the latest year for which full data are available. The US policy is particularly harmful for the rice-growers of Ghana. In 2003, the US paid $1.3bn in rice subsidises to its farmers and sold the crop for $1.7bn, effectively footing the bill for 72% of the crop.

Many of these subsidies go to big Arkansas rice farms. One company alone, Ricelands of Arkansas, was the recipient of US agricultural subsidies totalling $490m between 1995 and 2003.

...Ghanaian rice is only available for six months of the year. The poor quality of Ghanaian rice is no secret. Lack of government subsidies mean the farmers cannot afford to invest in any machinery to help with harvesting the rice. "We do not have a combine harvester. It is all done by hand," Ms Salifu said.

Neither does the village have a mill. Sometimes the farmers lay the rice out on the road and let the cars run over the crop to separate the husk from the grain. Or they beat the crop in the fields with heavy sticks. Either way, the crop ends up broken and with stones in it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/11/hearafrica05.development

The tale of ag subsidies and the globalized trading system is a complicated one. Most countries support their local ag industry, with two notable exceptions: Australia and New Zealand, who made a decision to move away from price supports. (New Zealand ended heavy supports in 1984.) Though their farmers receive a measly 3-5% in aid (as a percentage of crop value), they seem to be doing well. In fact, unlike other countries, people are choosing to stay in the ag sector. Why this should be should interest us, I think. And if Australia and New Zealand can do this, why not other wealthy countries as well?

http://newfarm.rodaleinstitute.org/features/0303/newzealand_subsidies.shtml

Edited October 19, 2012 by DeepInTheForest

[BookMan]

It is difficult to determine accurately the amount spent on ag subsidies by individual nations. This is because it can be done in such a variety of ways. There are direct payments, price supports, crop insurance subsidies, disaster payments, price floors, payments for keeping land out of cropping (for environmental reasons), agricultural extension services-- whoa, stop me from going on, you get the picture. Much of the ag aid is indirect, and thus difficult to quantify.

The amount of ag aid to domestic producers by the US and other OECD countries would astound you.

Libertarian websites (which I do not generally hold in special regard) regularly rail against ag subsidies. Here's a quote from one:

Among OECD members (a group of high-income countries), “producer support estimate” rates average about 31 percent of total revenue for the main grain, oilseed, sugar, and livestock products.

http://www.econlib.o...dyPrograms.html

The same website says that farm supports in the US have totaled about $20 billion per year in recent years. Certain commodities are favored. Again from the website:

The average rate of “producer support estimate” for the heavily supported commodities in the United States ranges from about 55 percent of the value of production for sugar to about 22 percent for oilseeds.

The subsidies in developed countries generally favor large farmers. In 2003 the WTO reported that the US gave 90% of its subsidies to large farms.

http://www.slideshar...s-pros-and-cons

Such price supports lead to the regular dumping of US and European ag products on the world market that destabilize entire countries' economies. Ghana and Haiti are two cases in point, where cheap US rice has undermined local economies.

Haiti:

Nearly two centuries of rice cultivation shows that Haiti was self-sufficient in its rice supply up until 1980. However, following a severe flood in the 1970’s that drastically reduced the island’s yield, U.S. companies began to send shipments of rice to the island, soon using their subsidized crop to undersell local farmers.

http://www.worldhung...ials/chavla.htm

Ghana:

Between them, the US, Japan and the EU subsidised their rice production by $16bn (£8.48bn) in 2002, the latest year for which full data are available. The US policy is particularly harmful for the rice-growers of Ghana. In 2003, the US paid $1.3bn in rice subsidises to its farmers and sold the crop for $1.7bn, effectively footing the bill for 72% of the crop.

Many of these subsidies go to big Arkansas rice farms. One company alone, Ricelands of Arkansas, was the recipient of US agricultural subsidies totalling $490m between 1995 and 2003.

...Ghanaian rice is only available for six months of the year. The poor quality of Ghanaian rice is no secret. Lack of government subsidies mean the farmers cannot afford to invest in any machinery to help with harvesting the rice. "We do not have a combine harvester. It is all done by hand," Ms Salifu said.

Neither does the village have a mill. Sometimes the farmers lay the rice out on the road and let the cars run over the crop to separate the husk from the grain. Or they beat the crop in the fields with heavy sticks. Either way, the crop ends up broken and with stones in it.

http://www.guardian....a05.development

The tale of ag subsidies and the globalized trading system is a complicated one. Most countries support their local ag industry, with two notable exceptions: Australia and New Zealand, who made a decision to move away from price supports. (New Zealand ended heavy supports in 1984.) Though their farmers receive a measly 3-5% in aid (as a percentage of crop value), they seem to be doing well. In fact, unlike other countries, people are choosing to stay in the ag sector. Why this should be should interest us, I think. And if Australia and New Zealand can do this, why not other wealthy countries as well?

http://newfarm.rodal...subsidies.shtml

A good post DITF.

It could be speculated that some large agro businesses are not in the actual business of growing crops, but rather are in the business of clever manipulations to make money out of government sponsored subsidies rather than the product itself.

[yoshiwara]

What is the difference between rice and oil? The OPEC cuts supply, oil prices sky rockets. When it eases supply, oil prices go down. But when it comes to rice, the rules are changed? Dumping happens when a country is selling a commodity to the global market as prices lowers than what it sells for domestically - at least that is how I understand this economic term. If Thailand were to release its stock of rice, the price of global rice will decrease. However, if that rate is still higher than the domestic price of rice, it should not be termed as dumping.

There is no longer a domestic market price of rice in Thailand. There is just the price the government is paying to buy up stocks. Classicly, the accusation of dumping is made when an exporter sells a product at a price higher than the marginal cost of production but lower than the average cost of production. The warning shot over the bows of the Thai government is when it inevitably tries to sell rice when either the storage containers are over-full or spoiling. The government will try to put off the day which is just pushing stocks up and up. Hello WTO.

[brianP]

The Thai rice is much more delicious than the non flavored bland rice from USA, too bad they don't price rice on flavor and micro-nutrient factors. Besides being genetically engineered,the US likes to nuke and process the the good stuff out of grains for longer shelf life,adding some vitamins and nutrients artificially later.

Biggest shame is that extra foodstuffs globally can't be shared with the Millions starving right now in the world!