Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This paper investigates the impact of customs unions (CUs) on the ability of countries to multilaterally cooperate within an economic environment characterized by trade-flow volatility. We find that the initiation of CU talks results in an easing of multilateral trade tensions, especially with regard to the employment of "special"-protection instruments, such as anti-dumping duties or safeguards. However, once the CU agreements come into force, a retreat to a more protectionist trading environment becomes necessary so that multilateral cooperation does not break down. Interestingly, in comparison with the pre-CU world, the utilization of "special"-protection tools in the post-CU world is more severe for "high" import volumes, but is less frequent overall. Moreover, "normal" protection remains low, largely unchanged from the pre-CU era.

A broad product assortment is usually valued highly by customers. However, holding a great number of product variants in inventory increases the costs of a supplier. It is possible to reduce need for warehousing with direct deliveries from manufacturing units, but customer value is reduced when orders are received on several shipments. Merge‐in‐transit is a distribution method in which goods shipped from several supply locations are consolidated into one final customer delivery while they are in transit. This article examines the effects of merge‐in‐transit distribution on delivery costs. The analysis is performed with a maintenance, repair, and operations products distributor as the case company. The evidence in this article supports the claim of merge‐in‐transit being a cost efficient distribution alternative in business networks. Based on the results advocates that companies in multi‐company networks should study the possibility of using the merge‐in‐transit delivery model.

This report provides brief summaries of those provisions that create new SEC authority, that were controversial during the legislative process, or that appear likely to have far-reaching consequences.

THIS ARTICLE REVEALS THAT PAST RESEARCH INDICATES THAT CANDIDATES WHOSE NAMES ARE KNOWN TO VOTERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO WIN THAN THOSE WHO ARE NOT SO FORTUNATE. FURTHER, THE LEVEL OF CAMPAIGN IS UNRELATED TO THE LIKELIHOOD THAT VOTERS WILL KNOW WHO THE INCUMBENT IS, WHEREAS THE MORE NONINCUMBENTS SPEND, THE MORE LIKELY THEY ARE KNOWN BY VOTER PUBLIC.

This paper examines the case of Andritz v. United States—first filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade then transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas—as a demonstrative case study highlighting the collaboration between U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the Department of Agriculture. CBP is charged with facilitating legitimate trade and travel while safeguarding the borders of the United States to protect against, inter alia, the entry of dangerous goods, including through agricultural import and entry inspection. Where these priorities overlap and potentially conflict, the agency is tasked with making reasonable decisions quickly, on the basis of the information available and in consultation with relevant subject matter experts across the Federal Government. To facilitate this process and, where challenged, its expeditious and effective judicial review, counsel advising the trading community should familiarize themselves with the legal sources governing the allocation of relevant authorities and providing for appropriate judicial review. The Andritz case provides a useful view of CBP's enforcement of the importation-related aspects of the Plant Protection Act, and showcases the agency's close collaboration with the Department of Agriculture. The case also suggests important lessons for international trade attorneys, concerning both the potential impact of agricultural laws upon importation and the appropriate avenue for judicial review in this context.