Thank you very much, Chair.
I'm not sure of the articles you're alluding to, but there has been in the press in the last number of days articles referring to the United States coalition's concerns that perhaps there are imports of Canadian lumber into the United States that are “flooding the market”, in their words. So I think, without seeing your articles, that's what has been occupying the American press with respect to the agreement recently.
I can say at this point that our statistics for the first eight months of this year show a drop in exports to the United States of approximately 9%. We don't have statistics for September to be able to comment on whether there has been an increase in Canadian exports of lumber to the United States. I haven't seen any statistical sources provided by the U.S. coalition, which is reacting to this apparent surge; therefore, I can only assume that's anecdotal information they're reacting to. With respect to your first question, I think that's what has been causing the press attention in the United States over the last few days.
I think your second question refers to what we refer to as option A and option B in the agreement in terms of the measures to be in place. As set out in the agreement, regions have a choice between following one of two options for the export measures to be imposed. Option A deals with an export charge, depending on the price of lumber, and as the price of lumber decreases, the export charge increases. Option B is a variation of that, which would lessen the export charge that would be paid under option A, but in return, there would be a restraint on the volume of exports to the United States as the compensation. That's basically the two different options that regions are being asked to choose between to give them the flexibility.
You've asked the question about how cash deposits will be refunded--I think that's what you're asking, and please correct me if I'm wrong. I think there are basically two mechanisms now that will bring the refunds that producers are entitled to. The first, as you know, is the process on the Export Development Corporation. A process has been established to expedite the refunds. In exchange, the Export Development Corporation, or EDC, has entered into contractual arrangements with importers of record by which they would take over the authority for the refunds in exchange for providing them with a portion of the refunds. Another portion of the refunds, as you know, is set aside to pay for the $1 billion obligation we have towards providing money to the United States side, both with respect to $500 million with respect to the U.S. coalition and then the other $500 million is divided up between the meritorious initiatives that I referred to in my opening statement, plus the North American lumber council, which is made up of business. That accounts for $490 million of the other $500 million. The other $10 million, as I've identified in the opening statement, is set aside for paying the cost of any arbitration proceedings that may take place under the agreement.
So that's basically the transfer to the United States.
For those who do not participate in the EDC process, the other way for importers of record to receive their money is directly from U.S. Customs. Of course, it's recognized, through past experience and through discussions with the United States, that this procedure could take up to two years. Therefore, that is the other process under which it is open to importers of record to receive their refunds when liquidation has been completed.
Thank you.