'V'1n.Sh iAl, t.LOIT, Iuad Emerson: U.S-Canadian Tornato Warv


Table 1. Ci'ndiiion. in the CiIceiilLI.E0-tjrs'. -n TomatOoS Industry, I t$JX-2[(XMP
Item 1998 1999 2L If I
U.S. C. I % U I IP i ,,
 QLI.LFX16VY 4014A52 459,844 51 1.-47
 U.S. Share 34,6 35.5 35J.
 Cabnda Share ;1, 382 ;.2
 Other Imports
 Shaur 31.5 21.3
U.S, IM[Np'11 fI. 11. ar 'ii l.M
Quan i1y j75.3x-I 2.2  s
 Value 111 '-fl I2I. oi I II 1 574
 Unit V.1hiiL 0.76 0.69 .073
U.S. Pruducers
rodtuction
Quantity 144.982 172,620
U.SI Shipments
 Quduli ''~I ~ t' I I r~Y' Ii 17',.i*n
 Value 114 78C 119.1 kI
 Unit Vutlo 1 4i7 1 410h9
Nne.: Quijrnjts epoitej inj I 41Mh PpuuILIHI: JAue rWFnMU in $jltL. tjfrii( vaes reputed in .4..ar, pcr paund.
Sinre: U.S. InitrinatiOnai Tradc 29iY1on. 1, 00.tajbk I112, p. I1t-A and table IV-1, p. IV-l.


crease. The U.S. share I the market remained
flat at .5'. while the share of the market con-
Irtolled hb Ca('.adii.it rc\ trom 3.I9% to 43 7'.
The share of other import .uiprlie., appeared
to have -uffered the most from the increase in
market share by Canada ilh other import
shares declining f'romn 31.5% to 21.3%, al-
Ihuiigh the quantity of ithei sources of im-
Fpimrt' remained lat at near 1i 3mi nll liin pounds.
 The quantity *,i iinimi'o.'r Irom Canada of
grcenhLouic.-groL' n tomatoes increased Iromr
136 million pounds in 1998 to 221 5 million
pounds in 2(Hl1l Ihe unit value on these im-
ports decreased from 76 cents per pound in
I LWn to (ij cents Fr picund in 1999, Unit val-
ues increased in _W(H') to 73 cents per pound.
 U.S sales increased in volume over this
same period, but far less than the increase in
C.'anidian quantlilic. from 144.') million
pounds to 183.4 million pounds in 2'(tHI. Unit
values for U S. production declined from 83
cents per pound in 1998 to 73 cents per pound
in 19WI.L Imecrcirinj to 7, cents per pound in
2IWOO. The number of workers and the total
number of hours worked increased over this
period for U.S. worker' Optrilinr income nIir


Iirims rteuIolllng to rhe ITC questionnaire,
however, declined from a pr ili of $2.9 million
in 1998 to a loss rof $11 million in 2I11W1. The
ITC reported that profitability declined over
the period of tIll iei'i.tlilkiiin withl 2 of P]l
producers reporting loss in W19. 8 of I1
reporting losses in I' N, and 8 of 14 reporting
losses in 2l'l0 ITC 2il 12. p. 3.',
 In its final ruling, the ITC determined from
the record the were able to assemble that an
indu,'tr in the United States was not materi-
ally injured or threatened with material injury,
and the er.ihllliiricen of an industry in the
United States was not materially rei..rded by
reason of imports of prccnhoui. tomatoes
from CanIad sold in the United Si.ati; at
LTrF '
 The opinion of the Commissioners decid-
ing this case revolved around the deli nAiknu of
the domestic like product and industry. Peti-
tioners ariued that the domestic like product
in this case should consist of tomatoes grown


 9 The II(' voed 4-1 in the negative with Com-
misrsienr i.,ri i Hr.gp timing ihe J1,un iiilg nincuber
SIre Yit: p, 3)