“The other rockfish lawsuit” — by Andrew Jensen, Alaska Journal of Commerce
“Trident, Ocean Beauty, Westward Seafoods, North Pacific Seafoods and
International Seafoods of Alaska sue NMFS over rockfish program. ”
See other recent articles at: http://www.alaskajournal.com/Alaska-Journal-of-Commerce/Fisheries/
THE VERY AUDACITY THAT THESE PROCESSORS HAVE A RIGHT TO SHARE IN THE RENTS OF HARVESTERS WHO CATCH FISH AND ALREADY SUFFER MARKET POWERS THAT DEPRESS FISH TICKET PRICES! DO HARVESTERS THEREFORE HAVE RIGHTS TO SHARE IN THE ECONOMIC INTERMEDIARIES’ VALUE-ADDED PROCESSING ALL THE WAY FROM DOCKSIDE TO THE RETAIL READY STAGE?!? If they want a split of the fishermen’s “20% or less” then we want a share of their “80% or more” globally. States and nations must also concern themselves with picking up the social costs of this increasing price-fixing around the world. Alaska sits on its duff and plays dumb to it all, and to Abusive Transfer Pricing and the FISHRON it indicates. At least the fishermen pay USA taxes!
While we ready an update, read this PDF to learn about the corruption inherent in the RPP (Rockfish Pilot Program) Cooperative going back over a decade, which might be insight into how the legal case will see potential intervention or amicus filings by smaller processor(s): GlobalSfds_KodiakCityWS_Nov7-2006
Friday, August 6, 2010 — Andrew Jensen of the Alaska Journal of Commerce wrote two revealing articles about how some CDQ entities excessively reward certain managers and employ Washington DC lobbyists. For now, here’s the link to the articles, the CDQ’s January 2009 request letter to Alaska delegates in Congress, and a copy of the latest draft of the legislation.
1. “CDQ execs reel in nearly $4 million since 2006″
2. “CDQ groups pursue tax break even as some say they don’t need it”
January 2009 – 6 CDQs write Congressional delegates requesting special tax-break legislation: CDQ_tax_ltr_Jan09
Nome Nugget article on congressional scoring of the proposed tax break: CDQ Tax Break – NomeNugget
Latest Draft of the Tax Break Legislation (available to Groundswell): CDQ MAT10481 Extenders Amdt
July 20, 2010 Bristol Bay, Alaska – Sockeye salmon returns through the 19th clicked in at 38.9 million fish, with 11.3 million of it allowed to escape upstream to spawn, leaving the commercial catch at 27.6 million fish. Two companies have announced base prices, before ice and refrigeration premiums, of 95 and 96 cents per pound. That places its value at around $150 million – not counting the roe. Several fish writers have referred to this as “great” and “wow,” but Groundswell says “so what!” With the Yen at 87 to the US Dollar, processors who market fillets to Japan through parent companies from their hollowed subsidiaries in Alaska can easily afford to pay $2.50 a pound. It’s a product mix with much of the salmon going into cans, but in a steady-as-she-went, no-peak season like 2010 (we heard no reports of boats being put on limits), we’ll have to see what the split in fresh-frozen and canned sales is later. But we guarantee you the processors are smiling like the cat in Alice in Wonderland … all the way to the bank. It would be a good year for stepped-up IRS Audit exams for Abusive Transfer Pricing.
June 22, 2010 – A major fisheries Antitrust complaint was filed today in U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Case No. 10-3057-PA, Lloyd D. Whaley v. Pacific Seafood Group involving 54 defendant entities owned by [Frank] Dulcich, Inc. The complaint alleges violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, and pursuant to Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and 26 and 28 regarding four major seafood product markets: Dungeness Crab, Groundfish, Pacific Onshore Whiting (hake), and Pacific Coldwater Shrimp.
PDF of PowerPoint slides: Antitrust & Restraint of Trade