[Federal Register: December 30, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 78516-78517]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30de04-120]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Petitions Under Section 302 on the Valuation of Chinese Currency;
Decisions Not to Initiate Investigations
AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
ACTION: Decisions not to initiate investigations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has determined
not to initiate investigations under section 302 of the Trade Act of
1974 with respect to petitions addressed to the valuation of Chinese
currency because initiation of investigations would not be effective in
addressing the issues raised in the petitions.
EFFECTIVE DATES: With respect to the petition filed by the China
Currency Coalition: September 9, 2004. With respect to the petition
filed by the Congressional China Currency Action Coalition: November
12, 2004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terrence McCartin, Senior Director of
Monitoring and Enforcement for China, (202) 395-3900; or William Busis,
Associate General Counsel, (202) 395-3150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 9, 2004, the China Currency
Coalition filed a petition pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended (the Trade Act), alleging that certain acts,
policies and practices of the Government of China with respect to the
valuation of Chinese currency deny and violate international legal
rights of the United States, are unjustifiable, and burden or restrict
U.S. commerce. In particular, the petition alleged that China's acts,
policies and practices that maintain a fixed exchange rate vis a vis
the U.S. dollar have resulted in a significant undervaluation of
Chinese currency. The petition alleged that these acts, policies and
practices: amount to a prohibited export subsidy under the Agreement on
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and articles VI and XVI of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994); amount--under
article XV of the GATT 1994--to exchange action that frustrates the
intent of articles I, II, III, and XI of the GATT 1994; and amount to
subsidies that are inconsistent with China's obligations under articles
3, 9, and 10 of the Agreement on Agriculture. The petition also alleged
that these acts, policies and practices of China violate international
legal rights of the United States under articles IV and VIII of the
Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund, and that they
burden or restrict U.S. commerce by, among other things, suppressing
U.S. manufacturing for domestic consumption and the growth in U.S.
exports.
Upon receipt of the petition, the USTR determined not to initiate
an investigation under section 302 of the Trade Act because an
investigation would not be effective in addressing the acts, policies,
and practices covered in the petition. The Administration is currently
involved in efforts to address with the Government of China the
currency valuation issues raised in the petition. The USTR believes
that initiation of an investigation under section 302 would hamper,
rather than advance, Administration efforts to address Chinese currency
valuation policies.
Subsequent to the USTR's decision not to initiate an investigation
in response to the petition filed by the China Currency Coalition, a
different petitioner--the Congressional China Currency Action
Coalition--filed a petition on September 30, 2004 with respect to
Chinese currency valuation. As compared to the earlier petition, the
second petition addressed the same acts, policies and practices of
China, and contained substantially the same allegations that those
acts, policies, and practices deny and violate international legal
rights of the United States, are
[[Page 78517]]
unjustifiable, and burden or restrict U.S. commerce. The USTR's
determination with respect to the second petition was the same as his
determination with respect to the earlier petition: namely, the USTR
decided not to initiate an investigation in response to the second
petition because an investigation would not be effective in addressing
the acts, policies, and practices covered in the petition.
William Busis,
Chairman, Section 301 Committee.
[FR Doc. 04-28625 Filed 12-29-04; 8:45 am]
