U.S. Tables Ffour Ag Proposals For Upcoming WTO Round

August 3, 1999

The United States tabled four short papers for the World Trade Organization negotiations that begin this fall on agricultural issues. The papers propose that the negotiations adopt certain objectives to be achieved in the talks. There were no surprises except, to some, the brevity of the descriptions.

One objective is to make sure agricultural biotechnology products trade is based on "transparent, predictable and timely processes." Production and trade of agricultural biotech products will continue to expand "as more biotechnology products with more beneficial characteristics are commercialized and as the reduction in protection and support increases trade in agricultural products," according to the paper.

Another objective, says the United States, should be to eliminate and prohibit future export subsidies and clarify rules on other measures "that can act to circumvent export subsidy disciplines and to create new disciplines for other practices that distort export competition."

On the subject of market access, the proposal is phrased somewhat cautiously. The WTO objective should be to "maximize improvements in market access opportunities and to make more uniform the structure of tariff bindings for all WTO members."

"Tariffs remain excessive on too many agricultural products in too many countries," according to the United States. "This threatens to effectively exempt agriculture from WTO disciplines despite progress made in the Uruguay round...The upcoming negotiations should improve and expand market access opportunities by lowering bound tariff rates to eliminate the disparities between applied and bound rates."

The fourth proposal is that the negotiations "result in substantial reductions in trade-distorting support and stronger rules that ensure all production-related support is subject to discipline while preserving criteria-based `green box' policies that can provide support to agriculture in a manner that minimizes distortions to trade."

Governments have the right to support farmers if they choose, according to the paper, but the support should be provided "in a manner that causes minimal distortions to production and trade."