The U.S. lost its appeal of a 2018 World Trade Organization decision that it had not properly calculated countervailing duties for Chinese pipes, tubular goods, solar panels, aluminum extrusions and other items. China had originally challenged the cases in 2016 -- the cases were brought between 2007 and 2012 (see 1805010071). The earlier ruling held that the U.S. was right to say that Chinese state-owned enterprises count as "public bodies" and therefore their actions can be market distorting. The appeal upheld that element of the case, but also upheld the victories for China. The WTO said that Commerce did not prove specificity in the subsidies for the products, and it also could not show how the SOE inputs distorted market prices. It was not allowed to use other countries' prices as reference points to prove market distortions, the WTO said, unless it had specific evidence that government interference in the market warranted that. The appeal said that countries' ability to use other countries' prices in CVD cases is "very limited."
China and the U.S. have agreed that China has until the end of the year to come into compliance with a World Trade Organization panel ruling on how it administers its tariff rate quotas for wheat, corn and rice. The WTO said that the fact that state-trading enterprises are given specific shares of the lower-duty import quotas, but that those enterprises don't always use all of the quotas nor is the unused portion reallocated to other buyers, means that China restrains the filling of its tariff rate quotas. The notice that the two countries agreed on a compliance timeline was circulated at the WTO on July 4.
The World Trade Organization published on July 2 its update to tariff and non-tariff measures imposed by more than 170 countries and customs territories. The publication also provides statistics about exports. For example, the European Union is the top destination for American industrial exports, and 22 percent of those exports are duty free. Those exports account for two-thirds of the value of exports from the U.S. to the EU. Japan is the fourth-largest export market for U.S. agriculture, and the average Most Favored Nation tariff for those exports is 23 percent. About two-thirds of ag exports to Japan from the U.S. face duties.
Even as mercantilistic policies spread, José Raúl Perales said there's good news in global trade -- developing countries' commitment to trade facilitation. Perales was speaking on a panel at the American Association of Exporters and Importers Annual Conference in Washington June 27.
The World Customs Organization issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
The World Trade Organization case that the U.S. opened against China on intellectual property (see 1804090020) has been suspended. The announcement, published June 14 by the WTO, gave no indication as to why the U.S. asked the dispute panel to pause in its consideration of the case. Under WTO rules, a case can be suspended for 12 months.
The World Trade Organization said China is not living up to its promises in how it uses tariff rate quotas for wheat, corn and rice, giving the U.S. a second victory in agriculture disputes with China. China may appeal the panel finding. The WTO said that the fact that state-trading enterprises are given specific shares of the lower-duty import quotas, but that those enterprises don't always use all of the quota, and it is not reallocated to other buyers, means that China restrains the filling of its tariff rate quotas.
The European Union filed a dispute with the World Trade Organization on April 2 over India’s “excess” duty rates for goods in the information and communications technology sector. The EU said India is levying tariffs on a range of products that should have no tariffs, including semiconductors, electrical transformers, telephone sets, microphones, circuits, wire and measuring instruments. The rates on those products “clearly exceed the bound rate” of 0 percent set in India’s Schedule of Concessions and Commitments implemented after the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the EU said. The tariff rates are “inconsistent with India's obligations” in the WTO, the EU said in its request for consultations.