Problems with tracking Bio-Diesel trade

Before there can be research assistance to increase a commodity's international competitiveness, you have to know how much is exported and where to.

Bio-diesel is one such product. It is categorized in HS Code 3824.90. If you look at our import codes, you can easily find how much we import out to the 10 digit level. But in the Schedule B (export code) descriptions, there is simply far less detail at any 10 digit level.

For 2007 US exports of 3824.90, this is the universe of exports identifiable at the 6 digit level: $2,895,657,134. But even with USDA data, we do not have a complete picture for all codes at the 8 digit level for the same year.

The latest and most complete year is 2006. US exports of 3824.90 in 2006 equaled $2,222,935,833. We can drill down to the 8 digit level for some codes and still build a picture of industry exports. However, at the 10 digit level, the export data falls off.

According to information received from the USDA, bio-diesel export codes are not well defined. Precise codes are not well defined in the EU either. HS 3824.90 contains not only bio-diesel , but other chemicals not specified in the code description, such as hydrated silica gel used to remove moisture from foodstuff and optical equipment. This makes it difficult to use export data to gauge competitiveness.

Companies requiring an export number should consult the Schedule B Code from the U.S. Census, or request that a specialist from the US Census help assign a number. The import and export codes will be the same out to 6 digits. After that, they begin to diverge, as with all products.

A look back at China Toy Recalls

In my company's efforts to unmask the 'masked' AMS shipment records, we've developed techniques, such as recognizing shipping lane patterns. The implication is that these patterns will be instrumental in uncovering future consignee identities.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission provides an invaluable service to American consumers, and with the resources at hand it does an excellent job. Still, one area that could most easily be addressed while bringing added value to American companies is the process of gathering toy recall information. We were surprised to find so little information on foreign suppliers in the recall announcements. This begs the question ‘why’? Minor changes could be made in the disclosure rules for the sake of more accurate reporting.

I feel there should be an obligation on behalf of the American importers to reveal the identity of foreign suppliers who may be at fault in the event of a recall. This would allow American buyers to gauge supplier performance and forestall problematic shipments. In this way, pressure could be put to bear on foreign suppliers without them having to reveal the identity of their subcontractors.

It is my estimation that safety and quality fade issues will continue to be significant areas of concern until operational standards in China grow closer to expectations of U.S. consumers and distributors. Taking into account the occurrence of recalls of Chinese-made products in other countries, U.S. companies should consider diversifying their supply base and foster relationships with a variety of foreign companies. Being over-dependent on too few suppliers exposes supply chains to disruption in times of crisis.