Огляд країнами що розвиваються НТБ на Доському раунді

Важливо розрізняти нетарифні бар'єрів із заходами, що не пов'язаних з тарифами. Нетарифні заходи можуть покривати вимоги до документації та збори на митниці і нормативні заходи, такі як дотримання стандартів. Вони надійні і необхідні. Нетарифні бар'єри, це нетарифні заходи, які спричиняють несправедливі перешкоди у торгівлі.

НТБ розглядаються з ГАТТ 1947 року. Переважна більшість статей в ГАТТ, стосується НТБ. Вони в основному передбачають м'які дисциплінарні заходи і залишають багато можливостей щоб їх обійти. Жорсткіша дисципліна стала коли НТБ стали більш поширеними. Положення про антидемпінгові і регіональні торговельні угоди були досягнуті протягом раунду Кеннеді. Токійський раунд сфокусувався на НТБ і створенні угоди про технічні бар'єри в торгівлі (ТБТ), державні закупівлі, субсидії і компенсаційні заходи, митну оцінку, ліцензування імпорту та антидемпінгу.

Тим не менше, ці угоди є добровільними, тому недуже ефективні. Уругвайський раунд характеризувався значною увагою до НТБ, і всі угоди Токійського раунду стали обовязковими і включали угоди про санітарних та фітосанітарних заходів (СФС), передвідвантажувальної інспекції, правила походження, гарантій, текстилю та одягу.

Державний договір поставки також став обов'язковим, але був багатобічною, а не багатосторонньою угодою. Незважаючи на ці підкріплення, НТБ тривають з 1995 року і потребують подальшого вирішення в рамках ДПР. Перші завдання в переговорах по ПДР стосувалися інвентаризаційних НТБ, в рамках якого було повідомлено про 312 заходів, одна третина з них пов'язана з СФС і ТБТ і далі найбільша група, що відноситься до митниці.

Щоб справитися з цим, важливо було встановити процедури з пошуку відшкодування, оскільки багато з цих бар'єрів були вже охоплені угодами СОТ. Проблема була у виконанні. Протягом шести років переговорів жодне рішення ніякого рішення не було знайдено під час реєстрації НТБ. Тим не менш, деякі з них зникли, а деякі були вирішені за межами СОТ. Уроки, які необхідно винести це те, що НТБ будуть існувати завжди, вони повинні швидко вирішуватися, вони не завжди зачіпають всі країни і що їх вирішення має бути основане на консенсусі. Ці уроки закріплені у пропозиціях NAMA-11 про прискорені процедури для боротьби з НТБ.

Пропозиція спрямована на двоетапний процес. Перша частина є обов'язковою сесією питань і відповідей із зацікавленими членами. За нею слідують стадії вирішення проблем, щоб прийти до вирішення у сфері НТБ. Пропозиція спрямована на використання існуючих підходів, але не впливає на права та зобов'язання щодо СОТ. Є і інші матеріали по галузевим проблемам і стандартам, які потрібно буде вирішувати в майбутньому.

Питання та коментарі аудиторії

Обговорювалося широке коло питань. Джон Кларк відповів на питання про нові НТБ на маркування молока в США, відзначивши, що нові заходи повинні повністю відповідати існуючим нормам СОТ. Учасники дискусії також розглянули питання про можливі обмеження на суверенітет, що накладаються через управління НТБ. Посол Бхатія зазначив, що суверенітет сам по собі обмежений всіма міжнародними угодами. Питання про капітуляцію суверенітету повинно бути добровільним процесом, основаним на взаємній вигоді. Джон Кларк погодився з цією точкою зору і додав, що колись були укладені членами СОТ угоди, повинні відповідати правилам, навіть якщо вимоги споживачів складні для досягнення.

Посол Бхатія захистив приписи Індії щодо митних реформ, зазначивши, що Індія скоротила затримки в митній системі на 75% в останні роки. У найбільших портах для оформлення знадобилося всього 1-2 дні. Звичайно, труднощі інфраструктури можуть зробити транспортування за межі порту більш складним, але уряд інвестує значні кошти для вирішення цієї проблеми. Митні процедури в Індії сьогодні в багатьох випадках є в онлайн режимі і в 50-60% імпорту не пов'язані з подальшою перевірки після подачі документів.

На виступах також розглянуті проблеми з переговорів щодо спрощення процедур торгівлі. Посол Бхатія зазначив, що основні проблеми в переговорах щодо спрощення процедур торгівлі, відносяться до проблем малих країн що розвиваються і стосуються браку доступу до ресурсів для реалізації можливої угоди, і додав, що нарощування потенціалу буде ключовим питанням, щоб отримати згоду. Координація міжнародних технічних організацій, що працюють для забезпечити цієї допомоги буде мати вирішальне значення на практиці.

Джон Кларк дав деякі додаткові подробиці про важливі елементи можливої угоди, включаючи обробку електронних даних заздалегідь; зелений коридор для перевірених трейдерів; зобов'язання, щоб всі офіційні перевірки відбуватимуться одночасно; і, нарешті, поділ руху товарів в залежності від розміру мита, щоб зменшити можливості для корупції. Обговорення також охоплює області стандартів, які можуть бути використані в якості протекціоністського інструменту в деяких випадках. Посол Бхатія зазначив, що це буде проблемою для розгляду в СОТ в майбутньому. Джон Кларк висловив розчарування тим, що переговори в рамках СОТ з політики в галузі конкуренції були зняті з ДСР, оскільки такі правила можуть бути використані проти таких протекціоністських практик приватного сектора.

Non-Tariff Barriers to International Trade and Economic Growth – What Can The WTO Do?

Organized by Businesseurope

Report written by BUSINESSEUROPE – the Confederation of European Business

Abstract

Non-tariff barriers are increasingly important as blockages to international trade and economic growth and development. This panel will address non-tariff barriers to market opening and suggest ways that the WTO can contribute to improving economic growth by providing a new mechanism for their removal. The scale of the problem was demonstrated by a presentation from the Confederation of Danish Industry on its recently released study of the non-tariff barriers faced by Danish companies in key markets around the world. The European Union has made a number of proposals to tackle non-tariff barriers in the Doha Round, including for a new horizontal mechanism to resolve disagreements between WTO Members over individual NTBs and the trade facilitation negotiations. The European Commission presented its proposals. Finally, the Indian government gave the view of developing country governments on the development dimension of the NTB issue, including comments on the NAMA-11 proposal for a mechanism and on trade facilitation.

1. Presentations by the panelists

(a) Eoin O’Malley, Adviser, BUSINESSEUROPE

Introduction

The obstacles to free trade in goods created by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) are only becoming more important with time. The progressive reduction of tariffs over the last 50 years, to very varying degrees, has meant that governments have often sought refuge in non-tariff measures to protect their industries. In addition, the increase in regulatory output responding to environmental and other concerns can in some cases create incidental barriers to trade. We also see that NTBs can also arise through unproductive administration and inefficiencies in, for example, customs management. The effect of NTBs on international trade cannot be underestimated. An effective non-tariff barrier can completely exclude products from one country from the market of another or raise costs to such a dramatic extent. NTBs are also difficult to define, covering regulatory measures, certification procedures and even questions of competition policy. The goal of the panel is to explore this question further – looking at both the impact of NTBs on companies and ways to address them through the multilateral process.

(b) Rasmus Wendt, Adviser, Dansk Industri – the Confederation of Danish Industries

Business view of NTBs

The problem of non-tariff barriers had been dealt with since the outset of the GATT, as negotiators, through tariffication, wished to move away from quantitative restrictions towards tariffs so as to later progressively remove these over time. Historically, examples of nontariff barriers within Europe have included such non-transparent measures as a systematic investigation by tax authorities of citizens purchasing a foreign car and the maintenance of individual country standards with burdensome and slow compliance procedures. The WTO is still discussing NTBs today as they continue to have an enormous impact. A recent Commission report found that European business, as a whole, lost commercial opportunities worth €20 billion. An International Trade Centre report notes that NTBs affect developing countries equally if not more than developed countries. It is important to note that it is not the existence of standards, regulations or customs procedures that create problems, but rather their implementation. Business needs standards and customs procedures to successfully run the world’s economies and manage trade. The report presented was produced by Dansk Industri (DI) in April 2007 on barriers to international trade faced by Danish companies. The study resulted from the need to promote exports in emerging markets, in particular the so-called BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), for the future competitiveness of Danish industry. The study was based on an online survey of 167 companies and 20 in depth interviews, a small but representative sample. Nearly 50% of those surveyed were facing trade barriers in export markets. This group included companies very accustomed to international trade and compliance with technical regulations and customs procedures. The food products, electrical and electronic equipment and machinery sectors were the most affected. Small companies were not the most exposed to these problems but rather medium-sized businesses. In terms of geographical destination, China was the most difficult country to deal with. Russia appeared as the second most difficult, followed by the non-China Asia, other developing countries and lastly developed countries. Danish companies face different types of NTBs including classical NTBs such as slow customs procedures but also problems like language, despite Danes’ tendency to speak international languages. Unnecessary technical regulation and local standards were also major issues. Three case studies are illustrative of the types of barriers faced by companies. In Ukraine importers/exporters are required to have different import licences for different products. This places a serious burden as importers and exporters do not only sell one product but often many and of different types, requiring multiple licences with different procedures. A second case is the lack of enforcement of intellectual property rights in China, a problem faced by a wide variety of companies. Lastly, a company exporting cars to Indonesia experienced a delay in customs clearance in Sumatra of a full year, despite the fact that the cars were destined for use in development cooperation work. The NTBs faced by business around the world, whether restrictive rules and regulations, poor implementation, lack of capacity, corruption or attempts to circumvent existing regulation are serious. They can be tackled within the WTO system but more tools are needed. The Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade is doing good work but more needs to be done on restrictive regulation. The WTO must also link up with other bodies to provide technical assistance programmes to improve capacity, including in the area of international languages.

(c) John Clarke, Deputy Head of Delegation of the European Commission to the WTO

European Union view on Doha NTB work

Clarke’s presentation covered the proposed horizontal mechanism for tackling NTBs and the negotiations on trade facilitation. The Uruguay Round agreements, including Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards and import licensing, sought to limit government capacity to create new NTBs. However, NTBs remain a big problem for business. The Doha Mandate allows for work to tackle non-tariff barriers on a sectoral and horizontal basis. For example, the EU and the US have made a joint proposal on textiles, clothing and footwear labelling. However, such a specific approach is insufficient as governments can always come up with new barriers to replace prohibited ones. As the Dispute Settlement Understanding can be too slow and burdensome to deal with these very specific problems the EC has proposed a horizontal mechanism to deal with NTBs – an idea that came from BUSINESSEUROPE. The horizontal mechanism is designed to be easy to use and is composed of the following elements. First, a country files a substantive complaint identifying the barrier and its effects, with the other country then responding. The procedure is then launched and a facilitator is appointed to lead consultations, give advice and recommend possible solutions. This procedure would be off the record. At the end of the process the facilitator reports to the WTO membership as a whole both for information and to create pressure for compliance with the decision, which is not legally binding. The process would be completed in a matter of days or weeks. The other major area of work on non-tariff barriers is in the trade facilitation negotiations, which are seeking the simplifi cation and modernisation of customs procedures around the world. Nearly half of NTBs notifi ed at the beginning of the Doha Development Agenda related to customs and border procedures and they can make up as much as 4-5% of total costs. This is why business from all over the world has supported the trade facilitation negotiations. An eventual agreement on trade facilitation would contain a commitment to modernise border procedures based on risk assessment, a commitment to reduce delays through advance clearance using electronic transmission of information, a reduction in fees and charges associated with customs procedures so that these reflect the actual cost of services provided, the institution of a one-stop shop for border clearance and the updating of WTO rules on international transit. There is broad support across the WTO membership for trade facilitation, from developing and developed countries. This is because simple, modern border procedures help SMEs in developing countries as much as multinationals, allow countries to concentrate resources on high-risk goods and increase tariff revenue as they reduce the freedom for fraud to take place.

(d) HE Ujal Singh Bhatia, Ambassador of India to the WTO

A Developing Country view on Doha NTB work

It is important to distinguish non-tariff barriers from non tariff measures. A nontariff measure can cover documentation requirements and fees at customs and regulatory measures such as adherence to standards. These are reliable and necessary. A non-tariff barrier however, is a non-tariff measure that causes an unfair impediment of trade. NTBs have been dealt with since GATT 1947. An overwhelming majority of articles in the GATT relate to NTBs. They mostly provided soft disciplining of these measures and left significant scope to get around their provisions. Stronger discipline, however, came as NTBs became more common. Provisions on anti-dumping and regional trade agreements were brought in during the Kennedy Round. The Tokyo Round put a real focus on NTBs creating agreements on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), government procurement, subsidies and countervailing measures, customs valuation, import licensing and anti-dumping. However, these agreements were voluntary making them less effective. The Uruguay Round included a very intensive attack on NTBs, making all the Tokyo Round codes binding and adding agreements on sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), pre-shipment inspection, rules of origin, safeguards, textiles and clothing. The government procurement agreement also became binding but was a plurilateral rather than a multilateral agreement. Despite these reinforcements, NTBs have continued since 1995 and require further consideration under the DDA. The initial exercise in the DDA negotiations was an NTB inventory, under which 312 measures were notified with one third relating to SPS and TBT and the next biggest group relating to customs. To deal with this, what was important was to establish procedures to seek meaningful redress as many of these barriers were already covered by WTO agreements. The problem was enforcement. In the six years of negotiations no solution has been found for notified NTBs. However, some have become redundant and some have been resolved outside the WTO. The lessons to be drawn form this are that NTBs will always exist, that they must be quickly resolved, that they do not always affect all countries and that their resolution must be consensual. These lessons underpinned the NAMA-11 proposal on expedited procedures to deal with NTBs. The proposal seeks a two-stage process. The first part is a mandatory question and answer session with the interested members on the barrier concerned. It is followed by a problem-solving stage to arrive at a solution to the NTBs. The proposal seeks to use existing approaches but does not affect rights and obligations under the WTO. There are other submissions on the table on sectoral problems and standards are an issue that will need to be tackled in the future.

2. Questions and comments by the audience

The discussion covered a broad range of issues. John Clarke responded to a question on new NTBs on dairy labelling in the USA, noting that new measures would have to be fully in conformity with existing WTO disciplines. The panellists also addressed the question of possible limits on sovereignty imposed by controls on NTBs. Ambassador Bhatia noted that sovereignty is per se limited by all international agreements. The question of the surrender of sovereignty should be though of as a voluntary process leading to mutual benefit. To the extent that there are sensitivities they should be taken on board in any agreement as decisions are taken by consensus. John Clarke concurred with this view and added that once agreements have been made WTO Members must conform to rules even if consumers preferences make it complicated to achieve. Ambassador Bhatia defended India’s record on customs reform, mentioning that India had reduced delays in its system by 75% in recent years. In the biggest ports clearance took only 1-2 days. Of course, infrastructure difficulties can make transport beyond the port more difficult but the government is investing heavily to resolve this. Customs procedures in India today are in many cases online and in 50-60% of imports involve no further verification after documents are submitted. The panel also addressed the challenges of the trade facilitation negotiations. Ambassador Bhatia noted that the main issues in the trade facilitation negotiations relate to the concerns of smaller developing countries on access to resources to implement an eventual agreement and added that capacity building will be a crucial issue to get an agreement. The coordination of international technical bodies working to provide this assistance would be crucial in practice. John Clarke gave some further details on important elements of an eventual agreement including advance processing of electronic data; a green channel for trusted traders; a commitment to have all official controls take place at the same time; and finally a separation of goods movement from duty payment to reduce scope for corruption. The discussion also covered the area of standards, which may be used as a protectionist instrument in some cases. Ambassador Bhatia noted that this would be an issue to be dealt with by the WTO in the future. John Clarke expressed disappointment that WTO negotiations on competition policy had been dropped from the DDA as such rules can be used against such protectionist private sector practices.

Поиск по сайту: