| |
 |
|
|
Hobby Forum Index » Sport - Basketball » European Imperialism
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| NewsToBeRead |
 Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119379374505577052.html
European Imperialism
October 31, 2007; Page A20
Microsoft waved the white flag this month by dropping all appeals of
the European Union's 2004 ruling against the software giant. The
episode shows that Europe now writes the rules for global business
across the board -- unapologetically to the benefit of its own
industry. American companies are learning they have little choice but
to obey.
For the past half century, Europe was supposed to be building a free
market. But old habits die hard, and many Continental politicians
think more and better regulation is the route to prosperity. Their
control over access to a consumer market of 500 million lets them try
to force the rest of the world to play by its cumbersome rules.
The result is a quiet but concerted war on non-European commerce, and
especially on U.S. companies. Antitrust policy in Brussels is a
battlefield, particularly for high-tech firms. Mario Monti, the former
EU competition czar who issued the ruling against Microsoft's software
"bundling," told an Italian newspaper last month that putting such
U.S. giants in their place was "the true strength of a united Europe."
His successor, Neelie Kroes, celebrated a court decision upholding
that decision by musing about how low she'd like Microsoft's market
share to fall. Next in her sights are Intel, Qualcomm, Apple and
Google, among others.
Older industries aren't immune. Consider a small but revealing dispute
over American poultry. Since 1997, the EU has banned chicken meat
rinsed in such antimicrobial treatments as chlorine. In Europe,
poultry meat can be "washed" only in potable water. The EU said the
chemicals used in the U.S. were dangerous, then changed its mind two
years ago when its own Food Safety Authority declared them harmless.
But the ban remains in place while Europe's environmental barons hunt
for fresh reasons to justify it. The latest mooted by EU officials:
the potential harm to the environment if the chemical rinse were used
in Europe. But Washington isn't asking the EU to allow the cleansing
practice there, only that it allow cleansed American chicken into
Europe. U.S. poultry farmers, in the meantime, are losing a
significant market. U.S. chicken exports to Romania were $63 million
in 2005, but they stopped cold when Bucharest joined the EU this year.
European poultry farmers love this absence of American competition.
But the larger EU motive is to force its environmental standards on
the U.S. In another example, Brussels wants to force any airline
flying to or from Europe to participate in its carbon cap-and-trade
scheme by 2012. Never mind that the rest of the world wants airline
emissions to be dealt with in a single global system. Listening to the
world would hurt European carriers, which are mandated to join the
EU's cap-and-trade regime in 2011. So much for Europe's love of
multilateralism.
Then there's the new "Reach" law that expands European purview over
the global chemicals industry. Substances safely used for decades all
over the world now have to be retested and recertified. EU lawmakers
saw an opening to impose tough standards on other countries if foreign
companies want their products sold in Europe.
But they didn't stop there, and slapped additional burdens on
non-European firms. Foreign cosmetic companies, for instance, are
required to register all chemicals in their products by June 1, 2008.
The deadline for their European rivals is at least three years away.
At stake for U.S. makers is their $2 billion in annual exports to
Europe. American companies are scrambling to meet this deadline even
as they wait for Brussels to approve new alternatives to animal
testing, which is banned for products sold in the EU starting in 2009.
Or consider financial regulation. Earlier this year, the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission agreed to let companies submit some
financial statements using new international accounting standards
rather than U.S. GAAP principles. The European Parliament responded to
this goodwill gesture -- for which Brussels had lobbied hard -- by
insisting that the SEC accept a special version of the accounting
rules tailored to the EU.
The larger theme here is that unelected officials in Brussels, and
protectionist politicians in EU capitals, are using their regulatory
power as a tool of economic nationalism. Under the cover of some
nice-sounding social goals, they are harming U.S. companies and
reducing commercial freedom. This is a growing threat to U.S.
prosperity, and American politicians and regulators had better wake up
to it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:44 pm
|
|