Skip to main content

Bombardier's CEO Alain Bellemare speaks to the media at the company's center of excellence Friday, November 17, 2017 in Montreal.

Ryan Remiorz/The Globe and Mail

The bitter dispute between Bombardier and Boeing will enter a critical phase next week, when the two aerospace rivals appear before an all-important trade tribunal whose ruling will ultimately decide the fight.

The U.S. International Trade Commission will hold hearings Monday in which Boeing will explain why it believes it was injured by Bombardier's landmark deal to sell C-Series passenger jets to a U.S. airline.

Montreal-based Bombardier will have its own chance to fire back by arguing that the multibillion-dollar deal involving up to 125 C-Series jets for Delta Airlines had no impact on Boeing's economic well-being.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada's ambassador to the U.S., David MacNaughton, along with his British counterpart, are also expected to attend on behalf of their respective governments, which support Bombardier.

The hearings mark the last chance for all sides to appear before the commission before it issues a final ruling, likely early in the new year, which will determine whether every C-Series jet entering the U.S. is hit with a hefty duty.

The U.S. Department of Commerce proposed a 300-per-cent duty after finding that Bombardier broke trade rules by selling the C-Series planes to Delta at an unfairly low price with help from government subsidies.

Such a penalty was seen as a potential stake to the heart for the C-Series until European aerospace giant Airbus proposed to buy a majority stake in the planes and try to skirt any duties by assembling them in Alabama.

But that deal, which was unveiled in October and whose terms have not been made public, still hasn't been approved by the federal government, which is looking at whether it would amount to a net benefit to Canada.

Boeing officials briefing reporters on background Friday also argued that any duties on the C-Series should apply to major components imported into the U.S., as well.

Still, heading into this final stretch of the dispute the pressure is very much on Boeing to prove that it lost out because of the deal between Bombardier and Delta.

Story continues below advertisement

That's because the proposed duty, which could change when the Commerce Department issues a final duty rate on Monday, will be thrown out unless the International Trade Commission sides with Boeing.

Some trade experts believe Boeing faces an uphill battle because it did not compete for the Delta contract, which is what Bombardier and the Canada's federal government have argued.

"Boeing does not compete and was not injured by this sale," said Bombardier spokeswoman Nathalie Siphengphet. "It's clear that it has not hurt Boeing."

But Boeing officials said the company's single-aisle 737-700 did compete against – and beat out – the C-Series for a contract with United Airlines in March 2016.

The U.S. aerospace giant plans to argue that even though it did not compete for the Delta contract, the deal will result in an influx of heavily subsidized airplanes that will hurt future opportunities in the American market.

The hearings come less than a week after the Canadian government punished Boeing over the dispute by abandoning plans to buy 18 Boeing-made Super Hornet fighter jets.

Story continues below advertisement

The government also plans to start assessing the "harm" that companies are causing to Canada's economic interests before awarding large military contracts – a move widely seen as a shot at the U.S. company.

The Boeing officials would not comment on those moves, but said the company assessed the potential risks before pressing ahead with a fight against Bombardier and has not thought about throwing in the towel.

"We've not looked back and have not made efforts or tried or even thought about stopping the proceeding," one Boeing official said.

Report an error
Tickers mentioned in this story
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies