The Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) aims to promote trade liberalization while ensuring competition. It recognizes that certain investment measures can distort trade. The TRIMs Agreement clarifies that GATT Articles III (national treatment) and XI (prohibition of quantitative restrictions) apply to investment measures related to trade in goods. It includes an illustrative list of measures inconsistent with these articles, such as local content requirements and import/export balancing requirements. The agreement establishes notification requirements for members and transition periods for eliminating inconsistent measures. It focuses on limiting investment measures' impact on trade in goods and does not regulate foreign investment or services.
An anti-dumping duty is a protectionist tariff that a domestic government imposes on foreign imports that it believes are priced below fair market value. To protect local businesses and markets, many countries impose stiff duties on products they believe are being dumped in their national market.
An anti-dumping duty is a protectionist tariff that a domestic government imposes on foreign imports that it believes are priced below fair market value. To protect local businesses and markets, many countries impose stiff duties on products they believe are being dumped in their national market.
GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade)Akshay Dhamija
GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade)
Precursor organization to GATT, ITO, was first proposed in
February 1945 by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNESCO).
On 1 January 1948, the agreement was signed by 23 countries for the formation of GATT.
Total of 8 rounds was there, all are listed along with their respective year, venue and issues are mentioned in the sides.
GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade)Akshay Dhamija
GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade)
Precursor organization to GATT, ITO, was first proposed in
February 1945 by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNESCO).
On 1 January 1948, the agreement was signed by 23 countries for the formation of GATT.
Total of 8 rounds was there, all are listed along with their respective year, venue and issues are mentioned in the sides.
An Introduction to Non-Tariff Barriers and WTO RulesSimon Lacey
This is a lecture that I recently gave at the Ministry of Trade in Indonesia to kick off a series of lectures I will perform there over the final months of 2013 on NTBs and what Indonesia can do about them
In 1944, the United States and Britain held a conference (Bretton Woods) that established:
1. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) (IBRD)
2. International Monetary Fund (IMF)
From Doha to Bali: Assessing the Bali Deliverables after 12 long years of mul...Simon Lacey
This is a lecture I prepared recently in anticipation of the WTO Ministerial Conference to be held from 3 to 6 December on Bali. It discusses the history of the Doha Round to date and offers a preliminary evaluation of the likely outcomes from the Ministerial meeting.
FTAs can result in some export gains, and possibly increased FDI flows, but the size and durability of these benefits – highly uncertain. FTAs will most likely lead to an increase in imports with impact for the trade balance and the external debt position.
THE FRONTIERS OF MONOPOLIZATION OF HUMAN GENESSaravanan A
This research work critically examines the current trends and future feasibility of gene patents with the help of most celebrated Myriad Genetics Gene Patent Case.
IPR in Traditional Knowledge and Bio –Diversity: Protection, Issues and Possi...Saravanan A
This work discusses on both defensive as well as assertive ways of giving IPR protection for Traditional Knowledge. It also identify the flaws in the Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2002.
Conservation of Medicinal Plants in Western Ghats through Sacred Groves: Pate...Saravanan A
This work briefly reviews the statistics of sacred groves conserving medicinal plants in Western Ghats and also explores the challenges in conserving Sacred Groves.
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf46adnanshahzad
All eyes on Rafah: But why?. The Rafah border crossing, a crucial point between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, often finds itself at the center of global attention. As we explore the significance of Rafah, we’ll uncover why all eyes are on Rafah and the complexities surrounding this pivotal region.
INTRODUCTION
What makes Rafah so significant that it captures global attention? The phrase ‘All eyes are on Rafah’ resonates not just with those in the region but with people worldwide who recognize its strategic, humanitarian, and political importance. In this guide, we will delve into the factors that make Rafah a focal point for international interest, examining its historical context, humanitarian challenges, and political dimensions.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...Finlaw Consultancy Pvt Ltd
Introduction-
The process of register multi-state cooperative society in India is governed by the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. This process requires the office bearers to undertake several crucial responsibilities to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. The key office bearers typically include the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, along with other elected members of the managing committee. Their responsibilities encompass administrative, legal, and financial duties essential for the successful registration and operation of the society.
Military Commissions details LtCol Thomas Jasper as Detailed Defense CounselThomas (Tom) Jasper
Military Commissions Trial Judiciary, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Notice of the Chief Defense Counsel's detailing of LtCol Thomas F. Jasper, Jr. USMC, as Detailed Defense Counsel for Abd Al Hadi Al-Iraqi on 6 August 2014 in the case of United States v. Hadi al Iraqi (10026)
Car Accident Injury Do I Have a Case....Knowyourright
Every year, thousands of Minnesotans are injured in car accidents. These injuries can be severe – even life-changing. Under Minnesota law, you can pursue compensation through a personal injury lawsuit.
NATURE, ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.pptxanvithaav
These slides helps the student of international law to understand what is the nature of international law? and how international law was originated and developed?.
The slides was well structured along with the highlighted points for better understanding .
1. The Agreement on Trade-Related
Investment Measures (TRIMs)
Saravanan A
PhD Candidate
RGSOIPL
2. Disclaimer:
Images, content, and published articles are
for reference and illustrative purposes only.
Under no circumstances should any image,
logo, content or article be viewed as an
endorsement for this presentation or any of
its contents. This presentation is intended for
educational purposes only.
2
3. Outline:
Legal Background- FIRA Panel Case
Uruguay Round Negotiations on TRIMs
General Features of TRIMs
Provisions of the TRIMS Agreement
Illustrative List: Para 1 (a) & (b)
Dispute Settlement Cases Involving The TRIMs Agreement
Current Debate and Prospects of TRIMs Agreement
India’s notified TRIMs
3
4. Legal Background- FIRA Panel Case:
Until 1980s, investment issues received only marginal attention
in the context of GATT
In 1982, GATT dispute settlement proceeding initiated by US
against Canada
For implementation of Canada’s Foreign Investment Review Act (FIRA)
Certain undertakings required from foreign investors in order to
get an approval for investment projects in Canada
Three undertakings
Those requiring foreign investors to buy goods of Canadian origin or
from Canadian sources (LCR)
To manufacture goods in Canada
Foreign investors to export specified quantities or proportions of their
local production (EPR)
Several parties expressed doubt about competence of GATT Panel
4
5. Cont…
Finally panel was allowed to hear the dispute
Condition- findings would be limited to trade issues fall within
scope of GATT
Panel concluded that LCR were inconsistent with
N.T obligation contained in Art III:4- because they discriminated
against imported products
Purchase Canadian goods (LCR) did not prevent
importation of goods
Hence, not inconsistent with Art XI:1 of GATT (prohibits QR)
Panel did not rule on GATT consistency of EPR, because it
falls outside the coverage of GATT
Panel made it very clear that,
The dispute instituted before the Panel pertained to consistency
with GATT rules of certain TRIMs applied by Canada
Not to Canada’s right to regulate FDI
5
6. Uruguay Round Negotiations on
TRIMs:
Launching Negotiations:
US was the main advocate for introducing TRIMs and other
investment issues into GATT framework
In 1981 joint study by IBRD and IMF concluded
EPR could have trade-distorting effects
Japan and EC expressed support for US proposal
Opposition from developing countries,
Argued EPR should outside the remit of GATT
FIRA decision brought this issue to negotiating table
In 1986, US succeeded to included the subject in agenda of
Uruguay round negotiations
6
7. Issues During Negotiations
The fundamental differences emerged between DC and Dvg
C
Lack of definition and clarity in the mandate, need, nature and
coverage of possible new disciplines
DC took a broad view of investment and investment
measures
DC (US and Jap) sought to introduce strong disciplines on
TRIMs
Proposed prohibition of wide range of measures in addition to LCR
These included, manufacturing req, trade balancing req, exchange req,
domestic sales req, EPR, product mandating, TT req, and local equity
req.
EC and Nordic countries took somewhat more nuanced
approach
7
8. Negotiating Positions:
On the contrast Dvg C led by India, Egypt and Latin
American Countries
Took a much narrower view
To preserve their freedom to use TRIMs as instrument of
development policy
Existing GATT rules already addressed trade-restrictive and trade-
distorting effects
India and other countries proposed negotiations should
address
Restrictive business practices of MNCs
But, DC opposed such move
8
9. Outcome:
Finally compromise situation emerged limited to an
interpretation and clarification of application to TRIMs
TRIMS Agreement did not create new obligations
Went beyond those already established under old GATT
Many of the measures proposed during negotiation were
excluded from coverage of TRIMs
Export performance and TT req.
No new disciplines regarding treatment of FI per se were
established
Dvg C succeeded in limiting the scope of TRIMs to
application of existing GATT Rules
From DC point of view, the Agreement failed to cover most
of the investment measures
9
10. General Features of TRIMs:
TRIMS does not create any new substantial obligations
Instead of that, it introduces transition periods for the
elimination of inconsistent measures
It establishes notification req – introduced some degree of
transparency
TRIMS also included a provision for its own review
Lead to amendment or expansion of its disciplines
DSU- to date 41 cases have been involved
Few- resulted in panel proceedings
TRIMs has never been invoked on its own
but in conjunction with other WTO provisions (Art III & XI of GATT)
After 20 yrs of EIF still some debates are unsettled
Working Group on Trade and Investment launched during
Doha Conference 2001
10
11. General Features of TRIMs:
It focuses on two Articles that were identified in a previous case
under the GATT
Article III (National Treatment)
Article XI (Quantitative Restrictions)
It is concerned with discriminatory treatment of both imported
and exported products
Do not regulate the issue of entry and treatment of FI as such
TRIMs Agreement makes no distinction w.r.t phase of
investment at which measure is imposed
It covers measures applied both at the moment of entry of investment
as wells as afterwards
It applies only to goods and not to cover trade in services
11
12. Aims of the Agreement:
Desiring
to promote the expansion and progressive
liberalization* of world trade and to facilitate
investment, while ensuring competition
Take into account
trade, development and financial needs of developing
countries, particularly least developed countries
Recognizing
certain investment measures can use trade-restrictive
and distorting effects
12
13. Structure of TRIMS Agreement:
Nine Articles and an Annex
Art I - clarifies that the agreement applies only
to trade in goods
Art 2 - applies Articles III or XI and refers to the
Annex list
Art 3-4 deal with general exceptions and Art
XVIII (b)
Art 5- Notification and transition periods
Art 9 - Review
13
14. Economic Rationale of TRIMs:
TRIMs shall not apply to any TRIM that is inconsistent with NT
and QR
TRIMs Agreement does not define the term ‘TRIM’
Its coverage is provided in an illustrative list annexed to Agreement
Other requirements not covered in TRIMs
Export performance, manufacturing , TT, JV and local equity
TRIMs tend to concentrate in specific industries , particularly in
automotive, chemical and petrochemical, and
computer/informatics
Local content requirements used more intensively in automotive
sector
Export performance requirements are more common in
computer/informatics
Combination of both measures in chemical and petrochemical
14
15. Economic Rationale of TRIMs:
Empirical studies shows performance requirements-
employed by both DC and Dvg C
But use has been more frequent by Dvg C
Dvg C often imposed performance requirements in an
attempt to
Offset market failures and monopolistic powers of MNCs
Prevent foreign subsidiaries from crowding domestic enterprises
Long controversial debate on development and trade
effects of PR
Has not been settled to date
15
16. Provisions of the TRIMS Agreement:
Art 1- Coverage:
This agreement covers only to trade in goods and it does
not apply to trade in services
Art 2 and the Illustrative List (Annex)- Basic Obligations:
Art 2.1- core obligation requires Members not to apply any
TRIM that is inconsistent with,
Art III (NT) or
Art XI (prohibition of QR on imports or exports)
16
17. Cont…
Agreement does not mention any definition of TRIMs
Art 2.2 refers to an illustrative list annexed to Agreement
Art III:4 of GATT- obligation of NT
Art XI:1 of GATT- obligation of general elimination of QR
Para 1 identifies measures that are inconsistent with Art III:4 of
GATT
Pertain to purchase or use of products by an enterprise
Deals with internal measures
Para 2 identifies measures that are inconsistent with Art XI:1
Concern the importation or exportation of products by an enterprise
Deals with border measures
17
18. Illustrative List: Para 1 (a) & (b)
Para 1(a) covers LCR measures relate to purchase or use
by an enterprise of products of domestic origin
Para 1(b) covers trade-balancing requirements
Limit the purchase or use of imported products
It is inconsistent with Art III:4, the measure discriminates
against imported products to less favourable conditions
than the domestic products
18
19. Illustrative List: Para 2 (a), (b) & (c)
Para 2(a)- refers to measures that limit the importation
Para 2(b) - measures that restricts imports through the
imposition of foreign exchange balancing requirement
Act like import quotas- incompatible with Art XI:1
Para 2(c)- measures that involve restriction on
exportation or sale for export specified in terms of
particular products,
In terms of volume or value of products , or
In terms of a proportion of volume or value of its local production
Para 2(c) refers to measures that restrict exports
19
20. Three aspects of illustrative list :
1) List covers both measures
Mandatory or enforceable under domestic law or under
administrative rulings
Compliance with which is necessary to obtain an advantage
2) The term ‘advantage’ is not defined but,
Interpreted by Panel in Indonesia-Autos dispute
3) The list is an illustrative nature not intended to be an
exhaustive one
Still, other measures not explicitly mentioned in list would still be
inconsistent with Art 2 of this Agreement
20
21. Exceptions: (Art 3)
All exceptions under GATT 1994 shall apply, as appropriate to
the TRIMs Agreement
Exceptions also applicable to prohibition contained in Art 2 of
TRIMs
E.g. LCR applied in context of govt procurement of goods is excluded
from NT obligation
Art 4- Developing Countries:
In addition to transition periods, some flexibility to Dvg C
Art 4- allows Dvg C to deviate temporarily from obligations in
Art 2 to extent in such a manner as Art XVIII of GATT
Governmental Assistance to Economic Development
Other safeguard provisions for situations of BoP difficulties
21
22. Notification and Transitional
Arrangements (Art 5):
It allowed the existing TRIMs that were inconsistent with GATT subject
to certain conditions
Set forth requirement in Art 5 w r t transitional mechanism
Art 5.1- Members – to notify to Council for Trade in Goods within 90
days of E.I.F of WTO (by March 31, 1995)
Regarding any existing TRIM that was inconsistent with this Agreement
Art 5.2- Existing TRIMs shall be eliminated within specific time-periods
Length depends upon level of economic development
DC- 2 yrs after e.i.f of WTO Agreement
Dvg C- 5 yrs
LDC- 7 yrs
Agreement did not provide any mechanism to monitor actions at the
expiry of transition period
22
23. Cont…
Countries not members of WTO on 1.1.1995, were entitle to
become original member within two yrs
After that, they should submit TRIMs notification within 90 days after
acceptance
Art 5.3- CTG may authorize extension of transition periods on
request by Dvg C or LDC
They have to demonstrate the ‘particular difficulties’
Several members have availed their rights under this provision
Art 5.4- prevents Members from modifying TRIMs notified
under Art 5.1
The benefit of transitional arrangements shall not apply for TRIMs
incase introduced less than 180 days before eif of WTO (7/5/94)
23
24. Cont…
Art 5.5- During the transition period Member may apply
the inconsistent TRIM to a new investment if this is,
Necessary to prevent trade distortion the condition of competition
between new investment and existing investments
To identify the product of existing investment is like products
Member shall notify to CTG incase if they apply these TRIM
to a new investment
24
25. Transparency: (Art 6)
Art 6.1- incorporated by reference the transparency
obligation established in Art X of GATT and other WTO
related provisions
Art 6.2- Members are required to notify to WTO Secretariat
about the publication in which TRIMs may be found
Art 6.3- Confidential information is exempted from Art X of
GATT
25
26. Committee on Trade-Related Investment
Measures: (Art 7)
Establishment of a Committee on Trade-Related Investment
Measures
To monitor the operation and implementation of the Agreement
To provide forum for consultation on implementation of the
Agreement
The Committee is required to report annually to CTG
Art 8- Consultation and Dispute Settlement:
Articles XXII and XXIII of GATT applied by DSU shall apply to
consultations and settlement of disputes under this Agreement
To date, 41 cases cite this agreement in the request for
consultations
26
27. Review by the Council for Trade in Goods:
(Art 9)
CTG shall review the operation of this Agreement every 5 yrs
The review shall offers opportunity to propose to the Ministerial
Conference
as appropriate amendments to the text of text of the Agreement
During Review CTG shall consider the provisions on investment
policy and competition policy
Setback:
It does not mention specific procedure on how to undertake the
review
Date for its completion also not mentioned in the Agreement
27
28. Dispute Settlement Cases Involving The
TRIMs Agreement:
1. EC Bananas III
2. Indonesia- Autos
3. Canada- Auto Pact
4. India- Autos
5. India- Solar cells and solar modules (Feb 24, 2016)
Claims under TRIMs Agreement accompanied by
claims under Articles III and XI of GATT
Some cases SCM, TRIPs & GATS also been cited
28
29. European Communities—Regime for the
Importation, Sale and Distribution
of Bananas: (DS 27)
Complainants:
Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, United States
Respondent:
EC
Measure at issue:
The EC’s regime for the importation, distribution and sale of bananas,
introduced on 1 July 1993 and established by EEC Council Regulation
404/93
Product at issue:
Bananas imported from third countries
29
30. Cont…
Essence of the claims based on preferential treatment granting
to EC and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) bananas at the
expense of bananas from third-countries
EC’s regime violated number of WTO provisions
Complainants alleged that regime’s allocation of import quotas
and import licensing procedure were inconsistent with Art III of
GATT and Art 2 of TRIMs, GATS, AoA, Agreement on import
licensing
Panel found that EC’s regime was inconsistent with NT
obligation in Art III:4 of GATT
EC contented that the measure is being a border measure and
not an internal measure
Hence, import licensing did not fall with purview or Art III:4 of
GATT
30
31. Cont…
But, Panel dismissed EC’s argument and held
The measure is an internal measure held within the meaning of Art
III:4
Preferred allocation of tariff quota to importers was
inconsistent with Art III:4
But, Panel did not consider the rule on consistency with Art
2 of TRIMs Agreement
EC appealed against Panel report on Sept 9, 1997
But, the AB upheld the Panel’s main findings
AB held, EC’s import licensing regime violated Art III:4 of
GATT
31
32. Indonesia—Certain Measures Affecting the
Automobile Industry: (DS 54, 55, 59, 64)
Complainants:
EC, Japan and US
Respondent: Indonesia
Measure at issue:
“The 1993 Programme” that provided import duty reductions or
exemptions on imports of automotive parts based on the local
content percent; and
“The 1996 National Car Programme” that provided various benefits
such as luxury tax exemption or import duty exemption to
qualifying (local content and etc.) cars or Indonesian car companies
Product at issue:
Imported motor vehicles and parts and components thereof
32
33. Cont…
Complainants alleged that these measures were inconsistent
with,
Arts I, III and X of GATT
Art 2 of TRIMs
Several other provisions of SCM and TRIPs
Panel found that Indonesia’s measures violate Art 2.1 of TRIMs
Panel found that Art III and SCM do not conflict with each other
They have different coverage and don’t impose the same type of
obligations
In this case both Agreements were Applicable
Panel held that the disputed measures were ‘investment
measures’
Measures fall within the scope of Para 1 of illustrative list
33
34. Cont…
Panel further held, measures violated Art 2.1 of TRIMs
Also noted that Indonesia did not invoke any exceptions contained
in Art 3 & 4, nor claimed for enjoyed the transition period
In order to exercise judicial economy, the Panel saw
No need to address the claims under Art III:4
Panel also held that the measures violated Articles I and
III:2 of GATT & Art 5(c) of SCM
34
35. Canada—Certain Measures Affecting the
Automotive Industry: (DS 139 & 142)
Complainants: Japan and EC
Respondent: Canada
Canada-Auto Pact concerned several measures taken by
Canada in framework of 1965 Auto Pact Agreement with
US
Implemented through 1988 Motor Vehicle Tariff Order (MVTO),
Several special remission orders (SRO) and letters of undertaking
from Canadian car manufacturers
35
36. Cont…
To qualify for the import duty exemptions, a car manufacturer
had to meet three conditions
It had to have had a manufacturing presence in Canada (base year
1963-64)
To achieve a minimum amount of Canadian value-added, which applied
to goods and services (CVA Requirements)
To comply with production-to-sales ratio requirement (ratio
Requirement)
Claimants contented:
Canada’s measures were inconsistent with Articles I:1, III:4 and XXIV of
GATT
Art 2 of TRIMS
Art 3 of SCM Agreement
Several GATS Articles
36
37. Cont…
Canada argued- CVA Req did not affect the internal sale or
use of imported products
Panel- dismissed Canada’s argument
Panel found that CVA Req affected the internal sale or use
in Canada of imported parts, materials
Panel also found- CVA Req accorded ‘less favorable
treatment’ to imported products than to like domestic
products
It also affected competitive opportunities
Hence, Panel concluded that Canada violated Art III:4 of
GATT
Panel held such measures were also inconsistent with Art
2.1 of TRIMs
37
38. Cont…
Panel also held that disputed measures affecting trade in
services inconsistent with Art II:1 of GATS
Panel also rejected the claim on ratio req inconsistent with
Art 2.1 of Trims
Canada appealed to AB:
AB upheld the Panel’s finding that disputed Measures
were inconsistent with this Art I of GATT
AB also upheld panel’s ruling on Ratio Req
But reversed the Panel’s decision on GATS Art II:1 and AB
held that measures were consistent with Art II:1
38
39. India—Measures Affecting the Automotive
Sector: (DS 146, 175)
Complainants- US and EU
Respondent – India
Measures at Issue:
India's indigenization (local content) requirement; and
Trade balancing requirement (exports value = imports value)
imposed on its automotive sector
Product at issue:
Cars and their components
39
40. Cont…
Indian adopted Automotive Policy in Dec 1997,
Mandatory requirement- Car manufactures wishing to import car
kits were required to sign a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’
Car manufactures were asked to fulfill following
conditions:
To achieve specified minimum local content levels to 75%
(Indigenization Requirement)
75% of total value of materials used within 5 yrs
To balance the value of their imports of car kits and car parts
against the value of their exports of cars and car parts (Trade
balancing Req)
Car manufacturers who did not sign and MoU could be
denied a license to import car kits and car parts
40
41. Cont…
EC and US raised a claims and challenging, the disputed
measures were inconsistent with
Arts III:4 and XI:1 of GATT
Arts 2.1 and 2.2 of TRIMS
W r t indigenization condition:
Panel held such requirements were inconsistent with Art
III:4 of GATT
Panel citing Canada- FIRA panel case
Automotive parts and components of domestic and foreign
origin were like products
41
42. Cont…
W r t Trade Balancing requirement:
Panel first examined whether it constituted a ‘measure’
within meaning of Art XI:1
Panel held it was a measure
Hence, Panel found that this req,
Limit the amount of imports in relation to export commitment
It acted as a restriction on importation within meaning of Art XI:1
India also failed to justify that the requirement under Art
XVIII:B of GATT (BoP exception)
Therefore, Panel concluded that this measure is
inconsistent with Art XI:1
42
43. Cont…
India appealed to AB, but subsequently withdrew it s
appeal
Consequently, AB issued a short report,
Outlining the procedural history of case
But, did not address the substantial legal issue raised by India
Eventually, India adopted AB and Panel reports on April 5,
2002
43
44. India - Certain Measures Relating to Solar
Cells and Solar Modules: (DS 456)
On Jan 1, 2010, India had launched National solar policy
named, the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (NSM)
Ambitious target of generating 20,000 MW of solar power by 2022
The solar photovoltaic and solar thermal are the two types of solar
power projects
Under NSM scheme, above two projects were subject
matter of certain measures,
1) It is mandatory under the scheme that, all the Solar PV
projects to use cells and modules manufactured in India
(100% DCR)
Measures allows for PV Modules made from thin film technologies
or concentrated PV may be sourced from any country
44
45. Cont…
2) w.r.t Solar thermal project- the project developers are to
ensure 30% local content
In all plant and installations under solar thermal technology
Solar power developers are entitled to enter into power
purchase agreement with NVVM (National Thermal Power
Company Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited, Govt nodal agency)
Who would purchase the electricity produced
45
46. Summary of key findings:
US claimed that the measures appear to be inconsistent with
Art III:4 of the GATT 1994;
Art 2.1 of the TRIMs Agreement; and
Arts 3.1(b), 3.2, 5(c), 6.3(a) and (c), and 25 of the SCM Agreement
On 23 May 2014 DSB established a panel
Brazil; Canada; China; European Union; Japan; Korea, Republic of Malaysia;
Norway; Russian Federation; Turkey; Ecuador; Saudi Arabia, Chinese
Taipei reserved their 3rd parties
On 24th Feb 2016, the panel report was circulated
Panel found that the disputed measures are TRIMs
Covered by Para 1(a ) of illustrative list
Panel found that this suffice to establish that the measures are,
Inconsistent with both Article III:4 of GATT and Art 2.1 of TRIMs
DCR do accord ‘less favourable treatment’
India claimed for Govt procurement derogation under Art III:8(a) of
GATT
46
47. Cont…
Panel fount that discrimination relating to solar cells and
modules under LCR is not covered by Govt procurement
exceptions
India argued LCR are justified under general exception in Art
XX(j) of GATT
Risk of a disruption in imports, makes these ‘products in general or
local short supply’
Panel found that terms ‘products in general or local short
supply’ refer to
Quantity of supply of a product from all sources, does not meet
demand in a relevant geographical area or market
India has not demonstrated the existence of any imminent risk of a
short supply
Therefore, panel found that India failed to justify the challenged
measured under Art XX(j) of GATT
47
48. Cont…
India also argued that LCR are justified under Art XX(d) of GATT
India’s compliance with ‘laws or regulations’ requiring it to take steps
to promote sustainable development
Panel did not find any of instruments identified by India are
within meaning of Art XX(d)
Therefore, panel held that India failed to demonstrate the
disputed measures are justified under Art XX(d)
Finally, Panel asked India to ‘bring its measures into conformity
with its obligations under TRIMs and GATT’
India will soon appeal to AB against panel’s findings
48
49. Current Debate and Prospects of TRIMs
Agreement:
Mandated Review with in 5 yrs (1.1.2000)
Singapore Ministerial Conference established two Working
Groups:
One on relationship between Trade and Investment
Other on Future negotiations
Review under Art 9 is foreseen and not focused till to date
WTO work on Trade and Investment is still unclear
It might be pursued in future
49
50. India’s notified TRIMs:
As per the provisions of Art. 5.1 of the TRIMs India had
notified three TRIMs as inconsistent with the provisions of
the Agreement,
Local content (mixing) requirements in the production of News
Print,
Local content requirement in the production of Rifampicin and
Penicillin – G, and
Dividend balancing requirement in the case of investment in 22
categories consumer goods
Such notified due to be eliminated by 31st Dec 1999
None of these measures is in force at present
Currently not have any outstanding obligations
50
51. References:
Martha Lara de Sterlini, The Agreement on Trade-Related Investment
Measures, The General Agreement on Trade in Services, The World Trade
Organization: Legal, Economic and Political Analysis International Trade
Law Center eds. Arthur E. Appleton, Michael G. Plummer (Springer, 2007)
Robert H. Edwards, Jr. & Simon N. Lester, Towards a More Comprehensive
World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade Related Investment
Measures, 33 STAN.J. INT'L L. 169 (1997)
Scott S. Quillin, The World Trade Organization and its Protection of Foreign
Direct Investment: The Efficacy of The Agreement on Trade-related
Investment Measures, 28 Okla. City U. L. Rev. 875 2003
Carlos Correa, Nagesh Kumar-Protecting Foreign Investment Implications
of A WTO Regime and Policy Options (RIS, 2004)
Syed Nasir Aziz Rizvi, Global Investments and the WTO, World Trade
Organization and India- a Critical Study of Its First Decade, eds. J K Mittal,
KD Raju (New Era Law, 2005)
51
- Provided a mandate for the first time to discuss:
“Following an examination of the operation of GATT Articles related to the trade restrictive and distortive effects of investment measures, negotiations should elaborate, as appropriate, further provision that maybe necessary to avoid such adverse effects on trade”
- Previous attempts at incorporating investment provisions included the Havana Charter in 1947
Progressive liberalization: only in connection with world trade and not with investment flows
Imported Products = domestic products cos exports
OPERATION OF TRIMS AGREEMENT:
Notification Obligations:
During first 5 yrs- 26 members , almost all Dvg C were submitted
In majority of cases- Measures referred to automotive sector, and Agriculture sector
Mostly LCR within the meaning of Para 1(a) of illustrative list
Secondly- pertaining to Foreign exchange balancing
Some notifications were submitted after expiry of relevant deadline
Relationship between SCM and TRIMS Agreement also raised some difficulties
Because overlap between these two w r t notification
Many members announced their intention to extent the transition period
Primarily mentioned- financial and structural adjustment problems