4 ms·
Maybe we need the political will to credibly threaten with high tariffs, but you could scratch the same itch by sequencing the lumber's genome on receipt and ch
by __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
Maybe we need the political will to credibly threaten with high tariffs, but you could scratch the same itch by sequencing the lumber's genome on receipt and checking it against a registry of plantation-grown species maintained by companies known to have paid for whatever environmental auditing we require of our lumber imports.
Trying to do that with tariffs creates a situation where only domestic companies are able to break the rules--which of course they're going to do domestically. I don't want to buy things that are harming Cambodia, but substituting them with things that are harming America is not any better.
- belorn 2y agoRequiring companies to sequence the genome on every lumber that they buy would seem a bit expensive, especially if they are liable if they get sequencing the genome wrong and sells products produced with illegal wood. The Government could do this as a vetting service for companies, paid through a tax on imported wood, but that would look very much like a tariff. That said, why not give companies and the free choice. If we are considering domestic companies that are willing to break the law, neither tariffs nor regulations works. A company can smuggle to bypass tariffs, and they can ignore regulations.
- __MatrixMan__ 2y agoAt any significant scale the sequencing cost would be much lower than the tariff. You wouldn't have to do it for every tree since they're all clones. It's just nice because it's verifiable at any point in the supply chain without requiring oversight at every point. You'd only have to pay for the sequencing: - when adding a new cultivar to the list of ones that are legal to sell - during sting operations The threat of being fined/jailed should be enough to get the market to police itself. No need to add bureaucracy in the middle.