|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Mar25/04) Geneva, 6 Mar (D. Ravi Kanth) — China on 4 March filed an addendum to the original dispute that it had initiated against the United States at the World Trade Organization (WTO) on 4 February, this time to include Washington’s latest “measures that increase the additional tariffs on goods originating in China from 10% to 20%,” while simultaneously imposing retaliatory tariffs of up to 15% on several American farm products, said people familiar with the development. As the trade war between the US on the one side, and China, Canada, and Mexico on the other, picked up the pace, US President Donald Trump said he has decided to pause for one month on imposing tariffs on vehicles coming from Canada and Mexico, as demanded by the three largest US automakers – General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, according to a statement issued by the White House spokesperson on 5 March. The spokesperson said the one-month pause will end on 2 April after the US announces retaliatory tariffs against those countries that are currently enjoying a trade surplus with the US. With respect to China’s addendum to the original dispute filed against the US on 4 February, as outlined in document WT/DS633/1/Add.1, Beijing has requested Washington to enter into dispute settlement consultations within the stipulated period of 30 days after the date of receipt of the request, under Article 4 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). Under the DSU, if consultations fail to settle the dispute within 60 days after the date of receipt of the request for consultations, China may request the establishment of a panel to adjudicate on the specific US measures at issue listed in its complaint. In its communication, China said that “subsequent to the above mentioned request for consultations, the United States issued the Executive Order of 3 March 2025, which amends the Executive Order of 1 February 2025 and increases the additional ad valorem tariffs imposed on all imported products originating in China from 10% [to] 20%.” It said that the measures at issue “are applied to products of Chinese origin only and are in excess of the United States’ bound rates in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments annexed to the GATT 1994.” Beijing alleged that the US measures “not only violate WTO rules, but are discriminatory and protectionist in nature.” In its communication, China cited the following US measures at issue that include: * Section 1702(a)(1)(B) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act; * Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Imposes Tariffs on Imports from Canada, Mexico and China; * Executive Order of 1 February 2025: Imposing Duties to Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China; * Federal Register notice described in section 2(d) of the Executive Order of 1 February 2025; * Executive Order of 3 March 2025: Further Amendment to Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China. China said the supplemental request for consultations also includes any amendments, supplements, or extensions to the measures specified above, as well as any closely connected, subsequent, replacement or implementing measures. The legal basis of the Chinese complaint is that the US measures at issue “appear to be inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under the following provisions of the GATT 1994, including: * Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, because the measures at issue fail to extend immediately and unconditionally to China an “advantage, favour, privilege or immunity” granted by the United States “[w]ith respect to customs duties and charges of any kind imposed on or in connection with” the importation of products originating in the territory of other Members. * Article II:1(a) and (b) of the GATT 1994, because the United States imposes additional tariffs on all imported products originating in China as identified in measures above that are in excess of United States bound rates in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments annexed to the GATT 1994, and therefore fails to accord to the products originating in China and imported into the United States treatment no less favourable than that provided for in the United States’ Schedule of Concessions and Commitments annexed to the GATT 1994.” Consequently, China said that the US measures at issue appear to “nullify or impair benefits accruing to China, directly or indirectly, under the cited agreements.” Given an Appellate Body that currently remains dysfunctional, the revised Chinese dispute against the US could remain merely “symbolic” without any resolution soon, said people familiar with the dispute. +
|
||
