Wto Agreement Countries

Wto Agreement Countries

The WTO dispute settlement procedure refers to numerous complaints. In some cases, countries have not respected the results of dispute settlement bodies. One example is the U.S. complaint against European Union (EU) trade restrictions on imports of beef made with hormones. Critics say some cases are filed for political, not economic, reasons. For example, some analysts claim that for years, the EU did not take action against a US tax advantage on exports (the Foreign Sales Corporation), but then filed a challenge after a US victory in another case. After all, the United States, as a defendant, has lost several cases involving trade aid measures, leading some members of Congress to give WTO dispute settlement bodies too much power in interpreting trade agreements. The United States did not obtain good status as respondents. As of October 2006, the United States had won 14 cases on core issues, but had failed to win in 30 cases, while 17 cases had been resolved without a conclusion to the dispute, 10 cases were in the litigation or appeal phase, and 22 cases were either pre-litigation or inactive.7 However, the dispute settlement system cannot be used to resolve commercial disputes, arising from political disagreements. When Qatar requested the establishment of a panel on the measures imposed by the United Arab Emirates, other GCC countries and the United States quickly rejected its request politically, stating that national security issues were political and unsuited to the WTO dispute settlement system.

[87] The GATT established trade principles that are still applied today. One of the most important of these principles was non-discrimination with regard to the treatment of trade in goods between countries. The most-favoured-nation principle, Article I of the GATT, stipulates that any advantage granted by a Contracting Party to a product of another country shall be extended unconditionally to a like product of all other Contracting Parties. A second rule of non-discrimination is internal treatment, the principle that imported and domestic products must be treated equally. Although non-discrimination is a cornerstone of gatt, certain exceptions are allowed. For example, customs unions, free trade areas and special treatment for developing countries are allowed. This concept involves more than just special treatment for developing countries, i.e. preferential market access, and exceptions or longer deadlines for the implementation of certain provisions. This includes the idea that developing countries do not have to reciprocate.

3. Does the WTO dispute settlement procedure serve the interests of the United States? The United States derives several benefits from the existence of a multilateral forum for trade disputes. Such a forum usually allows countries to peacefully resolve disputes without having to resort to more drastic measures. The WTO dispute settlement procedure contains a clear and understandable set of rules that must be followed, and the procedure is non-discriminatory between countries.5 The United States has been relatively successful in using the procedure as a complainant. In October 2006, the United States Trade Representative reported that 24 cases had been resolved without litigation to the satisfaction of the United States; 26 cases were won by the United States on key issues; in 4 cases, the United States was unsuccessful on key issues; and an additional 24 cases were at the group stage, in consultation or progress monitoring, or otherwise inactive.6 4. Should the WTO cover only traditional trade issues or should it be extended to non-traditional issues such as labour and the environment? The GATT agreement initially only established rules for border measures (customs duties and quotas) and then added rules for certain internal practices that clearly had a direct impact on trade in goods (e.g. B, subsidies, public procurement). .