FDRA Reacts to New Balance's Opposition to TPP
The Footwear Distributors & Retailers of America expressed disappointment (here) that New Balance switched its position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership to oppose the deal, after the Pentagon allegedly pulled out of putting the company in the running for a “lucrative…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
contract” to outfit military recruits if the company agreed to either support TPP or remain neutral, according to FDRA and a Boston Globe article (here). “We are disappointed at New Balance’s change of heart on this vitally important agreement for the entire U.S. footwear industry over a matter unrelated to TPP,” FDRA President Matt Priest said in a statement. “New Balance’s position is especially surprising as it is one of the companies that would see significant tariff reduction under the agreement.” Priest argued that TPP would save footwear consumers and companies $450 million the first year of implementation and $6 billion over the first decade, and vowed to continue FDRA’s push to lobby Congress about the deal’s expected benefits.