fiendish trade barriers
forwarded from Ian Murray. Subject: USTR Releases 2004 Inventory of Foreign Trade Barriers Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 14:36:15 -0500 From: Trade-Facts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: RICHARD MILLS/NEENA MOORJANI April 1, 2004 (202) 395-3230 USTR Releases 2004 Inventory of Foreign Trade Barriers Market by Market, U.S. Free Trade Pacts Complement Global Efforts to Reduce U.S. Export Barriers WASHINGTON - The Office of the United States Trade Representative today released its 2004 annual report documenting foreign trade barriers to U.S. exports and U.S. efforts to reduce and eliminate those barriers. "The United States benefits from being a relatively open economy, but American workers, exporters, farmers and businesses continue to face barriers for our world-class goods and services," said U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick, regarding the National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. "Day-in and day-out, all around the world, the U.S. government is working aggressively to make sure barriers to U.S. goods and services are removed. The NTE report is a useful inventory of global trade barriers to understand what has been accomplished and what more needs to be done." "We employ a variety of tools to make sure Americans are treated fairly, from consultations to negotiations to litigation. Trade liberalization itself provides a win-win opportunity to lower barriers and promote economic growth and development," Zoellick said. "Our new and pending FTA partners represent America's third largest export market -- these FTAs are stripping away trade barriers across-the-board, market-by-market, and expanding American opportunities." "Enforcement of existing trade agreements is a vital complement to producing new ones. Indeed, enforcement is inherently connected to the process of negotiating new agreements," added Zoellick. "Virtually everything USTR does is connected with enforcement in some way. Negotiations to open markets and enforcement are two sides of the same coin." The NTE includes a list of barriers and unfair trade practices to American exports of goods, services, and farm products. In addition to limiting commercial opportunities for U.S. businesses, these barriers undermine the substantial potential gains from trade among developing countries. The NTE covers 58 major trading partners in each region of the world and profiles policies restricting market access. This year's report highlights the global effort to reduce or eliminate those barriers, and notes in particular the effect of the FTA negotiations the U.S. held or plans to hold, as well as top areas of concern related to intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. The NTE notes many examples where countries have reduced or eliminated trade barriers described in earlier reports. Active monitoring of compliance with trade agreements together with vigorous enforcement helps ensure that these agreements yield the bargained-for benefits for Americans, advancing the rule of law internationally and creating a fair, open, and predictable trading environment. We address trade barriers using a number of tools - consultation, negotiation and litigation. Past examples of enforcement successes include rulings against Canada's prohibited export subsidies on dairy products, India's restrictions on U.S. exports of auto assemblies and an agreement with Argentina resolving many of the issues raised in our dispute over aspects of its intellectual property regime. Recently, the United States obtained a favorable dispute ruling against Japan on its restrictions on imports of apples and favorable preliminary findings against Mexico on its telecommunications regime. Ongoing enforcement actions involve Canada's restrictions on wheat, China's discriminatory tax on semiconductors, Egypt's excessive textile tariffs, the EU's moratorium on biotechnology products, the EU's discriminatory regime on geographical indications, Mexico's antidumping measure on rice and Mexico's discriminatory soft drink tax. As required by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, USTR prepares the NTE Report in close consultation with other U.S. Government agencies, based on the Administration's monitoring program and information provided from the public and private sector trade advisory committees. This year, as in the past, the USTR solicited public comments and, in response, 52 groups filed submissions. U.S. Embassies also participated actively in the preparation of the report and provided critical input based on the experience of U.S. exporters abroad. In addition, these barriers are the subject of consultation with the Congress throughout th
Re: technical standards, non-tariff barriers, comparative advantage
What I forgot to say, comparatively speaking, is that in Britain, the social role of happiness is dealt with slightly differently. The British specialise in the area of the developmental theory of happiness and seek to develop predictors of happy lifespans. This is often reflected in British pop music, and I will cite just one example of this, a song about "young Nigel" by the band XTC, from the album drums and wires. In the video released with this song, Nigel is strapped to a chair with a straightjacket and mutely going mad. The song goes like this: We're only making plans for Nigel We only want what's best for him We're only making plans for Nigel Nigel just needs this helping hand And if young Nigel says he's happy He must be happy He must be happy in his work We're only making plans for Nigel He has his future in a British steel We're only making plans for Nigel Nigel's whole future is as good as sealed And if young Nigel says he's happy He must be happy He must be happy in his work Nigel is not outspoken But he likes to speak And loves to be spoken to Nigel is happy in his work We're only making plans for Nigel Notice again the reference to "Steel". J.
Re: technical standards, non-tariff barriers, comparative advantage
"Ghost riders" are not a uniquely Dutch phenomenon as far as I know, it is generally a by-product of the capitalist mechanisation and motorisation process I think (cf. Pink Floyd, ""Welcome to the Machine" and songs by "Rage against the Machine"). On average, Dutch teenagers are happier than American teenagers, but the comparison is difficult to make because of the population size differential (which may create greater extremes of happiness and unhappiness in the USA), the state of the economy, the weather, and so on. Thus, happiness is a variable prone to fluctuations, and it may be that at a certain temporal interval happiness reports are greater in the USA. The main problem involved here is that people are made of flesh and blood, but cars are made of steel, and then you have these dillemma's, contradictions and displacements. The majority of ghost riders are men. An old lady is more likely to drive herself onto a railroad track in front of an approaching train, or something like that. Happiness research is very advanced in Holland in the statistical sense. The reason is that the motivators which are most powerful in Dutch economic behaviour traditionally were only weakly related to happiness. Consequently, a classic Dutch predicament is that a Dutch person has satisfied his needs, he is successful, but he complains and frets he is not happy, there is something missing, and a great deal of research then goes into finding the missing ingredient, and if that research is done, there is humanistic sympathy for the research. If the Dutch bourgeoisie has a lot of money, humanism increases, but if this money is obtained when the total domestic economic "cake" declines, then this increase in humanism is offset by complaints and gripes from the impoverished, and then the bourgeoisie has an epistemic problem, because it cannot understand why people cannot understand its humanistic intent. Hence the Dutch bourgeois saying that "you have to be satisfied and not always want more". Fortunately there is still imperialism, in other words, we can get money from somewhere else, and then this boosts humanism in Holland. The epistemic problem in happiness research is, that people will say they are happy, but we do not know if they really are happy, so then we need a theory of happiness based on observation, logic and valuation. It often takes a lot of subtle detective work to elicit to true level of happiness that is really occurring. Jurriaan Here's a song by Dire Straits from the Making Movies album, called Tunnel of Love: Getting crazy on the waltzers, but it's the life that I choose Sing about the sixblade, sing about the switchback and a torture tattoo And I been riding on a GHOST TRAIN, where the cars they scream and slam And I don't know where I'll be tonight, but I'd always tell you where I am In a screaming ring of faces, I seen her standing in the light She had a ticket for the races, just like me she was a victim of the night I put a hand upon the lever, said let it rock and let it roll I had the one arm bandit fever, there was an arrow through my heart and my soul And the big wheel keep on turning neon burning up above And I'm just high on the world Come on and take a low ride with me girl On the tunnel of love It's just the danger, when you're riding at your own risk She said you are the perfect stranger she said baby let's keep it like this It's just a cake walk, twisting baby, step right up and say Hey mister, give me two, give me two, cos any two can play And the big wheel keep on turning, neon burning, up above And I'm just high on the world Come on, and take a low ride with me, girl On the tunnel of love Well it's been money for muscle, another whirligig Money for muscle, and another girl I dig Another hustle, just to make it big And rockaway rockaway And girl, it looks so pretty to me, just like it always did Like the spanish city to me, when we were kids Oh girl, it looks so pretty to me, just like it always did Like the spanish city to me, when we were kids She took off a silver locket, she said, remember me by this She put her hand in my pocket, I got a keepsake and a kiss And in the roar of the dust and diesel, I stood and watched her walk away I could have caught up with her easy enough, but something must have made me stay And the big wheel keep on turning, neon burning up above And I'm just high on the world Come on, and take a low ride with me girl On the tunnel of love And now I'm searching through these carousels, and the carnival arcades Searching everywhere, from steeplechase to palisades In any shooting gallery, where promises are made To rockaway, rockaway, from cullercoats and whitley bay out to rockaway And girl it looks so pretty to me, like it always did Like the spanish city to me, when we were kids Girl it looks so pretty to me, like it always did Like the spanish city to me, when we were kids
Re: technical standards, non-tariff barriers, comparative advantage
Is this a culturally-specific form of suicide, or do your teenagers get more depressed than our teenagers? Joanna Jurriaan Bendien wrote: In Holland, we have the concept of a "ghost driver". A ghost driver is somebody who rides a motor vehicle deliberately for a long stretch on the wrong side of the road, usually a road with relatively light traffic, and usually as fast as possible. This may result in death or arrest by the police. J.
Re: technical standards, non-tariff barriers, comparative advantage
In Holland, we have the concept of a "ghost driver". A ghost driver is somebody who rides a motor vehicle deliberately for a long stretch on the wrong side of the road, usually a road with relatively light traffic, and usually as fast as possible. This may result in death or arrest by the police. J.
technical standards, non-tariff barriers, comparative advantage
[driving on which side of the road should be the global, technical standard?] [Federal Register: September 24, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 185)] [Notices] [Page 55287-55289] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24se03-7] === --- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology [Docket No.: 030908225-3225-01] Request for Technical Input on Standards Issues and Foreign Markets AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of inquiry. --- SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce requests industry comments on pressing standards issues and priority foreign markets. As part of the Department's Secretarial Initiative to Enhance Commerce Department Standards Activities, the Department is currently conducting a series of industry roundtables, seeking comment on barriers in export markets caused by foreign governments' policies on standards and technical regulatory requirements. The Department is supplementing these roundtables with a general solicitation of comments from industry representatives via this notice. The Department has also scheduled an open roundtable standards discussion, to be held on October 23 at the Department of Commerce and invites interested parties to indicate their interest in participating in this roundtable. DATES: Written comments on standards issues and foreign markets must be submitted to NIST no later than November 1, 2003. The Department also invites industry to attend an open roundtable standards discussion, to be held on October 23 at the Department of Commerce. Participants in the discussion will be asked for their individual input and advice, and will not be asked to furnish group consensus advice. A request to attend the open roundtable standards discussion should [[Page 55288]] be submitted to ITA no later than September 30, 2003. ADDRESSES: The public is strongly encouraged to submit comments electronically rather than by facsimile or by mail. All comments on standards issues and foreign markets should be addressed to: Dr. Belinda Collins, Deputy Director, Technology Services, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 2000, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, fax (301) 975-2183. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Those wishing to attend the open roundtable discussion should contact: Ms. Lisa Handy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Trade Development, International Trade Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The October 23 roundtable discussion will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The full text of the Initiative is available at: http://www.commerce.gov/opa/press/2003_Releases/March/19_Standards.htm . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on submitting input on standards issues and barriers in export markets, contact Dr. Belinda Collins, Deputy Director, Technology Services, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Tel: 301-975-4500 or Ms. Christine DeVaux, Technology Services, NIST, Tel: 301-975-4679. For further information on the open roundtable, contact Ms. Lisa Handy, International Trade Administration, Tel: 202-482-2788. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 19, 2003, Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans announced an eight-point Standards Initiative to help break down trade barriers. The initiative is in response to industry concerns that foreign standards and technical regulation issues are becoming among the greatest challenges to expanding exports. Foreign standards and methods used to assess conformity to standards can facilitate efficient international trade and its benefits, or they also can be used intentionally or unintentionally to impede access to foreign markets. Many in industry view foreign standards and technical regulation as a principal non-tariff barrier in markets around the world. Divergent standards, redundant testing and compliance procedures, and unilateral and non-transparent standard setting exercises are now recognized as major impediments to free trade--estimated to affect 80 percent of world commodity trade. Over the course of the last several months, a number of industry associations and companies have highlighted foreign standards development and technical regulations as an issue of increasing importance for U.S. exports. There is a sense from industry that the U.S. Government, specifically the Commerce Department, could do more to reduce the barriers to export markets caused by foreign governments' adverse policies on standards and technical regulatory requirements. In response to indu
USTR 2002 report on trade barriers
< http://www.ustr.gov/reports/nte/2002/index.htm >
barriers
Doug raises an interesting question. He is being charged $45 dollars for each Canadian$ cheque he clears. Now, of course, the cost of clearing those cheques (thanks to modern technology) approaches zero. So someone is ripping him (and many others of us) off. Why? And why do we accept it. What stops an independent (as suggested, I think by Maggie), from setting up shop in Canada, accepting those canadian cheques, converting them to international bank draughts or money orders -- if I remember right at approx 5$ max -- and transmitting them to the US. Have the monopoly banks become so powerful that they can prevent absolutely the market, imperfect as it is, from working even in a most primitive matter. In short, is there really a market in international money or have 'tansaction cost' completely destroyed the market except for the multi-big players? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba
[PEN-L:3717] Mexico puts up barriers to foreign investment
News source: N.Y. Times News Service, via Nando.net (Global) Source: http://www.latinolink.com/news/0405mex.html Date: 04/09/96 Mexico Tries to Restrict Foreign Investment By: Anthony DePalma A91996 New York Times News Service MEXICO CITY -- After several years of throwing open its economy, Mexico has recently tried to shut some doors to United States and other foreign investors, contending that national interests come before trade agreements. The latest attempt to restrict investment came this week as Mexican legislators, backed by the nation's strongest labor unions, demanded that foreign companies be prohibited from managing new pension funds that will be established next year as part of sweeping changes in the Mexican social security system. Citing the experience of Chile, where U.S. managers control more than 70 percent of privatized pension funds, the congressmen and labor leaders charge that foreign fund managers would invest their holdings outside Mexico, depriving the country of the benefit of increased savings. Foreign fund managers could take over the business by offering higher returns and lower costs, the legislators fear. "This is a case of nationalism,'' conceded Salvador Mikel, a representative of the ruling party, speaking on the floor of the Congress. "We are simply interpreting the North American Free Trade Agreement in Spanish,'' meaning to Mexico's advantage. The U.S. market managers who would be most interested in operating the pension funds think that any restrictions would backfire on the Mexican government's aim of increasing the paltry rate of domestic savings. "Managing assets requires confidence, skill and trust,'' said Luis Luis, director of emerging markets research at Scudder, Stevens & Clark, in Boston. "No one who can provide these things should be excluded.'' Just last month the government decided to restrict the sale of 60 of the 61 government-owned petrochemical plants to Mexican companies or joint ventures in which Mexicans have a majority interest. "It was the only politically palatable way to get the process moving ahead,'' said a senior official, who spoke on condition that he not be named. "So many political factors have gotten wrapped up in the sale that the privatizations became a paradigm for many past problems.'' Santander Investment estimates that with the new ownership rules, Mexico will realize only $2 billion on the sale of its four most important petrochemical plants, less than a third of original estimates. While restrictions against foreign investment pale against the large international presence in such important sectors of the Mexican economy as banking and manufacturing, they are important because they represent such a drastic change in government attitude. During the presidency of Carlos Salinas de Gortari from 1988 to 1994 foreign capital was universally welcomed. While President Ernesto Zedillo has followed many of the economic principles of his predecessor, he has slowed the pace of change. "It's important to remember the devaluation and the crisis it caused between the two administrations,'' said Jonathan Heath, an economist in Mexico City. "Now everyone in Mexico opposes what Salinas did and anything connected to him is seen as evil.'' The new attitude also seems to be formed in part by a perception that the United States is reneging on parts of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which took effect at the start of 1994. In the last few months the United States has put restrictions on Mexican tomatoes, refused to lift prohibitions against Mexican avocados and rejected a plan to allow Mexican trucks to cross the border. "The attitude now is that the United States is taking a much harder stand than before, so why should Mexico open up,'' Heath said. But he added, "I don't think American investors have too much to worry about, because it's a cycle that will end,'' referring to the political tensions leading up to midterm elections next year. The restriction against foreign investment in petrochemicals is in accord with a reserve clause of the trade agreement that permits limitations on the sale of assets once reserved for the state. All oil and petrochemicals in Mexico have until now been controlled by the government-owned monopoly Pemex. The first planned sale of a petrochemical complex, however, was begun before the restrictions were enacted. Three foreign companies and one Mexican company are submitting bids on the Cosoleacaque plant, government officials said. A decision will be announced on April 26. The pension fund restriction, if passed, would be on shakier ground than that for the Pemex sales. The Mexican finance minister, Guillermo Ortiz, told legislators last month that the trade agreement obliged Mexico to open the pension funds to foreign capital from the United States and Canada. The agreement allows other countries to enter the market as well, but only with less than a controlling interest. A vote on
