Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs

Presidential Documents; Presidential Documents 9837; Memorandum of February 13, 2025; Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs (90 FR 9837)

Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2025 National Trade Estimate Report

On September 3, 2024, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative published in the Federal Registered (89 FR 71775) Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2025 National Trade Estimate Report.

Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2025 National Trade Estimate Report

On September 3, 2024, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (89 FR 71775) Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2025 National Trade Estimate Report.

Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers

On September 11, 2023, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (88 FR 62421) Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2024 National Trade Estimate Report.

Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2023 National Trade Estimate Report

On September 15, 2022, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (87 FR 56741) Request for Comments on Significant Foreign Trade Barriers for the 2023 National Trade Estimate Report

USTR Releases 2022 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On March 31, 2022, United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai released the 2022 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (NTE Report), providing a comprehensive review of significant foreign barriers to U.S. exports of goods and services, U.S. foreign direct investment, and U.S. electronic commerce in key export markets for the United States.

“The President’s Trade Agenda detailed a bold vision for supporting America’s working families and businesses by promoting fair competition and inclusive economic growth,” said Ambassador Tai.  “The 2022 NTE Report identifies a range of important challenges and priorities to guide the Biden Administration’s effort to craft trade policy that reflects our country’s values and builds a better America.”

Published annually since 1985, the NTE Report covers significant foreign trade barriers in over 64 markets which together account for 99 percent of U.S. goods trade and 85 percent of U.S. services trade.

The NTE Report covers significant trade barriers in areas, including:  (1) import policies; (2) technical barriers to trade; (3) sanitary and phytosanitary measures; (4) government procurement; (5) intellectual property protection; (6) services barriers; (7) barriers to digital trade and electronic commerce; (8) investment barriers; (9) subsidies, especially export subsidies; (10) competition; (11) state-owned enterprises; (12) labor; (13) environment; among others.

Examples of these significant obstacles include:

Agricultural Trade Barriers:  The 2022 NTE Report highlights a number of cross-cutting barriers affecting U.S. agricultural trade, including (1) opaque and burdensome facility registration requirements, such as China’s Decree 248 and 249, and Indonesia’s facility registration requirements for dairy, meat, and rendered products; (2) sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures that are not based on science, are maintained without sufficient scientific evidence, or are applied beyond the extent necessary to address SPS issues, such as Turkey’s onerous procedures and requirements for agricultural biotechnology approvals, Mexico’s decisions on agricultural biotechnology applications and its decree providing for a phase-out of agricultural biotechnology corn, and the EU’s burdensome certification requirements for animal products and non-science-based policies affecting innovative crop technologies; and (3) import licensing requirements and non-transparent import licensing administration restricting the flow of U.S. agricultural exports to a number of countries, including Angola, Ecuador, Egypt, and Indonesia. USTR will continue to engage foreign governments on barriers that hamper the ability of U.S. farmers, ranchers and food processors to access markets worldwide. 

Digital Trade Barriers:  The 2022 NTE Report details restrictive data policies in China, the EU, India, Indonesia, Korea, Russia, Turkey, and Vietnam, among other countries.  For example, India’s proposed regulations on digital trade and electronic commerce include data localization requirements and restrictions on cross-border data flows that could serve as a barrier for a wide range of bilateral goods and services trade.  Separately, EU leaders have promoted “technological sovereignty” or “digital sovereignty” as a policy objective.   USTR will continue monitoring the execution of this policy to ensure that it does not pose a form of unfair competition.  USTR will continue to engage foreign governments on policies that significantly affect U.S. exporters of digital products and services and undermine U.S. manufacturers’ and service suppliers’ ability to move data across borders. 

Industrial Policies:  China’s state-led, non-market approach to the economy and trade drives its pursuit of industrial policies that provide unfair competitive advantages to Chinese companies and actively seeks to displace foreign competitors and technologies in order to dominate domestic and global markets.  China deploys numerous types of interventionist and discriminatory measures and actions in pursuit of its industrial policies, which can heavily distort and disrupt markets and often lead to the creation of severe and persistent excess capacity, as evidenced by the ongoing situations in steel, aluminum, and solar, among others.  Newer targets for China’s industrial policies include numerous industries in advanced manufacturing, high-technology, and other key economic sectors where China is setting and pursuing production and market share objectives that can only be achieved through non-market means.  USTR is determined to pursue all available domestic trade tools to protect the competitiveness of U.S. workers and businesses and to work closely with like-minded trading partners on the shared challenges posed by China’s harmful practices.

Labor:  The U.S. Government has identified concerns related to labor rights in several countries, including with respect to:  employment discrimination and freedom of association in Bahrain; acceptable conditions of work and freedom of association in Bangladesh; forced labor and other human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China; freedom of association and collective bargaining in Colombia; acceptable conditions of work, child labor, forced labor, freedom of association, and collective bargaining in the Dominican Republic; freedom of association, collective bargaining, and acceptable conditions of work in Guatemala; freedom of association, collective bargaining, child labor, and acceptable conditions of work in Honduras; freedom of association in Peru; and freedom of association and other worker rights concerns in Thailand.
 
Technical Barriers to Trade:  Technical regulations or conformity assessment procedures are a legitimate form of regulation, but in some cases can be used to unnecessarily restrict trade or curb the movement of innovative products risk lost opportunities to capitalize on America’s leadership in science and high-technology manufacturing, services, and agriculture.  For example:

• Burdensome technical regulations or conformity assessment procedures hamper the ability of American producers to export high quality U.S. food and agricultural products to certain markets. Examples include Mexico’s draft conformity assessment procedures for cheese, and Panama’s technical regulations for onions and potatoes.
• Egypt requires foreign entities that export finished consumer products to Egypt to register their trademark and their manufacturing facilities with Egypt’s General Organization for Exports and Imports. Registration can take several months, adding costs and uncertainty to the export process, which may discourage exports to Egypt over time.
• The NTE highlights how several countries have implemented automotive safety standards that effectively exclude vehicles built to conform to the U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), which provide a high level of protection that matches or exceeds that of other countries. Over the coming year, USTR will continue its engagement with foreign government and authorities, to ensure that U.S. exports of FMVSS-compliant vehicles are able to access their markets, including Colombia, Egypt, Mexico, Morocco, Philippines, and Taiwan.

The NTE also highlights progress on removing barriers by continuing to work with our trade partners.  For example:

• Following Japan’s imposition in March 2021 of a safeguard on U.S. beef exports, under which U.S. beef exports temporarily did not benefit from preferential treatment under the United States–Japan Trade Agreement (USJTA), the United States and Japan reached an agreement in principle to increase the USJTA beef safeguard trigger level, and greatly reduce the probability of the safeguard increasing tariffs again.  The United States will focus work in 2022 to finalize the text of the agreement and complete domestic procedures. 
• The United States and Vietnam signed an agreement that addresses U.S. concerns in the Section 301 investigation into Vietnam’s acts, policies, and practices relating to the import and use of illegal timber.  The agreement secures commitments that will help keep illegally harvested or traded timber out of the supply chain and protect the environment and natural resources.  USTR will monitor Vietnam’s implementation of its commitments.

You can view the report here.

The release of the 2022 NTE Report follows the March 1, 2022 release of the 2022 President’s Trade Agenda and 2021 Annual Report.  USTR plans to release its annual Special 301 Report on the adequacy and effectiveness of trading partners’ protection of intellectual property rights by April 30, 2022.
 

AAFA Submits Comments for USTR's NTE Report

On October 26, 2021, the American Apparel and Footwear Association filed comments on trade barriers facing the industry for inclusion in the U.S. Trade Representative's annual National Trade Estimate report.

The report identified import barriers relating to:

• Import licensing,
• Certificates of origin,
• Benchmark pricing,
• Labeling,
• Tariff rate quotas,
• Non-scientific product safety regulations,
• Customs procedures
• Import Fees, and
• Currency Issues.

The following nations were called out specifically in regard to import barriers:

• Argentina,
• Brazil,
• Canada,
• China,
• Colombia,
• El Salvador,
• Guatemala,
• Haiti,
• Japan,
• Mexico, and
• Russia.

Read more HERE.

Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On September 10 2021, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (86 FR 51436) Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

Resolving Trade Barriers

A message brought to you by the Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA) at the International Trade Administration. OTEXA is dedicated to increasing the international competitiveness of the U.S. textiles, apparel, footwear, and travel goods industries.

A trade barrier can be broadly defined as a foreign government policy, practice, or procedure that unfairly or unnecessarily restricts U.S. exports. The following are some common foreign government-imposed trade barriers that U.S. companies encounter abroad:

• High or unfairly applied tariffs

• Classification and customs barriers at the border

• Burdensome certificate of origin or import licensing requirements

• Unfair standards, testing, labeling, or certification requirements

• Intellectual property rights protection problems

• Discriminatory competition laws or unfair competition from state-owned enterprises

The Office of Trade Agreements Negotiation and Compliance (TANC) at the International Trade Administration (ITA) works to break down barriers to trade abroad and monitors and helps promote foreign government compliance with trade agreement obligations. By leveraging relevant trade agreements, ITA engages foreign governments to remove or mitigate barriers to trade as quickly as possible.

If you think you may be experiencing a trade barrier, report your issues as soon as possible.

Report a Trade Barrier Today 

 

2021 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On March 31, 2021, the Office of the United States Trade Representative released the 2021 National Trade Estimate Report

Published annually since 1985, the NTE Report is a comprehensive review of significant foreign trade barriers affecting U.S. exports of goods and services. The 570-page report examines 65 trading partners and country groups, including the U.S.’ largest trading partners, all 20 U.S. FTA partners, and other economies and country groupings of interest such as the Arab League, the United Kingdom (included as a separate entity for the first time in this report), and the European Union. Together, these economies account for 99 percent of U.S. goods trade and 87 percent of U.S. services trade.

The NTE Report covers significant trade barriers in 11 areas, including (1) import policies such as tariffs, import licensing and customs barriers; (2) technical barriers to trade; (3) sanitary and phytosanitary measures; (4) subsidies; (5) government procurement; (6) intellectual property protection; (7) services barriers; (8) barriers to digital trade and electronic commerce; (9) investment barriers; (10) competition; and (11) other barriers.

Taken as a whole, the NTE Report highlights significant barriers that present major policy challenges with implications for future U.S. growth opportunities, and the fairness of the global economy.

This report discusses the largest export markets for the United States, covering 61 countries, the European Union, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Arab League. The discussion of Chinese trade barriers is structured and focused to align more closely with other Congressional reports prepared by USTR on U.S.-China trade issues. The China section includes cross-references to other USTR reports where appropriate. As always, omission of particular countries and barriers does not imply that they are not of concern to the United States.

Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On September 10 2020, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (85 FR 55925) Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

Report Highlights Accomplishments in Reducing Foreign Trade Barriers to American Exports

On March 31, 2020, the Office of the United States Trade Representative released the 2020 National Trade Estimate Report

The National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (NTE) covers 63 countries, customs territories and regional associations, including each of the 20 United States’ free trade agreement (FTA) partners and all of the 50 largest markets for U.S. goods exports. These partners together account for over 95% of the United States’ $5.5 trillion in two-way goods and services trade. The NTE Report reviews each in detail, highlighting concerns regarding issues ranging from industrial tariffs and import licensing to digital data flow, customs, agricultural quotas, industrial subsidies, restrictions on provision of telecommunications services, and more.

Each year’s edition of the NTE Report changes and evolves. Sometimes this reflects the creation of new barriers to U.S. exports, and at other times new conceptual challenges and opportunities arising from the progress of science, technology, and logistics. Changes in the NTE Report from one year to the next also reflect the success of U.S. negotiations and enforcement efforts. Such successes have been worldwide since the publication of the 2019 NTE Report, highlighted by examples including:

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

Canada and Mexico – United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA): The USMCA represents a generational, comprehensive revision of the old North American Free Trade Agreement. In addition to landmark revisions of automotive rules of origin, state-of-the-art labor and environmental provisions, and 21st-century digital trade rules, the USMCA contains numerous provisions that – once in force – will address outstanding trade-related irritants with Canada and Mexico. For example, under the USMCA and related instruments, Canada agreed to eliminate milk classes 6 and 7, discriminatory grading of U.S. wheat, and British Columbia’s discriminatory treatment of U.S. wine in grocery stores. The USMCA also includes obligations to strengthen enforcement against counterfeiting and piracy, camcording of movies, satellite and cable signal theft, transparency with respect to new geographical indications, and copyright protection and enforcement in the digital environment. The USMCA also cracks down on data localization measures for services providers and financial services providers and locks in Mexico’s telecommunications and energy reforms.

Colombia – End of the “1x1” Truck Scrappage Policy: Due to U.S. engagement and enforcement efforts, Colombia ended the “1x1” truck scrappage policy on June 30, 2019. In March 2013, the Colombian government eliminated an option to pay a “scrappage fee” to legally register a heavy truck (over 10.5 metric tons) in Colombia, which negatively affected previously robust sales of imported trucks (which were generally over 10.5 metric tons).

EUROPEAN UNION

Technical Standards for Certain Heavy Electrical Products: The EU's requirements for restricting hazardous substances in electronic and electrical products are burdensome and arbitrary, and force companies to pursue an onerous and lengthy exemption process. In 2017, companies applied for exemptions to continue to use two substances (DEHP phthalate in rubber and lead in solder) that would have otherwise been banned in 2019 in engines, because there are no viable alternatives that provide the necessary flexibility in rubber and heat-resistance in solder. Following engagement by the U.S. government and industry, the EU approved in September 2019 the continued use of those two substances in engines for an additional five years. Those exemptions were fully implemented by EU member states in early 2020.

MIDDLE EAST

North Africa Markets Open to U.S. Beef, Poultry, Eggs, and Genetics: In April 2019, the United States and Tunisia finalized U.S. export certificates to allow imports of U.S. beef, poultry, and egg products into Tunisia. In June 2019, the United States and Morocco completed export certificates for U.S. processed eggs and beef genetics to Morocco, and reached agreement to improve U.S market access under the U.S.-Morocco FTA tariff rate quotas.

SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

Ghana – Automobile Standards: In 2019, Ghana proposed measures that would only recognize automobile standards developed by the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) as international standards. The proposal would have moved towards the wide adoption of the ECE standards and regulations as equivalent and significantly narrow the acceptance of U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). The United States provided comments and background information on FMVSS and their use. Following U.S. action, Ghana agreed to incorporate U.S. standards into its new standards policy, which are pending publication by the Ghana Standards Authority.

Standards Alliance Implementation with USAID: USTR worked with USAID to implement the Standards Alliance, a public-private partnership that provides technical assistance to developing countries and regions to help ensure that those countries’ standards-related measures do not impose unnecessary obstacles to trade and comply with other important obligations under the WTO TBT Agreement. In 2019, the Standards Alliance operated in five sub-Saharan African countries: Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Mozambique, Senegal, and Zambia. The programs included workshops to increase the application of good regulatory practices, the use of international standards in regulations, and the use of regulatory impact assessments. These procedures help to reduce unnecessary obstacles to U.S. trade by ensuring, for example, that proposed regulations are made available for public comment and that potential impacts of proposed measures are analyzed and taken into account.

CHINA AND TAIWAN

China – Historic “Phase One” Agreement: The United States and China reached an historic Phase One agreement that requires structural reforms and other changes to China’s economic and trade regime in the areas of intellectual property, technology transfer, agriculture, financial services, and currency and foreign exchange. The Phase One agreement also includes a commitment by China to make substantial additional purchases of U.S. goods and services in the coming years. Importantly, the agreement establishes a strong dispute resolution arrangement that ensures prompt and effective implementation and enforcement. At the same time, the United States maintains tariffs on many Chinese goods while monitoring and additional negotiations continue.

Taiwan – Adoption of Mechanism for Early Resolution of Potential Patent Disputes: In August 2019, following sustained engagement by USTR, final implementing regulations for Taiwan’s December 2017 amendments to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act entered into force. The establishment of a mechanism for early resolution of potential patent disputes, including coverage for biologics, represents a promising step forward for Taiwan in its efforts to develop an innovative pharmaceutical sector. Taiwan – Passage of Amendments to Trade Secrets Act: On December 31, 2019, Taiwan passed amendments to the Trade Secrets Act that provided authority to prosecutors to issue protective orders during investigation proceedings. These changes, long sought by USTR, are expected to improve Taiwan’s ability to effectively prosecute cases of trade secrets theft by protecting information from unauthorized disclosures.

JAPAN

New Access in Japan for U.S. Agricultural Exporters: The U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement, which entered into force on January 1, 2020, further opens a critically important market for U.S. food and agricultural goods exporters, including through the reduction or elimination of tariffs or allowance of a specific quantity of imports from the United States. This agreement eliminates many long-standing barriers and ensures that over 90% of U.S. food and agriculture exports have access to Japan either on a duty-free or other preferential basis.

U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement: The U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement, which also entered into force on January 1, 2020, parallels the USMCA as the most comprehensive and high-standard trade agreement addressing digital trade barriers ever negotiated. The Agreement covers over $40 billion in digital trade between the United States and Japan. It incorporates strong rules prohibiting data localization measures, including for financial services data, and ensuring that data can be transferred across borders by all suppliers, as well as rules ensuring non-discriminatory treatment of digital products, and protecting against forced disclosure of proprietary source code and algorithms.

Access for Passenger Airlines: Following amendment of the 1952 U.S.-Japan Civil Air Transport Agreement in March 2020, Japan opened up 12 new slot pairings for U.S. passenger airlines at Tokyo's Haneda Airport, significantly improving access at commercially viable times long sought by U.S. air carriers.

SOUTHEAST ASIA

Vietnam – Automobile Regulations: After the United States raised concerns, Vietnam rescinded a decree that required lot-by-lot testing and replaced it with a new program that requires autos to be tested by model. Vietnam revised its auto import testing regulatory system, which now facilitates the import of U.S.-manufactured autos.

USITC report U.S. SME Exports: Trade-related Barriers Affecting Exports of U.S. Small and Medium-sized Enterprises to the United Kingdom

On October 4, 2019, the U.S. International Trade Commission released Inv. No. 332-569, Publication 4953, U.S. SME Exports: Trade-related Barriers Affecting Exports of U.S. Small and Medium-sized Enterprises to the United Kingdom

The report focuses on barriers identified by SMEs that hinder their ability to export to the UK. The USITC collected primary qualitative information and data to analyze both tariff and nontariff measures that may affect U.S. SME exports to the UK.  The report includes suggestions from SMEs and relevant literature for actions that would help address some of the identified barriers and enhance the participation of U.S. SMEs in U.S.-UK trade.

Main Findings:

• SMEs believe they are particularly affected by a number of specific crosscutting trade-related barriers imposed by a European Union (EU) or UK government law or policy; these include tariffs and taxes, customs procedures, intellectual property measures, and temporary entry provisions.  Further, SMEs noted various market-related barriers that they perceive as affecting their ability to export to the UK market, including logistical and finance-related issues, and difficulties in entering or participating in the UK market.


• Standards, technical regulations, and conformity assessment procedures are most often cited by SMEs as limiting their exports to the UK.  The most frequently cited SME concern is that the UK often does not recognize the standards set by U.S. standards bodies, which forces many U.S. firms to seek dual U.S. and UK certifications before they can export their products.


• SMEs producing manufactured goods reportedly face numerous regulatory measures related to standards and regulations, which include labeling, licensing, and certification.  U.S. agrifood SMEs also identified a variety of nontariff barriers that they face in the UK with respect to labeling requirements, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements, geographical indications and wine names, packaging rules, food safety requirements, and certifications.


• There are limited trade-related barriers for U.S. service exports to the UK.  However, the largest hardships U.S. SMEs engaged in the professional services industry say they face are temporary entry provisions, and licensing and credential issues. SMEs that export computer services reportedly encounter issues related to data protection and privacy laws, cybersecurity, and customs requirements.

2019 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers ("NTE")

On March 29, 2019, the Office of the United States Trade Representative released the 2019 National Trade Estimate Report

Here are a few highlights that may be of interest to readers of Textiles and Trade.

ARGENTINA

Argentina subjects imports to automatic or non-automatic licenses that are managed through the Comprehensive Import Monitoring System (SIMI)…The SIMI system requires importers to submit detailed information electronically about goods to be imported into Argentina. … As of December 2018, Argentina maintained non-automatic import license requirements on 10,571 12-digit tariff lines, including on products the government deems import-sensitive, such as automobiles, paper and cardboard, iron and steel, nuclear reactors, electrical and construction materials and parts, toys, textiles and apparel, and footwear.

Certificates of origin have been a key element in Argentine import procedures to enforce trade remedy measures, reference prices, and certain geographical restrictions. Argentina requires certificates of origin for certain categories of products, including certain organic chemicals, tires, bicycle parts, flat-rolled iron and steel, certain iron and steel tubes, air conditioning equipment, wood fiberboard, most fabrics (e.g., wool, cotton, other vegetable), carpets, most textiles (e.g., knitted, crocheted), apparel, footwear, metal screws and bolts, furniture, toys and games, brooms, and brushes. To receive the MFN tariff rate, a U.S. product’s certificate of origin must be authenticated by an Argentine embassy or consulate, or carry a U.S. Chamber of Commerce seal.

Argentina restricts entry points for several classes of goods, including sensitive goods classified in 20 Harmonized Tariff Schedule chapters (e.g., textiles; shoes; electrical machinery; iron, steel, metal, and other manufactured goods; and watches), through specialized customs procedures for these goods.

BOLIVIA

Bolivia’s MFN tariff structure consists of seven rates ranging from zero percent to 40 percent. The rates in principle apply according to the category of the product: … 40 percent for clothing and accessories, alcoholic beverages, wooden furniture, and footwear.

Bolivian law authorizes prohibitions on the import of goods on the basis that the goods may affect human and animal life or health, or are harmful to the protection of plants, morality, the environment, the security of the state, or the nation’s financial system. … Prohibited items included: radioactive residues; halogenated derivatives of hydrocarbons; arms, ammunition, and explosives; worn clothing; and some types of vehicles and motor vehicles…

Other products require prior authorization before they can be imported. In 2018, prior authorization was required for 719 ten-digit tariff lines. Prior authorization (such as the import prohibitions discussed above) is generally presented as a way to protect human and animal health or life, to protect plants and conserve exhaustible natural resources, or to protect the security of the state. Bolivian law also permits the use of prior authorization to protect domestic industry from import competition. … Examples of products requiring prior authorization include: mineral products; chemical products; plastics and rubber; pulp and paper; textiles; footwear and headgear; precious stones; machinery and appliances; precision equipment; arms and ammunition; and some miscellaneous manufactures.

BRAZIL

Brazil imposes relatively high tariffs on imports across a wide range of sectors, including automobiles, automotive parts, information technology and electronics, chemicals, plastics, industrial machinery, steel, and textiles and apparel.

Brazil generally prohibits imports of used consumer goods, including automobiles, clothing, …

U.S. footwear and apparel companies have expressed concern about the extension of non-automatic import licenses and certificate of origin requirements for footwear, textiles, and apparel from non-MERCOSUR countries. They also note additional monitoring, enhanced inspection, and delayed release of certain goods, all of which negatively impact the ability to sell U.S.-made and U.S.-branded footwear, textiles, and apparel in the Brazilian market.

COTE D’IVOIRE

To protect national industries, Cote d’Ivoire imposes special taxes on imports of … certain textile products (20 percent)…

Textile imports are subject to some authorization requirements by the External Trade Promotion Office, but the market is generally open.

Imports of cotton and products consisting of 100 percent cotton, such as the “Wax and Resin” textile cloth most often used in traditional African clothing, require an import license from the External Trade Promotion Office.

ECUADOR

Ecuadorian law (INEN 013) requires footwear companies to make a special label on every pair of shoes imported into Ecuador, including content information and an Ecuadorian tax ID number. U.S. footwear companies need to make production runs specifically for Ecuador, to attach labels to the shoe upper during manufacture or attach a label after manufacture. These requirements far exceed typical local language labeling requirements. In 2017 this requirement was modified to require sewn labels to include only the material composition (percentage), country of origin, and safety instructions. For all other labeling requirements an adhesive tag suffices. Ecuador is working with other CAN members to issue a regional labeling policy for footwear, apparel, and accessories, among others, based on international standards.

EUROPEAN UNION

The EU regulation concerning the production, marketing, and use of chemicals known as REACH entered into force on June 1, 2007. REACH imposes extensive registration, testing, and data requirements on chemicals manufactured or imported into the EU in quantities greater than one metric ton. The restriction process limits or bans certain substances on the EU market. It also requires manufacturers or users of certain hazardous chemicals to obtain authorizations for those chemicals. Furthermore, REACH impacts virtually every industrial sector because each entity registering a chemical under the legislation must account for the uses of that chemical in the products it places or intends to place on the EU market.

The United States agrees on the importance of regulating chemicals to ensure environmental and health safety. The United States is concerned, however, that REACH appears to impose requirements that are either more onerous for foreign producers than EU producers or simply unnecessary. For example, stakeholders have raised concerns that they must provide data as part of the registration process under REACH that is irrelevant to health and environmental concerns. Additionally, there appears to be inconsistent and insufficiently transparent application of REACH by Member States. The United States and many other WTO Members have raised concerns regarding various aspects of REACH at nearly every WTO TBT Committee meeting for years. WTO Members have emphasized the need for greater transparency in the development and implementation of REACH requirements and frequently cite the need for further information and clarification, as well as problems producers have in understanding and complying with REACH’s extensive registration and safety data information requirements.

INDIA

India maintains several export subsidy programs, including exemptions from taxes for certain export- oriented enterprises and for exporters in Special Economic Zones. Numerous sectors (e.g., textiles and apparel, steel, paper, rubber, toys, leather goods, and wood products) receive various forms of subsidies, including exemptions from customs duties and internal taxes, which are tied to export performance. India not only continues to offer subsidies to its textiles and apparel sector in order to promote exports, but it has also extended or expanded such programs and even implemented new export subsidy programs. As a result, the Indian textiles sector remains a beneficiary of many export promotion measures. In July 2016, India announced subsidies intended to encourage employment generation in the garment sector in addition to providing refunds for state levies.

INDONESIA

In September 2018, Indonesia issued MOF Regulation 110/2018, increasing the “withholding tax” rates for 1,147 imported products, including from: 1) 2.5 percent to 7.5 percent for 719 consumer goods (e.g., audio- visual equipment, textiles); 2) 2.5 percent to 7.2 percent for 218 daily necessities (e.g., shampoos, cosmetics); and 3) 7.5 percent to 10 percent on 210 luxury goods.

MOT Regulation 87/2015 on the Import of Certain Products requires pre-shipment verification on a broad range of products (including electronics, textiles and footwear, toys, food and beverage products, and cosmetics) by designated companies (known in Indonesia as “surveyors”).

JAPAN

Japan maintains high tariffs on leather, footwear, and travel goods, ranging from 3.5 percent to an ad valorem equivalent of approximately 189 percent. In particular, Japan continues to apply TRQs to a limited and tightly controlled volume of leather footwear imports.

KENYA

For certain products and commodities deemed “sensitive,” Kenya applies ad valorem rates above 25 percent. This includes rates of 60 percent for most milk products, 50 percent for corn and corn flour, 75 percent for rice, 60 percent for wheat flour, 100 percent for sugar, and 50 percent for textiles.

In March 2016, Kenya and other EAC heads of state, in an EAC summit communique, directed EAC partner states to ban the importation of used clothing and footwear to support the development of the EAC’s textile and apparel and leather industries. In particular, they directed EAC partner states “to procure their textile and footwear requirements from within the region where quality and supply capacities are available competitively, with a view to phasing out importation of used textile and footwear within three years.” In addition, they directed partner states to ensure that “all imported second hand shoes and clothes comply with sanitary requirements, in the Partner States.” In June 2016, Kenya doubled the import duty rate on articles of used clothing to $0.40/kg or 35 percent ad valorem, whichever is higher, as a first step to implement the import ban. According to the Secondary Materials and Recycled Textiles Association (SMART), an industry association, Kenya is an important market for U.S. exports of used clothing. SMART estimates that at least 40,000 U.S. jobs in collection, processing, and distribution would be negatively impacted once Kenya and other EAC partner states fully implement the ban on imports of used clothing and footwear. In July 2017, Kenya reverted the import duty rate on articles of used clothing to the pre-June 2016 rates of $0.20/kg or 35 percent ad valorem, whichever is higher, in response to stakeholder concerns. In 2018, Kenya continued to apply the pre-June 2016 import duty rates.

KOREA

The Registration and Evaluation of Chemicals (K-REACH) Act entered into force on January 1, 2015. K- REACH requires manufacturers and importers of chemical substances to register and comply with annual reporting requirements. The United States has raised a number of concerns, centering on the lack of guidance around implementation, the insufficient time for companies to implement the requirements, and K-REACH’s lack of protection for confidential business information. The United States has raised these concerns repeatedly through meetings under KORUS and the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade.

A low volume exemption from K-REACH applies to companies importing under 100 kg; however, the Ministry of Environment (MOE) proposed changes to the Presidential Decree that would narrow application.of low volume exemptions by requiring registration of compounds exceeding 1,000 kg imported country- wide on an aggregate basis. This newly proposed criterion introduces uncertainty to business planning and adds a further compliance burden on chemical importers.

In 2018, MOE proposed an amendment to the Chemical Control Act that requires disclosure of the full composition of chemical mixtures by importers and manufacturers in line with its new “Universal Chemical Tracking System.” However, U.S. exporters contend that full composition disclosure fails to protect confidential business information and compliance would be difficult in declaring contents of third-party supplied materials. If U.S. exporters cannot fulfill the requirements, exports to Korea will likely be restricted. The United States continues to urge Korean ministries to base regulations on scientific evidence and will engage Korean authorities as implementation progresses.

MEXICO

Mexico applies several regulations governing the importation of footwear, apparel, and textile goods, including the creation of reference prices and the establishment of an import licensing system. According to the Mexican government, the measures are designed to enhance the productivity and competitiveness of Mexican footwear and apparel producers and protect Mexico’s domestic footwear and apparel industries from the importation of undervalued goods. Beginning in December 2018, the Ministry of Economy abruptly canceled automatic import licenses for several U.S. companies based on “inconsistencies” that have not been adequately explained. In addition, U.S. exporters expressed a number of concerns with regard to the schemes, including a lack of transparency in how reference prices are determined and uneven enforcement by Mexico’s customs and tax authorities.

NIGERIA

The Nigerian government continues to ban the import of nearly 50 different product categories, citing the need to protect local industries or promote health and safety. The list of prohibited imports currently includes, among other products: … textiles, apparel, footwear, and travel goods; used motor vehicles more than ten years old; most types of furniture; ball point pens; pistols and air pistols; cartridge reloading implements; used clothing; and certain spirits and alcohols.

OMAN

The United States raised concerns that pre-market testing could have a large negative impact on the U.S. electrical and electronic equipment industries (such as information and communications technology, medical equipment, machinery, and smart fabrics), especially as the practice differs from common practice for RoHS regulations, which typically allow self-declaration of conformity.

PARAGUAY

Paraguay requires import licenses on personal hygiene products, cosmetics, perfumes and toiletries, textiles and clothing, shoes, insecticides, agrochemicals, soy grains, barbed wire, wire rods, and steel and iron bars. … The import license process usually takes 10 days, but for goods that require a health certification, it can take up to 30 days. Once issued, the health certification is valid for only 30 days, and imports must therefore be made within this 30-day window. This can be difficult if there are shipment delays, which are fairly common in Paraguay, a landlocked country largely dependent on riverine shipment that can slow during dry seasons. Due to these delays, importers may need to reapply for an import license or health certification.

PERU

Peru currently restricts imports of certain used goods, including clothing and shoes (except as charitable donations), medical devices (except by individual physicians for their own use), tires, cars over five years old, vehicles with more than eight seats and a gross weight over five tons, and trucks more than two years old weighing more than 12 tons.

SRI LANKA

The Export Development Board (EDB) levy, often referred to as a “cess”, ranges from 10 percent to 35 percent ad valorem on a range of imports identified as “nonessential” or as competing with local industries. Further, when calculating the EDB levy, an imputed profit margin of 10 percent is added to the import price. With some products, such as biscuits, chocolates, and soap, the levy is charged not on the import price, but instead on 65 percent of the maximum retail price. In an attempt to rationalize the tariff structure, the 2017 and 2018 government budgets removed the EDB levy on 350 items.

Textiles are subject to an EDB levy of Rs. 100 per kg (approximately $0.57). In addition, starting September 17, 2018, textiles are subject to a 5 percent VAT. Sri Lanka does not have import duties on textiles. Nations Building Tax (NBT) and PAL are not applicable on textiles.

Apparel is subject to a VAT of 15 percent or an EDB levy of 15 percent or Rs. 200 ($1.14) per unit, whichever is higher, and an NBT of 2 percent. Sri Lanka does not have import duties on articles of apparel and clothing accessories. The PAL is not applicable on these items.

THAILAND

High tariffs in many sectors … continue to hinder access to the Thai market for many U.S. products. The highest ad valorem tariff rates apply to imports competing with locally-produced goods, including automobiles and automotive parts, motorcycles, beef, pork, poultry, tea, tobacco, flowers, wine, beer and spirits, and textiles and apparel.

TUNISIA

Tunisia maintains a number of nontariff barriers. Approximately three percent of imported goods, including agricultural products, automobiles, and textiles, require an import license issued by the Ministry of Trade.

TURKEY

Turkey recently has taken advantage of substantial differences between its applied and WTO bound tariff rates to increase tariffs significantly across multiple sectors. Since mid-2014, Turkey has increased tariffs by an average of 26 percent on products classified in 50 Harmonized System chapters, affecting a wide range of sectors, including furniture, medical equipment, tools, iron, steel, footwear, carpets, and textiles.

Op-Ed by Commerce Secretary Wilbur L. Ross: Trade Reciprocity Needed Now

Commerce Secretary Wilbur L. Ross says, "[Under the] WTO's "Most Favored Nation" rule, we do not have the ability to vary tariff rates in order to directly match or offset the tariffs or non-tariff barriers of one country or another," in promoting the The U.S. Reciprocal Trade Act introduced in the House of Representatives this week...READ MORE.

U.S. Report Finds China out of Compliance with WTO Commitments Relating to Textiles, Intellectual Property, Export Subsidies, and Import Barriers

On February 4, 2019, USTR Released the Annual Reports on China's WTO Compliance

China and Russia present unique and serious challenges for members of the WTO and the multilateral trading system, largely because of their failure to embrace the pursuit of open, market-oriented policies, the U.S. Trade Representative said in the annual reports. China became a member of the WTO in 2001 and Russia joined the WTO in 2012.

Selected highlights of the 2018 annual report on China’s WTO compliance:

• Despite repeated commitments to refrain from forcible technology transfer from U.S. companies, China continues to do so through market access restrictions, the abuse of administrative processes, licensing regulations, asset purchases, and cyber and physical theft.

• China committed to open the electronic payment services market in 2006. This commitment was confirmed in a 2012 ruling by the WTO’s dispute settlement body resulting from a U.S. legal challenge. Today, the reality remains that no foreign electronic payment services companies conduct business in China’s domestic market.

• China’s use of export and import substitution subsidies has been ubiquitous throughout the past two decades in sectors as diverse as automobiles, textiles, advanced materials, medical products and agriculture, despite explicit prohibitions in the WTO Agreement.

• China has repeatedly committed to review applications of agricultural biotechnology products in a timely, ongoing and science-based manner. However, the Chinese regulatory authorities continue to review applications slowly and without scientific rationale, while Chinese companies continue to build up their own capabilities in the area of agricultural biotechnology.

• China has repeatedly deployed illegal export restraints, such as export quotas, export licensing, minimum export prices, export duties and other restrictions, on scores of raw material inputs, as determined in multiple WTO cases brought by the United States and other WTO members. China has used these illegal export restraints to provide substantial cost advantages to a wide range of downstream producers in China at the expense of foreign producers, while creating pressure on foreign producers to move their operations, technologies and jobs to China.

• Any review of China’s trade regime also shows that China’s regulatory system is so opaque that it is often difficult for U.S. companies – or even the U.S. government – to fully understand China’s legal requirements in a particular area of the economy. This problem is exacerbated by China’s extremely poor record of adhering to its transparency obligations as a WTO member. These shortcomings create their own trade barriers and undermine the competiveness of China’s trading partners.

Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On August 24 2018, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (83 FR 42966) Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

Topics on Which the TPSC Seeks Information: To assist USTR in preparing the NTE Report, commenters should submit information related to one or more of the following categories of foreign trade barriers:

• Import policies (e.g., tariffs and other import charges, quantitative restrictions, import licensing, customs barriers, and other market access barriers).
• Trade restrictions implemented through unwarranted standards, conformity assessment procedures, or technical regulations (technical barriers to trade) that may have as their objective protecting national security requirements, preventing deceptive practices, or protecting human health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment, but that can be formulated or implemented in ways that create significant barriers to trade (including unnecessary or discriminatory technical regulations or standards for telecommunications products).
• Trade restrictions implemented through unwarranted sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures that the country claims to impose for purposes of protecting human, animal, and plant life or health (e.g., SPS measures not based on scientific evidence).
• Subsidies, including export subsidies (e.g., export financing on preferential terms, subsidies provided to equipment manufacturers contingent on export, and agricultural export subsidies that displace U.S. exports in third country markets) and local content subsidies (e.g., subsidies contingent on the purchase or use of domestic rather than imported goods).
• Government procurement restrictions (e.g., ``buy national policies'' and closed bidding).
• Lack of intellectual property protection and enforcement (e.g., inadequate patent, copyright, and trademark regimes).
• Barriers to trade in services (e.g., prohibitions or restrictions on foreign participation in the market, discriminatory licensing requirements or regulatory standards, local-presence requirements, and unreasonable restrictions on what services may be offered).
• Barriers to digital trade (e.g., barriers to cross-border data flows including data localization requirements, discriminatory practices affecting trade in digital products, restrictions on the provision of internet-enabled services, and other restrictive technology requirements).
• Investment barriers (e.g., limitations on foreign equity participation and on access to foreign government-funded research and development programs, local content requirements, technology transfer requirements and export performance requirements, and restrictions on repatriation of earnings, capital, fees, and royalties).
• Government-tolerated anticompetitive conduct of state-owned or private firms that restrict the sale or purchase of U.S. goods or services in the foreign country's markets.
• Other barriers (e.g., barriers that encompass more than one category, such as bribery and corruption, or that affect a single sector).

Commenters should submit information related to one or more of the following export markets to be covered in the report: Algeria, Angola, the Arab League, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, the European Union, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Kuwait, Laos, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Ukraine, and Vietnam.

On March 30, 2018, the Office of the United States Trade Representative released the 2018 National Trade Estimate Report

On March 30, 2018, the Office of the United States Trade Representative released the 2018 National Trade Estimate Report

The National Trade Estimate (NTE) covers 64 countries, customs territories and regional associations, as well as all 20 of the United States’ free trade agreement (FTA) partners.

Among the notable changes in the last year in the U.S. export market:

Africa

South Africa

Conformity Assessment for Information Technology (IT): South African authorities require conformity assessment that demonstrates that IT products imported into that country meet the relevant South African standard. The National Regulator for Compulsory Specifications, part of the South African Bureau of Standards, had been taking nearly a year to issue the required documentation. The resulting delays were especially damaging to U.S. producers of IT goods, since the products are frequently updated to incorporate the latest technological developments. Following direct engagement with South African authorities, the timeframe required to issue the letters has dropped to about 80 days.

Restrictions on U.S. Turkey Meat: Prior to January 2018, South Africa required that exports of U.S. poultry meat to South Africa be produced from U.S. birds hatched and raised within the United States. This requirement restricted exports of U.S. turkey from meat produced from Canadian poults. In January 2018, USDA and South African authorities reached agreement on an amendment to the USDA export health certificate for poultry to allow the importation of U.S. turkey meat produced from turkeys grown from Canadian poults under certain conditions.

Kenya

Import Restrictions: In June 2016, Kenya doubled the import duty rate on articles of used clothing to $0.40/kg or 35 percent ad valorem, whichever is higher, as a first step to implement a March 2016 East Africa Community (EAC) decision to eliminate imports of used clothing and footwear within three years. According to the Secondary Materials and Recycled Textiles Association, a U.S. industry association, shutting this market would negatively impact U.S. exports representing thousands of U.S. jobs. In response to U.S. concerns, in July 2017 Kenya revised down the import duty rate on articles of used clothing back to the pre-June 2016 rates of $0.20/kg or 35 percent ad valorem, whichever is higher.

Japan

Autos: In January 2018, Japan recognized a number of U.S. automotive safety standards, including frontal and rear crash standards, thereby reducing the cost and burden for U.S. auto exporters.

Sanitary and Phytosanitary: In September 2017, Japan agreed to expand market access for U.S. chipping potatoes by adding Idaho, starting with the 2018 season, to the list of U.S. states listed as eligible for export to Japan.

Western Hemisphere

Argentina

Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: In 2017, Argentine authorities undertook significant enforcement actions against the sale of counterfeit goods. Authorities seized millions of dollars’ worth of illicit goods and made key arrests to dismantle organized crime operations in La Salada, one South America’s largest black markets for counterfeit and pirated goods.

Canada

Supreme Court Strikes Down the “Utility Doctrine”: In June 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected lower Canadian courts’ rulings that if a patent promised more than it could provide, it could be invalidated for lack of utility. Canadian courts had used this “utility” or “promise doctrine” to invalidate a number of patents held by U.S. pharmaceutical companies. The Supreme Court of Canada struck down this doctrine as “unsound,” ruling that it is inconsistent with Canada’s Patent Act.

Colombia

Movement of Data: In August 2017, following U.S. engagement, Colombia’s Superintendency of Industry and Trade (SIC) added the United States to the list of countries that provide an adequate level of data protection. This corrected the original circular which did not include the United States and would have been a significant impediment to digital trade.

Guatemala

Chicken Leg Quarters: The United States gained immediate tariff elimination for U.S. exports of fresh, frozen and chilled chicken leg quarters, zeroing out tariffs five years earlier than planned and creating market opening benefits for U.S. poultry exporters. El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua also established duty-free TRQ volumes through 2023, when U.S. poultry will have unlimited duty-free access.

Peru

Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: In 2017, the United States worked closely with Peruvian prosecutors and members of the Peruvian National Police to coordinate IPR enforcement, including a September 2017 seizure of the domain for pelis24.com, a prolific pirate site, and arrested its administrators in Lima. The site infringed on more than 5,000 properties belonging to U.S. copyright holders and attracted more than 25 million monthly visitors from Latin America.

Europe and the Middle East

Israel

Simplifying Declaration of Origin: Israel required U.S. exporters seeking to claim preferential treatment under the United States – Israel Free Trade Agreement (FTA) to provide an original, consularized form (the “Form A” or UNCTAD green form). For many years, U.S. exporters shipping to Israel wishing to take advantage of these tariff preferences struggled to locate and obtain a hard copy “Form A.” To eliminate this barrier to U.S. exports, USTR negotiated an approach with Israel, reflected in a decision of the Joint Committee under the FTA that would allow Israel to accept self-declarations of origin for U.S. exports and to dispense with the use of the UNCTAD green form. The new simplified procedure went into effect on January 10, 2018.

China

Chinese Industrial Plans and Forced Technology Transfer: China uses a range of measures, including industrial plans such as “Made in China 2025,” to engineer the transfer of foreign technology to China. Made in China 2025 provides massive subsidies to high technology manufacturing industries, calls for preferences for Chinese goods and services, seeks to extract technologies from other countries and sets explicit goals for dominating China’s market and seeking increased market share abroad. To accomplish its industrial policy goals, for example, China denies certain financial or regulatory incentives to companies that do not own their intellectual property (IP) in China, do not conduct large amounts of R&D in China, and/or do not manufacture products in China. China also conditions foreign investment approvals on technology transfers to Chinese entities; mandates adverse licensing terms on foreign IP licensors; uses anti-monopoly enforcement to extract technology on unreasonable terms; and subsidizes acquisitions of foreign high-technology firms to bring technology to Chinese parent companies. Additionally, structural gaps and inconsistencies in intellectual property rights protection and enforcement allow Chinese entities to appropriate foreign IP. For example, misappropriation of trade secrets for the benefit of Chinese companies has occurred both within China and outside of China.

Excess Capacity: Chinese government industrial policies and financial support have contributed to massive excess capacity in China, with the resulting over-production and increased exports distorting global markets and hurting U.S. producers and workers in both the U.S. market and third country markets where U.S. exports compete with Chinese exports. This excess capacity has led to lower global prices and a glut of supply that undermine the viability of even the most competitive manufacturers, and policies like Made in China 2025 call for this pattern of distortion to continue.

Cybersecurity Regime: U.S. and global partners continue to have serious concerns regarding a series of Chinese cybersecurity measures that would impose severe restrictions on a wide range of U.S. and other foreign information and communications technology (ICT) products and services to replace such foreign ICT products and services with Chinese-made ICT products and services in China’s market. Concerns center on requirements in sectors that China deems “critical” to ensure that ICT equipment and other ICT products and services be “secure and controllable”. In addition, China would impose severe restrictions on cross-border data flows and requirements for data localization. Notwithstanding the negative U.S. and international reaction, China continues to move forward with its cybersecurity regime and problems continue to arise.

Taiwan

Pharmaceuticals: There continues to be a need for greater transparency and predictability in Taiwan’s pricing and reimbursement policies for pharmaceuticals, including innovative pharmaceuticals, in Taiwan’s health care system. In December 2017, Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act establishing a patent-linkage system that should address patent issues expeditiously in connection with applications to market pharmaceutical products. However, implementation remains incomplete.

Korea

In July 2017, USTR called for a special session under the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) to seek changes to rebalance the agreement in ways that will be more favorable to American workers and businesses. On March 28, 2018, an agreement in principle was announced and the agreement is being finalized.

In its discussions to improve KORUS, the United States achieved steps to improve the large trade deficit in industrial goods with Korea and to address KORUS implementation concerns that have hindered U.S. export growth.

Growing U.S. Auto Exports: Exports of U.S. motor vehicles to Korea will be improved through the following steps:

• Greater Access for U.S. Exports: Korea will double the number of U.S. automobile exports, to 50,000 cars per manufacturer per year that can meet U.S. safety standards (in lieu of Korean standards) and enter the Korean market without further modification.
• Harmonization of Testing Requirements: U.S. gasoline engine vehicle exports will be able to show compliance with Korea’s emission standards using the same tests they conduct to show compliance with U.S. regulations, without additional or duplicative testing for the Korean market.
• Recognition of U.S. Standards for Auto Parts: Korea will recognize U.S. standards for auto parts necessary to service U.S. vehicles, and reduce labeling burdens for parts.
• Improvements to CAFE Standards: Korea will expand the amount of “eco-credits” available to help meet fuel economy and greenhouse gas requirements under the regulations currently in force, while also ensuring that fuel economy targets in future regulations will take U.S. regulations into account and will continue to include more lenient targets for small volume manufacturers.

Customs Improvement: Korea will address long-standing concerns with onerous and costly verification procedures through agreement on principles for conducting verification of origin of exports under KORUS and establish a working group to monitor and address future issues that arise.

Pharmaceutical Reimbursements: In 2018, Korea will amend its Premium Pricing Policy for Global Innovative Drugs to make it consistent with Korea’s commitments under KORUS to ensure non-discriminatory and fair treatment for U.S. pharmaceutical exports.

South and Central Asia

India

Price Controls on Medical Devices: In 2017, India implemented price controls on coronary stents and knee implants that do not fully differentiate for advanced technologies within a product class. U.S. companies have applied to withdraw technologically advanced products from the market, but the requests have been rejected, forcing the United States to sell certain products at a loss. India has indicated it may apply similar price controls on additional medical devices.

Tariff Increases: India continues to maintain some of the highest average tariff rates worldwide. The large gap between India’s WTO bound and applied tariff rates allows India to make frequent adjustments to the level of protection provided to domestic producers by modifying tariff rates. For example, in 2017 India increased tariffs on pulses from zero to 30 and 50 percent. India also raised tariffs on certain high-tech information and communication technology products from zero to between 10 and 20 percent. U.S. companies have raised significant concerns with these actions.

The United States continues to raise these concerns through bilateral engagement with the Indian government, including through the U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum.

Southeast Asia

Vietnam

Electronic Payments Restrictions: Southeast Asian governments are implementing measures that favor national monopolies and champions at the expense of U.S. and other payments companies. Vietnam is implementing a plan to develop its own local electronic payments industry by requiring that all credit and debit payment transactions be processed by a government-owned monopoly, the National Payments Corporation of Vietnam (NAPAS). Implementation of the new system has been postponed until January 2019. The United States continues to urge Vietnam to adopt a competitive approach in which U.S. electronic payment companies are able to supply services without disruption or harm to commercial arrangements that have been in place for many years.

Motor Vehicles: In October 2017, Vietnam released Decree 116, which imposes onerous new requirements on imports, including new certification and testing requirements. The decree took effect on January 1, 2018 and has resulted in significant trade disruptions. The United States continues to engage Vietnam for a solution to these concerns that allows trade to resume for the benefit of both countries.

Request for Comments and Notice of Public Hearing Concerning Russia's Implementation of Its WTO Commitments

On August 4, 2017, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (82 FR 36521) Request for Comments and Notice of Public Hearing Concerning Russia's Implementation of Its WTO Commitments

USTR must receive written comments no later than 11:59 p.m. on Friday, September 22, 2017. USTR invites written comments and/or oral testimony on Russia's implementation of the commitments made in connection with its accession to the WTO, including, but not limited to, commitments in the following areas:

• Import regulation (e.g., tariffs, tariff-rate quotas, quotas, import licenses).
• Export regulation.
• Subsidies.
• Standards and technical regulations.
• Sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
• Trade-related investment measures.
• Taxes and charges levied on imports and exports.
• Other internal policies affecting trade.
• Intellectual property rights (including intellectual property rights enforcement).
• Services.
• Rule of law issues (e.g., transparency, judicial review, uniform administration of laws and regulations).
• Trade-related investment measures.
• Other WTO commitments.

The TPSC will convene a public hearing on Thursday, September 28, 2017.

Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers

On August 2, 2017, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (82 FR 36069) Request for Comments To Compile the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

SUMMARY: Section 181 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) annually to publish the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (NTE). The Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC) is asking interested persons to submit written comments to assist the TPSC in identifying significant barriers to U.S. exports of goods, services, and U.S. foreign direct investment for inclusion in the NTE.

DATES: Must receive all written comments no later than 11:59 p.m., October 25, 2017.

Topics on Which the TPSC Seeks Information

To assist USTR in preparing the NTE, commenters should submit information related to one or more of the following categories of foreign trade barriers:

1. Import policies (e.g., tariffs and other import charges, quantitative restrictions, import licensing, and customs barriers).

2. Government procurement restrictions (e.g., ``buy national policies'' and closed bidding).

3. Export subsidies (e.g., export financing on preferential terms, subsidies provided to equipment manufacturers contingent on export and agricultural export subsidies that displace U.S. exports in third country markets).

4. Lack of intellectual property protection (e.g., inadequate patent, copyright, and trademark regimes).

5. Services barriers (e.g., limits on the range of financial services offered by foreign financial institutions, regulation of international data flows, restrictions on the use of data processing, quotas on imports of foreign films, unnecessary or discriminatory technical regulations or standards for telecommunications services, and barriers to the provision of services by professionals).

6. Investment barriers (e.g., limitations on foreign equity participation and on access to foreign government-funded R&D consortia, local content, technology transfer and export performance requirements, and restrictions on repatriation of earnings, capital, fees, and royalties).

7. Government-tolerated anticompetitive conduct of state-owned or private firms that restrict the sale or purchase of U.S. goods or services in the foreign country's markets.

8. Trade restrictions affecting electronic commerce (e.g., tariff and non-tariff measures, burdensome and discriminatory regulations and standards, and discriminatory taxation).

9. Trade restrictions implemented through unwarranted sanitary and phytosanitary measures, including unwarranted measures justified for purposes of protecting food safety, and animal and plant life or health.

10. Trade restrictions implemented through unwarranted standards, conformity assessment procedures, or technical regulations (Technical Barriers to Trade) that may have as their objective protecting national security requirements, preventing deceptive practices, or protecting human health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment, but that can be formulated or implemented in ways that create significant barriers to trade (including unnecessary or discriminatory technical regulations or standards for telecommunications products).

11. Other barriers (e.g., barriers that encompass more than one category, such as bribery and corruption, or that affect a single sector).