Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • Non Agriculture Market Access Issues and Concerns For India

    Încărcat de

    Yogesh Bandhu
    96 vizualizări23 pagini
    A key element of the Doha Round of trade negotiations is the liberalisation of trade in industrial products, commonly known as non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Negotiations under NAMA focus on market access for all products that are not covered under the negotiations on agriculture or services and aim to reduce, if not possible to completely eliminate, tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that restrict trade in these products. The framework adopted for modalities for negotiations under NAMA, known as the ‘July Package’, envisages reduction of industrial tariffs in both developed and developing countries, according to a formula that is yet to be agreed. These negotiations are important for developing countries, as these will determine the market access opportunities available to developing countries through which they can improve their growth prospects. As per the WTO text on NAMA of December 6, 2008, the developing countries have been asked to undertake tariff reductions of 60 - 70 per cent while the developed countries are offering a reduction of only 20 - 30 per cent based on Swiss formula for tariff reduction which gives a coefficient of 8 for developed countries and 22 on an average for developing countries. The insistence on developing countries to cut their bound tariffs in NAMA or agriculture until they go below the applied levels along with the continuation of US practice of having a bound level that is twice its actual spending on agricultural domestic subsidies has been objected by India and China. India desires that the modalities for tariff cuts should reflect the mandate of less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments and comparability in ambition between NAMA and Agriculture. Also, there is a pressure for compulsory participation by select developing countries (including India, China and Brazil) in voluntary sectoral approach (in which tariffs in whole sectors have to be eliminated or brought to very low levels). In particular, the developed countries are pressurising India, China and Brazil to take part in “sectoral initiatives” to open their markets in auto, chemicals, and electrical/electronic sectors. The developed countries are also trying to link these sectoral initiatives with the flexibilities in average bound tariff reduction, but India, among others, has not accepted this and negotiations are still continuing. So far as the tariff reduction is concerned, it may be mentioned that the Swiss formula should not be used for making commitments on tariff reduction as it involves the use of an arbitrary coefficient, a, which can be manipulated by member countries. Even, the simple average formula has its own limitations. For instance, it overlooks the values that are either very high or very low and thus cannot solve the problem of tariff peaks. The simplest way is to reduce the bound levels of developed countries to 5 or 10 per cent for all tariff lines as their industries have already developed. Otherwise, the developed countries can be asked to bring their bound tariff rates to 5 to 8 per cent for those tariff lines that cover at least 98 per cent of the potential exports, and not the actual exports as that may be lower because of existing high import tariff or domestic support in importing country, of developing countries to developed countries. This potential of exports for developing countries can be calculated through revealed comparative advantage or by matching the developing countries exports and developed countries imports at different commodity classification levels.

    Titlu original

    Non Agriculture Market Access Issues and Concerns for India

    Drepturi de autor

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formate disponibile

    PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    A key element of the Doha Round of trade negotiations is the liberalisation of trade in industrial products, commonly known as non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Negotiations under NAMA focus on market access for all products that are not covered under the negotiations on agriculture or services and aim to reduce, if not possible to completely eliminate, tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that restrict trade in these products. The framework adopted for modalities for negotiations under NAMA, known as the ‘July Package’, envisages reduction of industrial tariffs in both developed and developing countries, according to a formula that is yet to be agreed. These negotiations are important for developing countries, as these will determine the market access opportunities available to developing countries through which they can improve their growth prospects. As per the WTO text on NAMA of December 6, 2008, the developing countries have been asked to undertake tariff reductions of 60 - 70 per cent while the developed countries are offering a reduction of only 20 - 30 per cent based on Swiss formula for tariff reduction which gives a coefficient of 8 for developed countries and 22 on an average for developing countries. The insistence on developing countries to cut their bound tariffs in NAMA or agriculture until they go below the applied levels along with the continuation of US practice of having a bound level that is twice its actual spending on agricultural domestic subsidies has been objected by India and China. India desires that the modalities for tariff cuts should reflect the mandate of less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments and comparability in ambition between NAMA and Agriculture. Also, there is a pressure for compulsory participation by select developing countries (including India, China and Brazil) in voluntary sectoral approach (in which tariffs in whole sectors have to be eliminated or brought to very low levels). In particular, the developed countries are pressurising India, China and Brazil to take part in “sectoral initiatives” to open their markets in auto, chemicals, and electrical/electronic sectors. The developed countries are also trying to link these sectoral initiatives with the flexibilities in average bound tariff reduction, but India, among others, has not accepted this and negotiations are still continuing. So far as the tariff reduction is concerned, it may be mentioned that the Swiss formula should not be used for making commitments on tariff reduction as it involves the use of an arbitrary coefficient, a, which can be manipulated by member countries. Even, the simple average formula has its own limitations. For instance, it overlooks the values that are either very high or very low and thus cannot solve the problem of tariff peaks. The simplest way is to reduce the bound levels of developed countries to 5 or 10 per cent for all tariff lines as their industries have already developed. Otherwise, the developed countries can be asked to bring their bound tariff rates to 5 to 8 per cent for those tariff lines that cover at least 98 per cent of the potential exports, and not the actual exports as that may be lower because of existing high import tariff or domestic support in importing country, of developing countries to developed countries. This potential of exports for developing countries can be calculated through revealed comparative advantage or by matching the developing countries exports and developed countries imports at different commodity classification levels.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    96 vizualizări23 pagini

    Non Agriculture Market Access Issues and Concerns For India

    Încărcat de

    Yogesh Bandhu
    A key element of the Doha Round of trade negotiations is the liberalisation of trade in industrial products, commonly known as non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Negotiations under NAMA focus on market access for all products that are not covered under the negotiations on agriculture or services and aim to reduce, if not possible to completely eliminate, tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that restrict trade in these products. The framework adopted for modalities for negotiations under NAMA, known as the ‘July Package’, envisages reduction of industrial tariffs in both developed and developing countries, according to a formula that is yet to be agreed. These negotiations are important for developing countries, as these will determine the market access opportunities available to developing countries through which they can improve their growth prospects. As per the WTO text on NAMA of December 6, 2008, the developing countries have been asked to undertake tariff reductions of 60 - 70 per cent while the developed countries are offering a reduction of only 20 - 30 per cent based on Swiss formula for tariff reduction which gives a coefficient of 8 for developed countries and 22 on an average for developing countries. The insistence on developing countries to cut their bound tariffs in NAMA or agriculture until they go below the applied levels along with the continuation of US practice of having a bound level that is twice its actual spending on agricultural domestic subsidies has been objected by India and China. India desires that the modalities for tariff cuts should reflect the mandate of less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments and comparability in ambition between NAMA and Agriculture. Also, there is a pressure for compulsory participation by select developing countries (including India, China and Brazil) in voluntary sectoral approach (in which tariffs in whole sectors have to be eliminated or brought to very low levels). In particular, the developed countries are pressurising India, China and Brazil to take part in “sectoral initiatives” to open their markets in auto, chemicals, and electrical/electronic sectors. The developed countries are also trying to link these sectoral initiatives with the flexibilities in average bound tariff reduction, but India, among others, has not accepted this and negotiations are still continuing. So far as the tariff reduction is concerned, it may be mentioned that the Swiss formula should not be used for making commitments on tariff reduction as it involves the use of an arbitrary coefficient, a, which can be manipulated by member countries. Even, the simple average formula has its own limitations. For instance, it overlooks the values that are either very high or very low and thus cannot solve the problem of tariff peaks. The simplest way is to reduce the bound levels of developed countries to 5 or 10 per cent for all tariff lines as their industries have already developed. Otherwise, the developed countries can be asked to bring their bound tariff rates to 5 to 8 per cent for those tariff lines that cover at least 98 per cent of the potential exports, and not the actual exports as that may be lower because of existing high import tariff or domestic support in importing country, of developing countries to developed countries. This potential of exports for developing countries can be calculated through revealed comparative advantage or by matching the developing countries exports and developed countries imports at different commodity classification levels.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 23

    WTOs Non-Agriculture Market Access Issues and Concerns for India

    U.P. Academy of Administration & Management, Lucknow August 28th , 2012

    Workshop on WTO

    Yogesh Bandhu

    What are NAMA products?


    NAMA refers to all products not covered by the Agreement on Agriculture. In other words, in pr actice, it includes manufacturing products, fuels and mining products, fish and fish products, an d forestry products. They are sometimes referre d to as industrial products or manufactured goo ds. Why is NAMA so important? Over the past years, NAMA products have accounted for almost 90% of the world mercha ndise exports.

    Why are there NAMA negotiations in the DDA?

    Despite the significant improvements in market access for NAMA products that previous GATT r ounds and the Uruguay Round prod uced, tariffs continue to be an impor tant barrier to world trade, as tariff peaks, high tariffs, and tariff escalat ion remain.

    Why has a formula approach been agreed to in the NAMA negotiations?


    Following intensive discussions, participants recognized the advantages of the formula approach. A formula approach provides transparency (every Member will know how the other will reduce its tariffs); efficiency (simpler process than request/offer approach), equity (tariff reduction depends on rules rather then bargaining power); predictability (easy to foresee the results of the negotiations).

    Background

    Reduction in tariffs and non-tariff barriers on industrial goods was at the core of multilateral trade negotiations under the GATT. Over the past decades, multilateral trade negotiations have achieved significant reductions in tariffs. The process of liberalization has led to: A substantial reduction in overall tariff barriers A commitment to keep tariffs below a given level (binding tariff lines) Greater transparency of trade impediments through conversion of quantitative restriction to ta riff barriers. A legal framework to minimize the use of policies and measures to unfairly distort trade, and A set of measures and safeguards to provide flexibility to developing countries and least develo ped countries.

    Background (cont.)

    Given the current extent of protectionism still prevalent in both developed and develo ping countries, there is still a great deal of r oom for further trade liberalization. Therefore, the issue continues to remain central to the negotiations agreed in Doha. Most countries support this mandate, though many LDCs are concerned about

    Loss of government revenue Potential weakening of their competitiveness Expected erosion of preferential access margins.

    Background (cont.)

    From Doha to the July Package Modalities

    Binding

    Formula approach based on bound tariffs Unbound tariffs to be bound at twice the average rate in each country Complete elimination of tariffs in seven sectors
    Electronics and electrical goods; fish and fish products; footwear; leather goods; motor vehicle parts and components; stones, gems and precious metals.

    Sectoral Elimination

    Special and Differential Treatment

    Non-tariff Barriers

    Longer implementation periods.

    Credit for autonomous liberalization

    Proposals to identify, categorize and select NTBs that fall within the NAMA negotiating mandate.

    NAMA Negotiations

    The objectives of NAMA negotiations include:


    Reduction

    Tariff peaks and high tariffs Tariff escalation Non-tariff barriers

    or elimination of:

    Increased market access on products of export interest for developing countries.

    Major Issues of NAMA


    Tariff Peaks Tariff Escalation Non-Tariff Barriers Binding Coverage

    Figure: Trade Weighted Bound and Applied Average Industrial Tariffs


    14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Developed Countries Developing Countries Least Developed Countries
    3.4 3 13.5 12.5 12.4

    Weighted Average Bound Rates Weighted Average Applied Rates

    Source: UNCTAD and WTO database.

    Figure: Simple Bound and Applied Average Industrial Tariffs


    50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
    45.2

    29.4

    12.3 5.5

    11.6

    12.6

    Developed Countries

    Developing Countries

    Least Developed Countries

    Simple Average Bound Rate

    Simple Average Applied Rate

    Source: UNCTAD and WTO database.

    Tariff Peaks

    Tariff peaks are high tariffs usually defined as tariffs that are three times th e national weighted average. The Problem of tariff peaks occurs largely in the following sectors
    Food industry Textiles and clothing Footwear, leather and travel goods Automotive sector and a few other transport and high technology goods.

    Tariff Peaks (cont.)


    Food Industry The food industry is a major area where tariff peaks are widespread and high in major developed countrie s even after the implementation of Uruguay Round co ncessions. Tariff peaks and a range of additional measures extend far beyond the initial processing stages in a la rge variety of industries.

    The EUs food industry accounts for 30% of all tariff peaks ranging (with some exceptions) from 12% to 100%. In the US, the food industry accounts for one-sixth of all tariff peaks and these also fall mainly into 12%-100% range.

    Tariff Peaks (cont.)


    Textiles and Clothing In the major textile importing countries like the US, EU and Canada, large proporti ons of clothing and textiles imports are su bject to high tariffs. Most tariff peaks are in 12-32% range. These high tariffs are also combined with quantitative restrictions.

    Tariff Peaks (cont.)


    Footwear, Leather, and Travel Goods. Footwear of various types is still protected by high tariffs in most devel oped countries. Post Uruguay Round MFN rates are close to 160% in Japan, 37.5-58% in the US and 18% in Canada. MFN duties remain relevant, as General System of Preferences (GSP) benefits are limited in this sector.

    Tariff Peaks (cont.)


    Automotive, Transport and Electronics With the exception of Japan and the Republic of South Korea, level of protection for one or the other branch of t he transport industry is rather high. In the developed countries, MFN tariff protection is more selectively applied in the automotive and transport sector. In addition, various developed countries apply high tariffs on TV receivers, TV picture tubes and some other high technology products. It is important for developing countries to ensure that a tariff reduction approach addresses not only average tarif f rates but also tariff peaks on key sectors of export inter est to them.

    Figure: Distribution of Tariff Peaks in Applied Tariff Rates


    7%

    28%

    65%

    Developed

    Developing

    Least Developed

    Source: UNCTAD and WTO database.

    Tariff Escalation

    Tariff escalation occurs when tariff levels increase with the degree of processing Tariff escalation is clearly observed in all groups of countries as tariffs are higher for intermediate and final products Among developing countries there is an escalation between raw materials/low technology products and intermediate technology goods, tariff rates diminish between intermediate goods and final products. Tariff escalation in developed countries may prevent the development of value-added industries in develo ping countries where they might more suitably be lo cated.

    Figure: Tariff Escalation of Weighted Applied Tariff on Industrial Products


    18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
    17.2

    12.3
    9.4

    3.3 0.5

    3.6

    3.2 1.2

    Developed Countries

    Developing Countries

    Least Developed Countries

    Low
    Source: UNCTAD database.

    Intermediate

    High

    Non-Tariff Barriers

    Non-tariff barriers are the set of trade distorting measures and policies other than tar iffs. These include:

    Quantitative restrictions Administrative procedures and unpublished government regulations and policies Market structure and Political, social, and cultural institutions

    There are committees in WTO on technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures and trade facilitation, whose objecti ve is to ensure that the various non-tariff barri ers are reduced.

    Non-Tariff Barriers (cont.)

    The Doha Ministerial Conference rightly calls for removal of all the non-tariff barriers on industrial pr oducts as they are least transparent and have major distortionary impact. Important non-tariff barriers on the export interest to developing countries are:

    Use of licensing procedures particularly automatic licensing procedures Technical regulations applicable to such products as electric machinery, chemicals, and pharmaceutical products Contingency protection measures such as safeguards and anti-dumping countervailing measures, and Quantitative restrictions on imports particularly those which apply to Textiles and Clothing sector.

    Binding Coverage

    Bound tariff lines are lines on which there is a commitment not to increase tariffs above a specified level. Tariff bindings make trade more predictable The binding coverage (% of tariff lines that are bound) among developed countries is almost comple te However it is much lower in developing countries, and for some LDCS it is as low as 10%. Proposals within multilateral trade negotiations have called for increased binding coverage, especially among developing and least developed members. LDCs are concerned that increasing binding coverage can lead to less flexibility and higher level of obligations in future rounds of tariff reductions.

    Guidelines for NAMA Negotiations

    Tariff reduction modalities in NAMA negotiations should at least have the following features:
    Effectiveness Equity Flexibility Simplicity Transparency

    S-ar putea să vă placă și