Non-preferential rules of origin: Their importance and thoughts for the future

Similar documents
Chapter 9. Figure 9-1. Types of Rules of Origin

RULES OF ORIGIN. Chapter 9 1. OVERVIEW OF RULES. Figure 9-1

Trade and Public Policies: NTMs in the WTO

Introduction to the WTO. Will Martin World Bank 10 May 2006

AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE EUROPEAN UNION FOR AN ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP PREAMBLE

Introduction to Rules of Origin in the WTO

AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN

EU-Georgia Deep and Comprehensive Free-Trade Area

RULES OF ORIGIN CHAPTER 10 A. OVERVIEW OF RULES 1. BACKGROUND OF RULES. Chapter 10: Rules of Origin

PART III (TRADE) TITLE I INITIAL PROVISIONS ARTICLE X.X. Establishment of a Free Trade Area ARTICLE X.X. Objectives

The Republic of Turkey (hereinafter referred to as "Turkey") and the Republic of Estonia (hereinafter referred to as "Estonia");

BREXIT BRIEFING RULES OF ORIGIN

Introduction to WTO and the SPS Agreement. Anneke Hamilton Agriculture and Commodities Division 12 September 2013 SADC Workshop, South Africa

FOREIGN TRADE LAW SECTION ONE GENERAL PROVISIONS. Article 1 Scope of Application. Article 2 Definitions

The Government of the State of Israel and the Government of Romania (hereinafter "the Parties"),

Limited. EU Mercosur negotiations. Chapter on Goods Draft consolidated text. Joint Text November 2017 XXX BNC/MCS-EU

Introduction to the WTO Non-tariff Measures and the SPS & TBT Agreements

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA AND ROMANIA

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY AND THE REPUBLIC OF ALBANIA

World Trade Organisation Law and Policy Fundamentals This course is presented in London on: 9 February 2018

The following text reproduces the Agreement1 between the Republic of Turkey and the Slovak Republic.

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA AND THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL

The Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Republic of Poland (hereinafter referred to as "the Parties"),

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA AND BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

(a) Short title. This Act may be cited as the "Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2013". (b) Findings. The Congress makes the following findings:

World Trade Organization

ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CARIFORUM STATES, OF THE ONE PART, AND THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND ITS MEMBER STATES, OF THE OTHER PART

The Republic of Poland and the Republic of Latvia (hereinafter called the Parties),

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN POLAND AND THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN AND THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

Effects on Trade and Competition of Abolishing Anti-Dumping Measures

The Internal Market in a Global Context

Annexure 4. World Trade Organization. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947 and 1994

World Trade Organisation Law and Policy Fundamentals

The Republic of Turkey and the Republic of Bulgaria (hereinafter called the "Parties");

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND ISRAEL

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CROATIA AND SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY AND THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND TURKEY

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND TURKEY

ALBANIA. Overview of Regulatory and Procedural reforms to alleviate barriers to trade

PREFERENTIAL TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS AND THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN

World business and the multilateral trading system

e_tit_trade.jpg (4825 bytes)

POVERTY, TRADE AND HEALTH: AN EMERGING HEALTH DEVELOPMENT ISSUE. Report of the Regional Director EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA

Table of contents TREATY ON THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION PART I ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION

PALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

INTERIM FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY AND PALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

The Republic of Hungary and the Republic of Lithuania, hereinafter called respectively "Hungary", "Lithuania" or "the Parties".

CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

Shared Responsibility - Swedens' Policy for Global Development

OF MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS

LL.M. in International Legal Studies WTO LAW

AGREEMENT FREE TRADE BETWEEN BULGARIA AND THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 10 November 2008 (OR. fr) 12129/08 ACP 142 WTO 153 COAFR 262 RELEX 564

Human Rights and Development. Joel P. Trachtman The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

The Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Latvia and the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter referred to as "the Parties"),

DELEGATED POWERS MEMORANDUM BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE

AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE AFRICAN CONTINENTAL FREE TRADE AREA

2 WTO IN BRIEF. Global trade rules

The International Classification of Non-Tariff Measures (NTMs) UNCTAD, on behalf of MAST group

Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR):

N GAGE CONSULTING FOREIGN TRADE REPORT

The future of regional economic integration in the context of European African trade relations overcoming paradoxical patterns Summary Report

The GATT WTO System: How it Works and The Challenges of Doha

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND THE KINGDOM OF MOROCCO

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA

Report of the 15 th EU-Japan FTA/EPA negotiating round Brussels, 29 February - 4 March 2016

ANNEX IV SAFEGUARD MEASURES. Part I: Global Safeguards. Article 1

WTO Plus Commitments in RTAs. Presented By: Shailja Singh Assistant Professor Centre for WTO Studies New Delhi

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALBANIA AND THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN

Addressing non-tariff barriers to maximize Indonesia trade potential I N T E R N A T I O N A L T R A D E F O R U M D R I N T A N S O E P A R N A

CHAPTER 8 TRADE REMEDIES. Section I

The Trans-Pacific Partnership

ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CARIFORUM STATES, OF THE ONE PART,

IMPLEMENTATION OF ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE EAEU

CHAPTER 5 SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES. Article 1: Definitions

Reaffirming their firm commitment to the principles of a market economy, which constitutes the basis for their relations,

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CROATIA AND THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

The World Trade Organization...

Joint Report on the EU-Canada Scoping Exercise March 5, 2009

L 127/6 Official Journal of the European Union

TPP Competition Chapter Prepared by the Competition Working Group of the U.S. Business Coalition for TPP. Competition Enforcement

TRADE REMEDIES. Side-by-Side Chart Trade Remedies

***I DRAFT REPORT. EN United in diversity EN. European Parliament 2018/0101(COD)

Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015: Section-by-Section Summary

Committee on Regional Trade Agreements FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CROATIA AND BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA PREAMBLE

Chapter Seven. Technical Barriers to Trade

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND UKRAINE

9 January 2017 Without prejudice CHAPTER [XX] SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES. Article X.1. Objectives

CHAPTER 6 TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

Ethiopia applied to join the World Trade Organization (WTO) in However,

Transcription:

Non-preferential rules of origin: Their importance and thoughts for the future Jonas Kasteng Senior Adviser, National Board of Trade Sweden Contact: jonas.kasteng@kommers.se WCO Global Origin Conference 2017 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, May 4, 2017

Non-preferential rules of origin should be objective, predictable and transparent Non-preferential rules of origin constitute the basis for a diverse range of trade policy instruments and trade related policy areas, for example: Trade remedies, Quantitative restrictions and tariff quotas, Sanitary and phytosanitary measures, Public procurement, Sanctions Labelling and marking Trade statistics

Non-preferential rules of origin should not be used as a trade policy instrument According to the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin: non-preferential rules of origin should not be used as instruments to pursue trade objectives directly or indirectly. They should not themselves create restrictive, distorting or disruptive effects on international trade Members are required to ensure that rules of origin are not used as a trade policy instrument Source: Part IV, Article 9; Part II, Article 2

The WTO negotiations on non-preferential rules of origin The WTO negotiations aimed at harmonizing the non-preferential rules of origin the list rules should be applied identically by all countries, for all products and for all purposes The negotiations were suspended in 2007 members countries mainly disagreed on the use of non-preferential rules of origin in relation to trade remedies Today WTO members are free to determine their own nonpreferential rules of origin but these should be in accordance with the WTO rules

Why are non-preferential rules of origin important for trade remedies? Trade remedies may only be imposed on products from certain countries where the criteria on dumping, injury and causality are fulfilled However, in today s world with fragmented global production chains it is increasingly difficult to establish the origin from certain countries with legal certainty There is an increasing risk that trade remedies are used as an indirect trade policy instrument to facilitate the imposition of trade remedies

Unlinking non-preferential rules of origin and trade remedies Short-run objective: Limiting the possibility to use non-preferential rules of origin as a direct or indirect trade policy instrument (see Option 1 and Option 2) Long-run objective: Modernizing the non-preferential rules of origin based on global value chains, including services and intellectual value (see Option 3)

Option 1: Make all list rules legally binding Countries should make their non-preferential rules of origin legally binding without the possibility to amend the rules for trade remedy purposes All list rules must be included! The list rules must be updated to the new trade reality and be flexible! Country-specific legally binding list rules might, however, hamper the future of the WTO harmonization process

Option 2: Non-binding list rules combined with a commitment clause The non-preferential rules of origin should remain non-binding Certain list rules may still be made legally binding for specific purposes but potential trade effects should always be considered A commitment clause prohibiting the amendment of nonpreferential rules of origin for trade remedy purposes should be included in the domestic legislation Notifications to the WTO Committee on Rules of Origin in order to increase transparency

Option 3: The modernization of the nonpreferential rules of origin Non-preferential rules of origin like all rules of origin should be modernized The value added in the production process, i.e. a global value chain perspective including services and intellectual value, should be emphazised This might create a new pattern of non-preferential origin in global trade that differentiates between Made in and Made by which should make the rules less interesting for trade remedy purposes The new principles should be developed at the multilateral level

The principle of last substantial transformation must still be respected No carve outs should be permitted the principle of last substantial transformation must be respected in the definition of nonpreferential origin The non-preferential origin should not be disregarded due to the lack of economic justification of the last substantial transformation An approach of this kind would be contrary to the global value chain perspective since producers have to defend their production processes to the non-business community

Additional considerations about the nonpreferential rules of origin Non-preferential rules of origin are relatively unknown and their use difficult to understand even within the trade community It is difficult to interest policy makers for non-preferential rules of origin since they are one step away from the trade policy measures Non-preferential rules of origin might, accordingly, be amended without too much notice and attention with a possible big impact on trade Amendments of non-preferential rules of origin need to be closely monitored by, for example, the WTO

Conclusions The use of non-preferential rules of origin are important for various trade policy instruments, in particular for trade remedies The non-preferential rules of origin should be unlinked from the trade remedy proceedings at the domestic level i.e. a more flexible approach than WTO harmonization In any case, the non-preferential rules of origin should be modernized in order to define the true origin (based on global value chains, including services and intellectual value) Since the non-preferential rules of origin are largely unknown but important they should be closely regulated and monitored

Disclaimer The National Board of Trade Sweden is a Swedish Governmental Agency It provides the Swedish Government with analyses and recommendations on trade policy issues with focus on the Swedish position in the EU It publishes independent reports to increase awareness on the importance of open and free trade with transparent rules The ideas presented by the National Board of Trade Sweden are not necessarily those of the Swedish Government

ADVERTISEMENT: FORTHCOMING PAPER Preference utilization and preferential rules of origin in the EU