Return to Washington Examiner Homepage
May 19, 2013 | 07:43 AM
politics
Washington D.C. weather
Politics

Tim Carney: What if taxpayers had guaranteed the jumbo jets that are now catching fire?

January 21, 2013 | 3:50 pm
Leave a comment
Photo - FILE - In this Jan. 17, 2013 file photo, a line of 787 jets are parked at Paine Field in Everett, Wash.  After two separate and serious battery problems aboard Boeing 787s, it wasn't U.S. authorities who acted first to ground the plane. It was Japanese airlines. The unfolding saga of Boeing's highest-profile plane has raised new questions about federal oversight of aircraft makers and airlines.  (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, file)
FILE - In this Jan. 17, 2013 file photo, a line of 787 jets are parked at Paine Field in Everett, Wash. After two separate and serious battery problems aboard Boeing 787s, it wasn't U.S. authorities who acted first to ground the plane. It was Japanese airlines. The unfolding saga of Boeing's highest-profile plane has raised new questions about federal oversight of aircraft makers and airlines. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, file)

You may have heard that dozens of cutting-edge Boeing jumbo jets have been grounded by the Federal Aviation Administration because they have an unsettling tendency to ignite.

What you may not have heard: many of these jets were exported from the U.S. with a guarantee from U.S. taxpayers.

The Export-Import Bank of the United States is a federal agency dedicated to promoting U.S. exports — mostly Boeing jets. Ex-Im guarantees private-bank loans to foreign buyers of Boeings and other U.S.-made goods. President Obama has dramatically ramped up Ex-Im’s subsidies of Boeing exports.

So, if Boeing sold a foreign airline a Boeing that is faulty, and U.S. taxpayers guaranteed the financing on that sale, could taxpayers end up footing the bill?

Ex-Im officials promise me this won’t happen. I called Phil Cogan at Ex-Im last week, and he said that Ex-Im has arranged these deals in such a way that taxpayers are protected. Here’s a Reuters story making this argument.

This whole ordeal is worth watching closely, because Ex-Im subsidies for Boeing have been the heart of President Obama’s “Export Initiative.”

When I describe Ex-Im loans and loan guarantees as “subsidies,” Ex-Im and Boeing officials object — they’re not “subsidies,” they say, because Ex-Im generally brings in more in interest payments and fees than it shells out. Point out Fannie and Freddie were profitable for years until taxpayers had to bail them out, and Team Ex-Im says Fannie was just in one industry. Point out Ex-Im is mostly exposed to the airplane industry, and they say default rate in airlines is very low.

I’m not very worried. I don’t think Ex-Im will end up shelling out big bucks for fiery Boeing Dreamliners. But it’s worth following closely.

From WeeklyStandard.com

  • Ideological Revenue Service

    With three different scandals threatening to consume the White House last week—the Benghazi cover-up, the Justice Department’s seizure of the phone records of dozens of Associated Press...

    Read More...

  • The Real Scandal

    Everyone in Washington, except those in the crosshairs, likes a good scandal, and THE WEEKLY STANDARD is no exception. What’s more, in the case of the Obama administration, comeuppance is well...

    Read More...

  • When It Rains, It Pours

    There is no curse on the second term of presidents. When presidents lose credibility, when trust vanishes and their word is no longer accepted, they have only themselves to blame. That was true...

    Read More...