Topic Category: Manufacturing

In today’s rapidly changing global business environment, U.S. manufacturers must develop an efficient and cost effective strategy to satisfy regulatory compliance requirements. But in many cases, it’s not easy.

With few exceptions, most companies operate as quickly as possible in order to beat competitors to market. This generally means squeezing every single unnecessary delay out of the product development process. Unfortunately, this often results in commitments to very challenging — if not impossible — product release deadlines.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 1833

The integration of new technologies, sophisticated co-production practices (manufacturing of a product in two or more countries), improved supply chain management and advances in worldwide financing—all spawned by globalization—has transformed American manufacturing.

In turn, resources have shifted to sectors with competitive advantages. And due to the American ability to adapt, innovation has flourished while productivity has skyrocketed. In fact, over the last 10 years, annual manufacturing productivity rose by 4.5 percent, much faster than the 2.7 percent annual growth in overall business productivity, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2845

The United States and Mexico have increasingly integrated their manufacturing industries and rationalized production. In turn, the North American Free Trade Agreement partners have based plant locations on the availability and cost of inputs (labor, raw materials, energy and capital), the quality of supply chains and proximity to markets. Increasingly, however, Chinese trade and investment have affected the U.S.-Mexican relationship and raised questions as to the impact on American manufacturing.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 1957

Some time ago, China realized that in order to grow and prosper, it would have to become globally integrated and make fundamental adjustments. It also understood that to do so meant becoming a full member of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

On December 11, 2001, after 15 years of negotiations, China officially became the 143rd member of the WTO. As part of its accession agreement, China pledged to undergo massive reform that would include significantly reducing its trade barriers. This move was predicted to result in greater access to Chinese markets. It also was anticipated to significantly improve China's ability to attract foreign direct investment — a necessary step in building a globally-competitive manufacturing sector.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2310

FAQ: Do U.S. production sharing operations abroad destroy U.S. jobs?

Talking Points:

Several anti-globalist groups feel U.S. production sharing (the allocation of different stages of the manufacturing process to different countries) is totally unnecessary and should be eliminated. What they don’t understand is that production sharing actually saves more jobs here at home than would be lost due to protectionist efforts to place a straight jacket on business.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2917

FAQ: How is globalization impacting U.S. manufacturing?

Talking Points:

The integration of traditional manufacturing, new technologies, national markets and improved supply chain management—all spawned by globalization—is transforming American manufacturing. In the process, resources have shifted to sectors with competitive advantages. As a result, productivity has climbed to new highs, and due to the American ability to change and improve, innovation is flourishing. For instance, the use of muscle on the factory floor is a thing of the past. Today, self-directed workers operate in teams and apply more sophisticated skills to create and run new processes. Concurrently, competitive forces unleashed by globalization are forcing U.S. manufacturers to compete less on price and focus more on product design, branding strategies, productivity, flexibility, quality and responsiveness to customer needs. And companies must continue to push the envelope in terms of greater specialization.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2897

We are witnessing one of the greatest periods of transformation in history. The convergence of powerful technological, political, economic and cultural forces are shaping the 21st century. For many manufacturers and workers, adapting to this reality is proving difficult—but necessary.

New Factors Changing Our Lives

Technological advances in microelectronics, computers, telecommunications, biotechnology and other fields are changing the way we live and work. The fall of Communism, which added one-third of humanity to the capitalistic ranks, is sharply boosting global competition and creating new markets.

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2217

Primarily due to the “jobless recovery,” global outsourcing has become more controversial in the U.S. In an effort to gain an understanding of its impact, policymakers and others are raising a number of issues — many of which are discussed here.

Outsourcing Manufactured Goods

Traditional U.S. outsourcing mainly involved production sharing or co-production — a process whereby producers in at least two countries share in the manufacturing process. This has allowed U.S. companies to:

Topic: Manufacturing
Read More Comment (0) Hits: 2131

In today's dynamic global environment, companies often need to implement new strategies to remain competitive. For many manufacturers, production sharing is part of the answer.

Also referred to as co-production, cross-border manufacturing and outward processing, production sharing occurs when producers in different countries share in the manufacturing of a product. For example, a Detroit auto parts manufacturer may team up with a Mexican company to produce high quality and competitively priced products.

Production Sharing Benefits Are Vast

Cross-border manufacturing allows companies to:

  1. Complement each others’ strengths in order to create greater value;
  2. Gain access to unique technology, raw materials, and specialized intermediate inputs;
  3. Reduce overall costs;
  4. Provide an important market for a company's component exports;
  5. Retain higher wage jobs, product development and design, capital-intensive manufacturing, and marketing-related activities in the United States; and sometimes
  6. Provide the only means to keep companies in business.

Cross-Border Manufacturing Is Growing Worldwide

Production sharing is not unique to the United States. For example, companies in Japan, Korea and Taiwan primarily co-produce in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines with a focus on computer hardware, telecommunications equipment, electronic components and appliances.

In the European Union (EU), most co-production involves apparel, auto parts and electronic products and occurs mainly in Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovenia — countries with inexpensive but well-educated labor forces. A growing share of EU co-production also is taking place in Northern Africa.

How big is production sharing? According to The World Bank, production sharing involves more than $800 billion or 30% of total manufacturing trade annually.

U.S. Tariff Code 9802

U.S. exports of components are co-produced abroad and often re-imported by the U.S. as finished goods. In most cases, these imports are entered into the United States under section 9802 of the U.S. tariff code.

Under 9802, U.S. materials assembled, processed or improved abroad can be shipped back to the United States, incurring duty only on the foreign labor and non-U.S.-made materials. As a result, these imports — which often contain substantial U.S. content — can be more price competitive than other imports with no U.S. content.

Outward Processing Advanced in the Auto Industry

Revolutionary technologies combined with production sharing have transformed the U.S. manufacturing industry. As such, levels of productivity and competitiveness during the 1990s increased significantly.

The U.S. auto industry is no exception. As global competition continues to increase, production sharing is one strategy employed by U.S. and foreign auto producers to stay ahead of the curve. This may involve, for example, the capital, technology and engineering skill of a U.S. producers with precision assembly provided by a Chinese partner. The result: an attractive top quality product.

In 2002, U.S. imports under 9802 of automobiles, trucks, buses, bodies, and chassis from Japan reached $18.6 billion. Germany followed with $9.3 billion; the U.K., $1.8 billion; Sweden, $1.8 billion; and South Korea with $1.5 billion.

North American Auto Industry Is Highly Integrated

Since vehicles assembled in Canada and Mexico are eligible for U.S. duty-free treatment under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), only a small percent enters the U.S. under the 9802 tariff code.

For example, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), in 2002, U.S. imports of automobiles, trucks, buses, bodies, and chassis from Mexico and Canada under 9802 were $618 million and $36 million, respectively. However, in 2002, co-produced U.S. imports of motor vehicles from Mexico not entered under 9802 are estimated at $19.5 billion. Co-production data from Canada outside 9802 is not available.

How Important Is Production Sharing?

In the late 1980s, the ITC conducted a survey of 900 U.S. firms that co-produced utilizing Chapter 98. When asked what they would do if this Customs provision was eliminated, the firms said they would:

  • Turn to foreign suppliers of components;
  • Drop labor-intensive products and import them from East Asia;
  • Move all manufacturing to Asia;
  • Cut back U.S. production and target a market niche not threatened by imports; or
  • Go out of business.

Since then, production sharing has become vastly more important to U.S. companies and workers. According to the ITC, it has been responsible for generating new jobs and retaining those that would have been lost due to intense foreign competition.

Consider the Pros and Cons

Sharing manufacturing strengths with high and low-wage countries has become an important strategy for many companies. However, while co-production has been beneficial for many firms, some have invested in foreign-based production sharing facilities only to find unexpectedly low levels of productivity, excessively high turnover, poor infrastructure, and a corrupt legal system. Consequently, several firms have abandoned their efforts.

Co-production can be a means to achieve a higher level of global competitiveness. However, before engaging in production sharing, it’s essential to fully understand your needs, in addition to the needs of your partners, their culture and their environment.

This article appeared in Crain's Detroit Business, June 2003. (CO)
Topic: Manufacturing
Comment (0) Hits: 4599

The events of September 11, 2001, the recent war in Iraq and the threats of future terrorism have forced Americans to identify and eliminate vulnerabilities. In doing so, our trade and transportation systems have become a major focus.

The Maritime Industry’s Challenge

An integral link in our transportation system and supply chain, the maritime industry is crucial to U.S. economic success. The impact of a terrorist attack on our waterway system could be enormous. Why? More than $738 billion or 7.5% of U.S. gross domestic product is derived from waterborne cargo.

The maritime industry already has implemented several important security measures. One of the most sweeping is the U.S. Customs’ 24-hour manifest information rule. Initiated on December 2, 2002, it requires sea carriers or non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) to electronically provide detailed descriptions of U.S.-bound sea container contents 24 hours before containers are loaded at foreign docks. This is designed to help Customs better analyze container content and identify terrorist threats.

Non-Compliance Will Not Be Tolerated

On February 2, 2003, after a 60-day phase-in period, Customs began fully enforcing the 24-hour advance manifest regulation. According to U.S. Customs Commissioner Robert C. Bonner, “all parties who have implemented the rule seriously deserve commendation, but for those who have not, U.S. Customs will not tolerate non-compliance.”

Although an important step in preventing terrorism, the rule is likely to impact your imports and supply chain. As a result, it’s necessary to become familiar with the regulation’s requirements and carefully implement them in order to prevent supply chain disruptions.

You Must Utilize AMS

All cargo declarations are required to be sent to Customs via its automated manifest system (AMS). If you are not set up on this system, you can utilize a service provider or a port authority who is, or you can provide paper documents to your carrier for input into AMS. Visit a list of entities using the direct interface system.

Common Terms No Longer Accepted

The use of common cargo descriptions such as “said-to-contain,” “general merchandise” or “freight-all-kinds,” are no longer accepted. Instead, a precise narrative description of the cargo or its six-digit tariff number must be supplied. In short, Customs must be able to identify physical characteristics and packaging so irregularities can be determined. The cargo’s description also must be precise enough to identify any goods which may emit radiation. For example, “electronics” is not an acceptable description, but “CD players” or “computer monitors” are.

Beware of Do Not Load Messages

As of the phase in period, Customs Service ports began to issue “do not load” messages to sea carriers and NVOCCs not in compliance with the 24-hour rule. In fact, between February 2 and April 29, 2003, Customs reviewed more than 2.4 million bills of lading, and approximately 260 containers with inadequate cargo descriptions were denied loading for violation of the 24-hour rule. However, most of these violations were resolved in time for the shipment to make its original voyage.

If carriers or NVOCCs are found in non-compliance, they may be fined between $5,000 and $10,000, their container may not be allowed to be unloaded at the port of destination, or the vessel may even be denied docking privileges. And although an error may arise because of false information provided by the shipper, Customs will still pursue the party it regulates — the sea carrier or NVOCC.

In addition, if a container is examined by Customs, either at home or abroad, and the manifest description of the contents is in Customs’ opinion inaccurate, carriers can be held liable for penalties and NVOCCs can be held liable for liquidated damages.

Greater Shipper Disclosure Required

In the past, Customs may have only received information that identified the shipper as a carrier, importer or even a bank, which didn’t allow Customs to track specific shippers. Today, specific information about the shipper is required, including the shipper’s full name and address. If shippers don’t comply, they run the risk of closer scrutiny and increase the likelihood that their container will be examined. Furthermore, Customs may be more inclined to issue do not load messages.

Other Important Issues at Hand

Because more detailed information is now included in the manifest, shippers are concerned that their information could be obtained by competitors or criminals. And, if competitors learn of a new foreign source or identify a strong U.S. buyer by reviewing the data, the shipper could lose its competitive advantage. To prevent this, shippers should request confidentiality. They also should talk with their customs broker or freight forwarder to protect themselves from potential misuse of information.

Truck or Rail Cargo Is Exempt

The 24-hour rule does not apply to cargo that is shipped to Canada or Mexico and then brought into the U.S. by truck or rail. However, if Customs suspects goods are being routed in an attempt to evade scrutiny, those goods will likely be treated as high risk.

C-TPAT Membership Offers Benefits

It is expected by Customs that members of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism program (C-TPAT) will provide the required 24-hour information as a regular part of their security-related procedures.

Although C-TPAT participants will not be excluded from advance reporting requirements, their participation in the program may assist them during the targeting process. Furthermore, C-TPAT participation by the carrier or NVOCC may be a mitigating factor in the case of penalties.

Keep Operations Running Smoothly

Supply chain managers should note that other modes of transportation, such as air, rail and truck, soon will be subject to advanced notification requirements from Customs, too. So what can companies do to ensure successful business operations as a result of the new 24-hour rule?

To begin with, each company must contact Customs and review all the details. Importantly, firms need to reevaluate their supply chain to ensure that every involved organization, starting with the overseas exporter, understands the rules and is complying. Then, it is vital to determine where changes need to be made and to quickly implement them. The traffic departments of both exporters and importers should work closely together and with all intermediaries to build in the necessary lead times and prepare the required information accurately.

Keep Abreast of New Requirements

The 24-hour rule, along with a variety of others, likely will change over time. As a result, it is vital to keep abreast of changes and new requirements. For more details about the 24-hour rule, go to or contact your local U.S. Customs office.

This article appeared in Impact Analysis, May-June 2003.
Topic: Manufacturing
Comment (0) Hits: 2785

Page 5 of 7

Quick Search

Stock Watch

FREE Impact Analysis

Get an inside perspective and stay on top of the most important issues in today's Global Economic Arena. Subscribe to The Manzella Report's FREE Impact Analysis Newsletter today!