The US Chamber of Commerce has rejected an appeal against the huge tariffs it has imposed on Bombardier in favour of rival aerospace firm Boeing.
A further tariff of 80% was imposed on the import of Bombardier’s C-Series, adding to the 220% rate already introduced by Congress. Boeing has claimed that Bombardier benefited from illegal state subsidies from Canada and the UK and dumped the planes at “absurdly low” prices.
The imposition of massive tariffs on US imports threatens Bombardier jobs in Northern Ireland: 4,000 are directly linked to the construction of the C-Series.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
The BBC says the programme is also important to 15 smaller aerospace firms in Northern Ireland and, by more than tripling the cost of a C-Series aircraft sold in the US, could “also jeopardise a major order placed last year from US airline Delta”.
Reacting to the Chamber of Commerce decision, a spokesperson for Bombardier said the ruling represented an “egregious overreach and misapplication of US trade laws”.
“This hypocrisy is appalling” the spokesperson added, “and it should be deeply troubling to any importer of large, complex, and highly engineered products.”
The row between Boeing and Bombardier comes just as the UK is looking to negotiate a number of major international trade deals.
Theresa May described the original decision to impose US tariffs as “hugely disappointing”. It underscores the “defensive trade policy” of President Donald Trump as he looks to prioritise US companies as part of his America First economic strategy, says Reuters.
Both Britain and Canada have threatened to cancel contracts with Boeing and avoid buying military equipment but it is unclear how they will react to the latest round of trade tariffs.
A final ruling on the case is expected early next year.
-
Massacre in the favela: Rio’s police take on the gangsIn the Spotlight The ‘defence operation’ killed 132 suspected gang members, but could spark ‘more hatred and revenge’
-
The John Lewis ad: touching, or just weird?Talking Point This year’s festive offering is full of 1990s nostalgia – but are hedonistic raves really the spirit of Christmas?
-
Codeword: November 15, 2025The daily codeword puzzle from The Week
-
US mints final penny after 232-year runSpeed Read Production of the one-cent coin has ended
-
Argentinian beef is at the center of American farmers’ woesThe Explainer ‘It feels like a slap in the face to rural America,’ said one farmer
-
Will latest Russian sanctions finally break Putin’s resolve?Today's Big Question New restrictions have been described as a ‘punch to the gut of Moscow’s war economy’
-
China’s rare earth controlsThe Explainer Beijing has shocked Washington with export restrictions on minerals used in most electronics
-
The struggles of Aston Martin: burning cash not rubberIn the Spotlight The car manufacturer, famous for its association with the James Bond franchise, is ‘running out of road’
-
Why are beef prices rising? And how is politics involved?Today's Big Question Drought, tariffs and consumer demand all play a role
-
Labor: Federal unions struggle to survive TrumpFeature Trump moves to strip union rights from federal workers
-
New York court tosses Trump's $500M fraud fineSpeed Read A divided appeals court threw out a hefty penalty against President Trump for fraudulently inflating his wealth
