Washington – The targeting of the Chinese shipbuilding industry can also open US domestic transport transactions to foreign operators, an act that is currently banned by federal law.
The lawmakers of the Maritime Maritime Partnership have been introduced by US representatives, and James Milen, R-Gum, what lawmakers say in this law are the weaknesses that provoked US domestic ships and are built in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
They claim that the law, known as the Jones Act, creates a monopoly on domestic transport that artificially costs the cost of imported goods to Hawaii and Guam.
“Under the long -standing weaknesses of maritime law, Jones’ transportation can outsource the construction of the main parts of the ship and reforms in foreign ships that are primarily in PRC,” the case said.
“These reforms are not minor, and often include complete engine replacement, liquid natural gas conversion and other major repairs. Through further weaknesses, these reforms greatly prevent the work of 50 % imported to repair foreign ships.”
Listed as examples of Jones -based container transportation by Matson -based Honololo (NYSE: MATX), which has recently become liquid natural gas in Nantong Cosco facilities in China, “which has a relationship with the Chinese government and the military and military complex.”
“By closing the holes in favor of the People’s Republic of China and cooperating with reliable allies such as Japan and South Korea, we can grow our ship building capacity, support good paid jobs, and soothe families and jobs,” Molan said.
According to the bill, the law constitutes a “registration of foreign transport”, consisting of countries determined by the American ally.
If you work in shipbuilding in the Allied countries in this registry, US companies are exempt from 50 % tax on major ship changes.
Companies of these countries are also eligible to work with foreign and foreign ships in coastal trade. “Under proper oversight, recognizing the global nature of modern transportation.”
The Minister of Transport can, for renewable five -year periods, “a eligible ship for transportation of goods by water or through land and water, between the existing points in the United States that enforces coastal laws directly or through the foreign port.”
However, the case insisted that the law does not abolish or abolish Jones, but that “the law returns to its purpose – serves as a basis for national resistance, industrial power and strategic security, instead of being abducted by the national defense umbrella at the cost of increased consumer goods across the country.”
“This recognizes that modern maritime trade is global, but the global balance must be rooted in trust, shared values and defense.”
Related Articles:
Click for more transport articles by John Galagar.
About the Author
