Transcript מצגת של PowerPoint - Bar

MAIN LEGAL SUPPORT TO
COMPETITION
Customs
Art. 3(a) 10-17
Restricting Arrangements
Art 81(85)
Governmental Aid
Art. 92-94
Quotas
Art. 30-37
Dominant Position
Art. 82(86)
Tax Discrimination
Art. 95-99
ILLUSTRATIVE CASES
Customers & Quotas
• National type approval
regulation-British safety
and technical standards.
1981
• Cassis de Dijon Rewe
Zentral against German
Federal Monopoly
Administration
• Asterix & Cleopatre Art.36
Cartels & Monopoles
• Grunding-Consten
Territorial Protection
• Nintendo Case
• Check Point Case
Governmental aid
Tax Discrimination
• Schul Case Import to
Holland from Monaco
of second hand yacht
Article 81 (ex Article 85)
1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible
with the common market: all agreements
between undertakings, decisions by associations
of undertakings and concerted practices which
may affect trade between Member States and
which have as their object or effect the
prevention, restriction or distortion of
competition within the common market, and in
particular those which:
(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling
prices or any other trading conditions;
(b) limit or control production, markets, technical
development, or investment;
(c) share markets or sources of supply;
(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent
transactions with other trading parties, thereby
placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to
acceptance by the other parties of supplementary
obligations which, by their nature or according to
commercial usage, have no connection with the
subject of such contracts.
2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant
to this Article shall be automatically void.
3. The provisions of paragraph 1 may, however, be
declared inapplicable in the case of:
— any agreement or category of agreements
between undertakings;
— any decision or category of decisions by
associations of undertakings;
— any concerted practice or category of concerted
practices,
which contributes to improving the production or
distribution of goods or to promoting technical or
economic progress, while allowing consumers a
fair share of the resulting benefit, and which does
not:
(a) impose on the undertakings concerned
restrictions which are not indispensable to the
attainment of these objectives;
(b) afford such undertakings the possibility of
eliminating competition in respect of a substantial
part of the products in question.
Article 82 (ex Article 86)
Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a
dominant position within the common market or
in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as
incompatible with the common market insofar as
it may affect trade between Member States.
Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:
(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or
selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
(b) limiting production, markets or technical
development to the prejudice of consumers;
(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent
transactions with other trading parties, thereby
placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to
acceptance by the other parties of supplementary
obligations which, by their nature or according to
commercial usage, have no connection with the
subject of such contracts.
EU-ISRAEL ASSOCIATION
AGREEMENT
PRINCIPLES
• Progressive Liberalization
of Capital Movement
• Political Dialogue (I)
• Intensification of
• Expansion of Trade in
Cooperation in Science &
Goods (II) and Services
Technology
• Progressive Liberalization
• Encourage Regional
of Public Procurements
Cooperation
• Title III: Right of Establishment & Supply of
Services
• Title IV: Capital Movement, Payments, Public
Procurement, Competition & Intellectual
Property
• Title V: Scientific & Technological Cooperation
• Title VI: Economic Cooperation
• Title VII: Cooperation on Audiovisual &
Cultural Matter, Information & Communication
• Title VIII: Social Matters
12. NAFTA Agreement
NORTH AMERICAN FREE
TRADE AGREEMENT
January 1994
OBJECTIVES
MOTIVATIONS
• Eliminates Barriers to
Trade
• Promote Conditions of
Fair Competition
• Increase Investment
Opportunities
• Provide Protection of
Intellectual Property
• GATT Dissatisfaction
Progress
• EU Expansion
• Attract Investments
• Promote International
Trade
OBJECTIVES
a. eliminate barriers to trade in, and facilitate the cross-border
movement of goods and services between the territories of the
Parties;
b. promote conditions of fair competition in the free trade area;
c. increase substantially investment opportunities in the
territories of the Parties;
d. provide adequate and effective protection and enforcement of
intellectual property rights in each Party's territory;
e. create effective procedures for the implementation and
application of this Agreement, for its joint administration and
for the resolution of disputes; and
f.
establish a framework for further trilateral, regional and
multilateral cooperation to expand and enhance the benefits of
this Agreement."
Under the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), tariffs on virtually all originating goods
traded between Canada and Mexico will be eliminated
by 2003. Tariffs on qualifying goods traded between
Canada and the United States became duty free on
January 1, 1998.
OPERATIONS
• Commission for Environment
• Commission for Cooperation
(Montreal)
• Commission for Labor
Cooperation( Dallas)
• North American Bank (San
Antonio)
• Working Groups
CONTENT
• Trade In Agriculture
• Fifteen Years Transition
• Trade in Services,
Telecommunication, Finance
• Competition Policy
• Intellectual Property
• Rules of Origin
North American Free Trade Agreement
PART ONE: GENERAL PART
Chapter One: Objectives
Chapter Two: General Definitions
PART TWO: TRADE IN GOODS
Chapter Three: National Treatment and Market Access for
Goods
Annex 300-A: Trade and Investment in the Automotive
Sector
Annex 300-B: Textile and Apparel Goods
Chapter Four: Rules of Origin
Chapter Five: Customs Procedures
Chapter Six: Energy and Basic Petrochemicals
Chapter Seven: Agriculture and Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures
Chapter Eight: Emergency Action
PART THREE: TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE
Chapter Nine: Standards-Related Measures
PART FOUR: GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
Chapter Ten: Government Procurement
Chapter Four: Rules of Origin
Chapter Five: Customs Procedures
Chapter Six: Energy and Basic Petrochemicals
Chapter Seven: Agriculture and Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures
Chapter Eight: Emergency Action
PART THREE: TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE
Chapter Nine: Standards-Related Measures
PART FOUR: GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
Chapter Ten: Government Procurement
PART FIVE: INVESTMENT, SERVICES AND RELATED
MATTERS
Chapter Eleven: Investment
Chapter Twelve: Cross-Border Trade in Services
Chapter Thirteen: Telecommunications
Chapter Fourteen: Financial Services
Chapter Fifteen: Competition Policy, Monopolies and
State Enterprises
Chapter Sixteen: Temporary Entry for Business Persons
PART SIX: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Chapter Seventeen: Intellectual Property
PART SEVEN: ADMINISTRATIVE AND
INSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
Chapter Eighteen: Publication, Notification and
Administration of Laws
Chapter Nineteen: Review and Dispute Settlement
in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Matters
Chapter Twenty: Institutional Arrangements and
Dispute Settlement Procedures
PART EIGHT: OTHER PROVISIONS
Chapter Twenty-One: Exceptions
Chapter Twenty-Two: Final Provisions
Annex 401: Specific Rules of Origin
RVC= regional value content
TV VNM
--------------TV
TV
is the transaction value of the good adjusted to a F.O.B.
basis; and
VNM
is the value of non-originating materials used by the
producer in the production of the good.
NAFTA RESULTS
CANADA
• 16% Employment
growth
• 109% exports growth
(29% to others)
• Exports to Mexico
doubled
•127% Investment
increase to US
•Six times increase to
Mexico
USA
MEXICO
• Export growth
• Export growth 238%
doubled(59% others) • 28% Employment
• 12% Employment growth
growth
NAFTA has enabled both Canada and Mexico to
increase their exports to the United States: Canadian
manufacturers now send more than half their
production to the U.S., while Mexico’s share of the U.S.
import market has almost doubled from 6.9% in preNAFTA 1993 to 11.6% in 2002.
Today, 86.6% of total merchandise exports go to our
NAFTA partners. And close to 2.3 million jobs have
been created in Canada since 1994, representing an
increase of 17.5% over pre-NAFTA employment levels.
U.S. Agricultural Exports to NAFTA Partners
Have Increased by $4 Billion Since 1994
Source: NAFTA AT SEVEN Its impact on workers in all three nations Economic Policy
InstituteApril 2001 | EPI Briefing
13. The World Trade Organization
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
• General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (GATT)
From Geneva(1947) – 23 Countries to
Uruguay Round (86-94) 120 Countries
Constrain Governments from Imposing or
Continuing a Variety of Measures that Restrain or
Distort International Trade
• Marrakech 15 April 1994 - WTO
• China 2001(143 Members)
The new rules and commitments apply to:
•market access — various trade restrictions
confronting imports
•domestic support — subsidies and other
programmes, including those that raise or
guarantee farmgate prices and farmers’ incomes
•export subsidies and other methods used to
make exports artificially competitive.
Agreement on Agriculture
Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
Decision on Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform
Programme on Least-Developed and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries
Agreement on Textiles and Clothing
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures
Anti-Dumping)
Customs Valuation)
Preshipment Inspection
Agreement on Rules of Origin
Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
Agreement on Safeguards
General Agreement on Trade in Services
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Including
Trade in Counterfeit Goods
MAIN RESULTS
• Agriculture Domestic Support less 20% (developing
13.3%) in 6 Years; Subvention to Exports 36%-21%
NTB’s Converted to Tariffs & cut by 36%
• Textiles: MFA quota dismantled 1995-2005, tariffs
reduced
• Telecommunication services 69 Countries (Feb 1997)
• Information Technology 49 Countries (Feb 1997)
• Financial Services 70 Countries (Feb 1997)
The WTO holds its main ministerial conferences roughly every
two years, and they are the WTO's highest authority. The first
ministerial was held in Singapore in December 1996. The
second was held in Geneva in May 1998. Seattle hosted the
third ministerial conference between November and December
1999. Doha hosted the last conference in November 2001.
2003's WTO ministerial conference will take place in Cancun,
Mexico in September.
TABLE OF CASES CITED IN THIS REPORT
Short Title
Brazil –
Aircraft
(Article 22.6 –
Brazil)
Full Case Title and Citation
Decision by the Arbitrators, Brazil – Export
Financing Programme for Aircraft –
Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under
Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 411 of
the SCM Agreement, WT/DS46/ARB,
28 August 2000
Canada –
Decision by the Arbitrator, Canada – Export
Aircraft Credits Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional
and Guarantees Aircraft – Recourse to Arbitration by
Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and
(Article 22.6 – Article 411 of the SCM Agreement,
WT/DS222/ARB, 17 February 2003
Canada)
EC –
Bananas III
(Ecuador)
(Article 22.6 –
EC)
Decision by the Arbitrators, European
Communities – Regime for the Importation,
Sale and Distribution of Bananas – Recourse
to Arbitration by the European Communities
under Article 22.6 of the DSU,
WT/DS27/ARB/ECU, 24 March 2000,
DSR 2000:V, 2243
EC –
Bananas III
(US)
(Article 22.6 –
EC)
Decision by the Arbitrators, European
Communities – Regime for the Importation,
Sale and Distribution of Bananas – Recourse
to Arbitration by the European Communities
under Article 22.6 of the DSU,
WT/DS27/ARB, 9 April 1999, DSR
1999:II, 725
EC –
Hormones (US)
(Article 22.6 –
EC)
Decision by the Arbitrators, European
Communities – Measures Concerning Meat and
Meat Products (Hormones) – Original
Complaint by the United States – Recourse to
Arbitration by the European Communities under
Article 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS26/ARB,
12 July 1999, DSR 1999:III, 1105
EC – Hormones
(Canada)
(Article 22.6 –
EC)
Decision by the Arbitrators, European
Communities – Measures Concerning Meat and
Meat Products (Hormones) – Original
Complaint by Canada – Recourse to Arbitration
by the European Communities under Article 22.6
of the DSU, WT/DS48/ARB, 12 July 1999,
DSR 1999:III, 1135
VII AWARD AND DECISION OF THE ARBITRATORS
154 For the reasons set out above, we conclude that the
European Communities may suspend obligations under
GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement against imports
from the United States.
But such rulings are hardly the norm. In one highly
publicized case, the WTO ruled in January 1999 that the EU
could no longer give preferential treatment to banana
imports from former colonies in the Caribbean, a decision
which is likely to hurt the region's already-impoverished,
primarily small-scale banana farmers. Who brought up the
complaint? The US -- home base to banana giants Chiquita,
Dole, and Del Monte, which control an estimated two-thirds
of world banana exports.
www.MotherJones.com
But what's so terrible about global free trade?
Trade is one thing, but unrestricted, worldwide, corporatedominated trade runs roughshod over the environment,
workers' rights, small nations, and local self-determination,
critics say.
Lori Wallach and Michelle Sforza, co-authors of Public
Citizen/Global Trade Watch's "Whose Trade
Organization?" have made a study of the 167 contested
trade issues brought to the WTO as of last March. Their
conclusion: In every case in which an environmental,
health, or food safety law was challenged at the
WTO, such laws have been declared illegal barriers
to trade. WTO rulings have forced South Korea to lower
meat safety rules and the US to weaken its Clean Air Act, to
cite just two.
What's on the agenda at Cancun?
WTO ministers will negotiate the "Doha Agenda", which is
the current round of trade negotiations launched at the last
Ministerial Meeting in Doha. Trade negotiations on different
issues are linked together so that countries can make
trade-offs between different agreements. At Cancun, the
agenda includes four new issues: investment, competition
policy, transparency in government procurement, and trade
facilitation (ie custom procedures), as well as the huge
number of on-going negotiations on issues like agriculture,
market access and drug patent rules.
The 5th Ministerial Meeting in Cancun came to a dramatic end
without agreement on 14 September 2003, leaving negotiations in
a deadlock. On the agenda were a range of issues agreed upon at
the 2001 Ministerial Meeting in Doha, including agriculture,
services, e-commerce and the environment. The European Union
had continued to push for an expansion of the WTO's powers to
include new issues (investment, competition policy, government
procurement and trade facilitation), until the eleventh hour,
insisting that these issues get dealt with first before the
development issues that should have been at the top of the
agenda.
Despite the Ministerial Meeting's abrupt ending, the outcome is
not a negative one. It was the only option for the developing
countries, as no deal is better than a bad deal at this stage.
Developing countries refused to be pushed into a corner and have
proven they are a force to be reckoned with at the WTO
negotiating table.
•Barry Coates
World Development Movement
We live in a world where the problem is not that the
governments have too much control over corporations,
and they use it to discriminate against multinationals, the
problem is that multinationals have too much power
and they discriminate against governments. That is
the fundamental problem with the WTO. The WTO as an
intergovernmental agreement is primarily there to stop
governments from interfering with the market. And I
think we have to question that as the pre-eminent system
of global economic rules that it is becoming.
http://www.wdm.org.uk/campaign/cancun03/cancun.htm
How does the WTO affect workers rights?
Why, then, will some of the biggest demonstrations in
Seattle be organized by workers and labor unions? Outrage
over abusive sweatshop conditions throughout the
developing world, for one thing. But laborers in the United
States are also feeling the impact of the global economy
directly, especially in the aftermath of NAFTA. According to
Ron Judd, executive director of the King County Labor
Council, the US has lost 537,000 manufacturing jobs
in the last 18 months alone as companies continue to
move production overseas to places where labor costs are
cheaper.
What about the environment?
But critics say that WTO decisions on trade have undermined
important environmental safeguards. Shrybman cites the
Biosafety Protocol of the UN Convention on Biological
Diversity as an example. Last February, more than 140 nations
met in Colombia to complete the Biosafety Protocol, the
result of seven years of international effort toward a policy to
protect the public from the potential health and
environmental threat of genetically modified organisms.
The protocol was intended to give governments the
right to consent to or to refuse shipments of
genetically modified foods. But, as Global Trade Watch's
Wallach and Sforza have documented, the US-led "Miami
Group" consisting of several major exporters of
genetically modified organisms blocked adoption of
the protocol, citing conflicting trade obligations under the
How about local food production?
While many European, Asian, and North American countries
have indeed seen significant economic benefits from free trade,
the impact of trade liberalization for developing countries has
been far more negative than the WTO cares to admit. A recent
United Nations Commission on Trade and Development report
shows that the share of world exports and imports has, in
fact, fallen sharply among the poorest countries in
recent years. Rapid liberalization of trade and the removal of
trade barriers has often forced producers in developing
countries to compete with -- and lose to -- more
sophisticated and industrialized foreign
manufacturers. UN Council on Trade and Development has
also found that those countries which have pursued rapid
trade liberalization have seen phenomenal increases in
wage inequalities at home.
12 October 2004
(04-4274)
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND CERTAIN MEMBER
STATES MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN LARGE CIVIL
AIRCRAFT
Request for Consultations by the United States
The provision by the EC and the member States of equity infusions
and grants, including through government-owned and governmentcontrolled banks. Examples include equity investment by the
German government through Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau
("KFW") in Deutsche Airbus and the return of the shares acquired
through this transaction to Deutsche Airbus' parent, the Daimler
group, without compensation. The French government between
1987 and 1997 made equity infusions to offset losses of
Aérospatiale and increased the company's share value through
share transfers into the company in 1998.
The provision by the EC and the member States, through the
European Investment Bank ("EIB"), to the Airbus companies,
including Airbus' parent company EADS, of research and
development and other loans on preferential terms, including
financing for the A320, the A321, the A330/340, and the A380.
The assumption and forgiveness by the EC and the member States
of debt resulting from launch aid and other large civil aircraft
production and development financing, including debt accumulated
by Deutsche Airbus and forgiven by the German government and
debt assumed by the government of Spain on behalf of
Construcciones Aeronauticas SA ("CASA").
Press/394
11 January 2005
DIRECTOR-GENERAL
Supachai welcomes EU — US decision on aircraft
dispute
Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi today welcomed
the decision taken by the European Union and the United
States to negotiate a bilateral resolution to their ongoing
dispute concerning aircraft subsidies rather than continue
the cases they had brought in October to the WTO’s
Dispute Settlement Body.
MERCOSUR
Treaty Establishing a Common Market
between the Argentine Republic, the
Federal Republic of Brazil, the Republic of
Paraguay and the Eastern Republic of
Uruguay
http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/mrcsr/mrcsrtoc.asp
Chapter I: Purposes, Principles, and
Instruments
Chapter II: Organizational Structure
Chapter III: Period of Application
Chapter IV: Accession
Chapter V: Denunciation
Chapter VI: General Provisions
AnnexesAnnex I: Trade Liberalization
Programme
Annex II: General Rules of Origin
Chapter I: General Rules for Classification of
Origin
Chapter II: Declaration, Certification, and
Verification
Annex III: Settlement of Disputes
Annex IV: Safeguard Clauses
Annex V: Working Groups of the Common
Market Group
The States Parties hereby decide to establish a common
market, which shall be in place by 31 December 1994 and
shall be called the "common market of the southern cone"
(MERCOSUR).
The free movement of goods, services and factors of
production between countries through, inter alia, the
elimination of customs duties and non-tariff restrictions on
the movement of goods, and any other equivalent
measures;
The establishment of a common external tariff and the
adoption of a common trade policy in relation to third States
or groups of States, and the co-ordination of positions in
regional and international economic and commercial
forums
ORGANIZATION
• The Council shall be the highest organ of the
common market, with responsibility for its political
leadership and for decision-making to ensure
compliance with the objectives and time-limits set for
the final establishment of the common market.
• The council shall consist of the Ministers for Foreign
Affairs and the Ministers of the Economy of the
States Parties.
The Common Market Group shall be the executive organ of
the common market and shall be co-ordinated by the
Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
The Common Market Group shall have powers of initiative. Its
duties shall be the following:
- to monitor compliance with the Treaty;
- to take the necessary steps to enforce decisions adopted by
the Council;
- to propose specific measures for applying the trade
liberalization programme, co-ordinating macroeconomic
policies and negotiating agreements with third parties;
- to draw up programmes of work to ensure progress towards
the formation of the common market
GENERAL RULES OF ORIGIN
1.
2.
Products manufactured wholly in the territory of any of the
Parties, when only materials originating in the States
Parties are used in their manufacture;
(b) Products included in the chapters or headings of the
tariff nomenclature of the Latin Arnerican Integration
Association referred to in Annex 1 of resolution 78 of the
Committee of Representatives of that Association, simply
by virtue of the fact that they are produced in their
respective territories
•Products in whose manufacture materials not originating in
the States Parties are used, when such products are changed
by a process carried out in the territory of one of the States
Parties which results in their reclassification in the tariff
nomenclature of the Latin American Integration Association
under a heading different from that of such materials, except
in cases where the States Parties determine that the
requirement of Article 2 of this Annex must also be met.
•In cases where the requirement of Article 1 (c) cannot be met
because the process carried out does not involve a change in
nomenclature heading, it shall suffice that the c.i.f. value of the
third country materials at the port of destination or the
maritime port does not exceed 50 per cent of the f.o.b. export
value of the goods in question