WASHINGTON – Each year the U.S. government puts together a massive document called the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers and its most recent one, published in March, takes particular aim at one new CRTC rule.
The 2017 report, which can be found here (the section on Canada starts on page 65) outlines all the ways there are barriers for Americans to trade and invest in countries around the world.
The section on Canada references many things, including our telecom and broadcasting protections (something we believe will be seriously analyzed when the federal government looks to overhaul the Broadcasting Act and Telecom Act – as well as when the U.S. administration opens up NAFTA), but it uses essentially the exact same wording as the 2016 report on trade barriers, except when it comes to the CRTC rule on simultaneously substituting the broadcast of the Super Bowl in Canada.
This is something we have covered comprehensively and will face the Federal Court of Appeal likely later this year.
Clearly, this is on the radar of the Office of the United States Trade Representative and of the American administration as a whole. The report states: “U.S. suppliers of programming also have raised concerns about a CRTC policy not to permit simultaneous substitution of advertising for the Super Bowl, beginning in the 2016-2017 season… U.S. suppliers of programming believe that the price Canadian networks pay for Super Bowl rights is determined by the value of advertising they can sell in Canada, and that the CRTC’s decision reduces the value of their programming. On August 19, 2016, the CRTC issued a formal rule preventing simultaneous substitution during the Super Bowl by a major Canadian telecommunication company, which has exclusive rights to air the Super Bowl in Canada. The United States is highly concerned about this policy.”
In a 492-page document which speaks about a number of corrosive trade practices, corruption and the obstinacy of other countries around the world when it comes to trade, this is the only policy about which the entire document says it is “highly concerned”.
(Ed note: One wonders if job one of the next CRTC chair, whomever that might be, would be to undo this controversial policy.)
