US–Brazilian cotton policies

Brazil filed a lawsuit with the WTO against the United States for providing cotton production and export subsidies, and the WTO ruled in favour of Brazil. Brazil threatened to impose retaliatory tariffs if the United States does not comply with the WTO rulings. After a prolonged litigation stretching from 2002 to 2010, both countries agreed to a negotiated settlement wherein the United States paid Brazilian cotton producers to compensate for any adverse effects. This study develops a political economic model to theoretically analyse US cotton policies, Brazil's threat of retaliatory tariffs and the negotiated settlement between the two countries. The theoretical results show that the volume of cotton output, supply price response, politicians' apathy for the public welfare, elasticities of excess supply/demand and the magnitude of US transfers play a crucial role in determining US policies. This study contributes to the literature by being the first to model political economic aspects of the complex system of trade and domestic policies in the cotton industry using a three-country framework, tariff retaliation and transfers between the countries.     

Dispute Settlement at the WTO: Impacts of a No Deal in the US‐Brazil Cotton Dispute

On the day before Brazil was to start imposing retaliatory sanctions against the United States in the WTO dispute settlement case regarding unfair domestic and export upland cotton subsidies, the parties have reached a preliminary concession aimed at settling this eight‐year‐long trade dispute. In this paper, we explore the economywide impacts of a no deal with specific emphasis on intellectual property retaliation in a computable general equilibrium framework. As awarded by a WTO dispute settlement panel, Brazil would have been entitled to $591 million in retaliatory sanctions in goods sectors and $238 million in intellectual property sanctions. We find that retaliation by Brazil would have led to welfare gains for all countries except the United States. Most importantly, however, had Brazil not been allowed to retaliate in the form of suspension of intellectual property rights, the impact of trade retaliation alone would have been negative for both Brazil and the United States, a case of shooting oneself in the foot to shoot at the other person's foot.     

2004 Trade Policy Review – The United States

Many of the findings of the seventh Trade Policy Review of the United States are similar to those reached in earlier reviews: the US is unanimously acknowledged as having an open and transparent system; the US economy has remained amongst the world's most competitive, and has continued to support global growth by keeping its import market largely open. This review finds, however, that the US has developed a disturbing pattern of non‐compliance with WTO rules. During the period of review the United States enacted policies, most notably the infamous Byrd Amendment and the 2001–02 steel safeguard action, that were found to be clear violations of its WTO obligations. Despite these and other such findings, the United States has obstinately refused to bring its domestic statutes in line with WTO rules. In addition, in recent years the United States’ aggressive pursuit of regional and bilateral initiatives has led many Members to question whether the United States is committed to the multilateral approach espoused by the WTO. Overall, despite the US's many virtues, Member countries expressed concern that the US's stated leadership of and commitment to the WTO is not matched by its actions.     

WTO Rules on Direct Taxation

The widely‐followed ruling by the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body against the United States concerning the latter's FSC/ETI scheme, which led to the largest retaliation award ever authorised in a dispute at the WTO, confirmed (if there were ever any doubt) that, generally speaking, direct taxes, like indirect taxes (including tariffs), are subject to the multilateral rules of the WTO, notwithstanding efforts by tax authorities to secure specific exemptions for certain direct tax measures in these agreements. This ruling reconfirmed the traditional distinction under international trade rules between direct and indirect taxes, particularly with respect to how such taxes should be treated under the subsidy and border tax adjustment rules of the WTO. It prompted the US Congress finally to pass legislation in late 2004 to repeal the FSC/ETI scheme as part of a larger overhaul of the US corporate tax system. The most recent disputes between the United States and the European Communities over assistance to large civil aircraft (allegedly amounting in each case to even more than the FSC/ETI) also encompass direct tax measures. It would not be surprising if other WTO‐inconsistent direct tax measures were identified in the future, leading to further disputes among WTO Members. Multilateral WTO rules, which are agreed by consensus, can therefore be expected to continue to be an important factor in determining how Members shape their tax policies, as they will undoubtedly want to avoid having their tax policies successfully challenged in the WTO.     

技术性贸易壁垒对中国电子行业出口的影响研究——基于中美贸易引力模型的实证分析

技术性贸易壁垒与出口之间的关系一直都是学术界关注的重点,但目前学术界对二者之间的具体影响机制尚未形成统一认知。利用2001年~2016年中国电子行业对美国出口额的时间序列数据,通过理论推导与拓展贸易引力模型,研究了美国技术性贸易壁垒对中国电子行业出口的影响。结果表明:实行传统关税壁垒,美国会比中国损失更多的出口利益,从而使得美国放弃关税壁垒而选择技术性贸易壁垒;技术性贸易壁垒对出口呈现正"U"型影响。研究结果还显示:美国技术性贸易壁垒对中国电子行业出口呈倒"U"型影响,这是因为美国技术性贸易壁垒强度会因中国技术创新数量与出口的增加而产生"壁垒强度突变";同时,美国技术性贸易壁垒对中国技术创新数量呈正"U"型影响。根据研究结论,提出了相关政策建议。     

中美贸易战背景下美国对外粮食援助政策演变及对中国的影响分析

2017年以来,中国的经济实力越来越强,在国际舞台上的地位越来越重要。然而,美国希望自己在国际经济和贸易中的领导地位能够保持不败之地。因此,两国经贸往来不可避免地会有摩擦。随着中美贸易战的升级,美国的一些贸易政策将直接影响国际经济秩序。期望中国在这场中美贸易战中的对策是维护中国对外贸易关系长期稳定发展、解决世界饥饿问题和促进粮食安全的一条途径。通过分析,粮食援助的重要性日益增加,美国对粮食援助的批评集中在国内农业利益的优先性与紧急人道主义需求的低效率上。     

Trade Statistics: Cotton Yarn & Fabric in Feb.

Cotton is the single most important textile fiber in the world,accounting for nearly 40 percent of total world fiber production.While some 80 countries from around the globe produce cotton,the United States,China,and India together provide over half the world's cotton.This monthly update provides official CNTAC (China National Textile & Apparel Council ) data on China import and export of cotton yarn and cotton fabric,to show a general profile of China's foreign trade in current textile industry.     

Cotton Subsidies,the WTO,and the ‘Cotton Problem’

Following an 8‐year‐long dispute over cotton subsidies, Brazil and the US signed a Memorandum of Understanding on 21 April 2010, effectively paving the way for settling the dispute. This paper argues that cotton subsidies are just the tip of the iceberg while a number of other, perhaps more important, issues require attention and, indeed, political will. Chief among them is the persistent divergence between cotton prices and the prices of other agricultural commodities which reflects, for the most part, the large supply response by China and India, a direct consequence of conversion to biotech cotton varieties in these (and other) countries. Such a response – which kept cotton prices low, compared to other commodities – imposes a competitive disadvantage to nonusers of biotech cotton. The paper also highlights two additional constraints faced by the cotton‐producing countries of West and Central Africa, namely the structural inefficiencies of their primary processing industries (also known as ginning) and the appreciation of the CFAf against the US dollar. Without downplaying the importance of subsidy elimination, this paper concludes that these impediments should receive high priority in the policy agenda.     

Emerging Powers in WTO Negotiations: The Domestic Sources of Trade Policy Preferences

In the current round of multilateral trade liberalization, emerging powers such as Brazil and India created the G-20 coalition and refused to accept further tariff rate reductions for industrial products before the United States and the European Union made reciprocal concessions in agriculture. This article examines how and why Brazil and India have taken a more offensive and proactive position at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Following Putnam's two-level games approach, I focus on domestic factors and specifically on interest groups to explain actors' policy preferences in WTO negotiations. From a theoretical perspective, the case studies Brazil and India lend credit to the literature discussing the impact of powerful, sector-specific interest groups on governments' trade policy preferences. From an empirical perspective, the findings show how these two countries translated these demands into government positions and influenced WTO outcomes as agenda-setters and coalition builders.     

WTO棉花争议案中交叉报复的研究

鉴于中国与贸易伙伴贸易摩擦的增多,深入研究WTO争端解决机制及案例对加入世贸不久的中国来说,如何更好地利用WTO争端解决机制具有重要意义。对交叉报复和对报复要求仲裁的理解是对WTO争端解决机制进行深入研究的两个重要方面。     

贸易争端背景下特朗普政府农业贸易补贴政策研究

美国长期实行农业补贴政策,其中农作物保险、农业风险补贴和价格损失补贴是补贴的主要形式。特朗普政府上台以后,美国同中国等一些国家发生贸易争端,美国农业出口面临关税报复和贸易壁垒的困境。为保持农业稳定发展,特朗普政府在原有农业补贴形式的基础之上新增了农业贸易援助计划,该计划主要包括市场促进项目、食品采购和分配项目、农业贸易促进项目。这些援助计划在稳定农业生产的同时,也扭曲了市场。美国在2019年度的农业补贴可能会超过其对世贸组织承诺的"黄箱"补贴上限,从而导致违反世贸组织规则。如美国长期执行该政策,我国应采取对美施压措施。     

世界主要国家和地区生物燃料发展现状和趋势展望

出于能源安全、促进农村经济发展、保护环境等方面考虑,自2000年以来,以美国、巴西和欧盟为主的一些国家和地区大力倡导和扶持生物燃料生产,对当地经济发挥了极大的推动作用,同时也对国际粮油市场产生了巨大影响。借鉴先进国家和地区的有关政策措施和成功经验,对于我国因地制宜发展生物燃料生产,保障能源安全、保护生态环境和建设社会主义新农村具有重大意义。     

Allies and Friends: The Trade Policy Review of the United States, 2006

The 2006 WTO Trade Policy Review of the United States reveals that national security concerns have become a dominant influence on US trade policy since 2001. This paper argues that direct and indirect effects of this influence have been deleterious to the multilateral trading system. Security concerns have led to an embrace of bilateralism that bears little relation to US commercial interests and will arguably detract from ongoing efforts at multilateral trade liberalisation. Security concerns have also led to a substantial change in customs and inspection procedures for goods bound for the US, which could swamp tariffs in terms of their trade‐inhibiting effect. Finally, the unpopularity at home of US military actions abroad has weakened the US President and opened the door for rising protectionism in Congress.     

世贸组织与贸易有关的知识产权协议在医药专利保护方面面临的问题

艾滋病危机是目前一些发展中国家面临的影响社会和经济稳定的主要问题之一,数以百万人因无法获得防治药品而死亡。而TRIPs协议对医药专利的保护导致发展中国家无法承担高昂价格的药品,因而发展中国家几乎享受不到TRIPs协议下的公共健康自主权。美国与南非、巴西的争端突显了这一问题的严重性。为此,多哈会议首次就该问题发表了公共健康宣言,但该宣言也留下了许多有待解决的问题。未来TRIPs协议应向何处发展值得反思。     

Facing up to Trump administration mercantilism: The 2018 WTO trade policy review of the United States

As one of the largest trading economies in the WTO system, US trade policy is reviewed regularly by WTO members, informed by a Trade Policy Review (TPR) report. This paper discusses the 2018 TPR of the United States, the 14th such review undertaken since the entry into force of the WTO in 1995. It is the first review of trade policy under the Trump administration. While the TPR documents the significant changes in US trade policy, it does not engage with the mercantilist vision that motivates trade policy under President Trump or the apparent desire to engage in trade wars with its major trading partners. The lack of discussion of the existential threat to the liberal trading system implied by the drastic changes to US trade policy reduces the salience of the TPR and makes it unclear exactly what purpose it serves.     

“Minding Our Business”: What the United States Government has done and can do to Ensure that U.S. Multinationals Act Responsibly in Foreign Markets

The United States Government does not mandate that US based firms follow US social and environmental law in foreign markets. However, because many developing countries do not have strong human rights, labor, and environmental laws, many multinationals have adopted voluntary corporate responsibility initiatives to self-regulate their overseas social and environmental practices. This article argues that voluntary actions, while important, are insufficient to address the magnitude of problems companies confront as they operate in developing countries where governance is often inadequate. The United States can do more to ensure that its multinationals act responsibly everywhere they operate. First, policymakers should define the social and environmental responsibilities of global companies. They must consistently make their expectations for global business clear – and underscore that this objective can often be accomplished without mandates. Second, the US should closely examine the policies that undermine global Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and address the many conflicting signals sent by policymakers. Third, the President should make the US government a CSR model by examining how to use its purchasing power to promote human rights. Finally, the US government should require pension funds to report on the social and environmental consequences of their investments. In these ways, Americans can mind our business – and thus make sure that US based firms do not undermine social and environmental progress when they operate in the developing world. Susan Aaronson is Senior Fellow and Director of Globalization Studies at the Kenan Institute Washington Center, an arm of the Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. Her scholarly research focuses on international investment and social responsibility issues. Aaronson devised and directed a study, funded by the Ford, UN and Levi Strauss Foundations, that examined how U.S. public policies can promote or undermine global corporate social responsibility. She is now beginning a Levi-Strauss funded project on trade and human rights. Aaronson is a frequent speaker on public understanding of globalization issues and the author of four books on globalization including, Taking Trade to the Streets: The Lost History of Public Efforts to Shape Globalization (Michigan: 2001).     

US Economic Sanctions Against China: Who Gets Hurt?

The United States maintains a broad spectrum of economic sanctions against China ranging from export controls to prohibitions on certain imports. Our study finds that, although from a macroeconomic perspective, US sanctions have had no significant adverse effect on China's overall economic growth and trade between the two countries, they do have a negative impact on producers and consumers in both countries. US economic sanctions have hindered technology transfer to China and US investment in China. US restrictions on imports from China have caused deadweight losses for the US due to higher domestic production costs for import substitutes and a reduction in consumption. US export controls have hindered US exports to China and contributed to large US trade deficits with China. The export controls have also caused losses of high‐paid jobs in the United States and benefited competitors from other countries. In addition, US economic sanctions against China have had significant third‐party effects. China's diversification of imports to sources other than the United States may have a long‐term effect on US exports to China even after US economic sanctions against China are lifted.     

中美经贸摩擦如何影响了大豆进口——基于贸易转移与创造效应视角

中美经贸摩擦背景下,中国对美国大豆进行反制,加征25%关税,那么,中国对美豆加征关税,会对中国大豆来源布局和产业产生怎样影响。文章利用寡头竞争理论,使用2002年1月~2020年3月中国海关数据,利用进口需求模型(AIDS),分析了加征关税对农产品贸易可能发生的贸易损害、贸易转移和贸易创造效应。实证结果表明,中国对美国大豆并不存在刚性依赖,对美加征关税将发生显著贸易转移效应和创造效应。即对美关税每增加1%,将会导致其对中国大豆出口下降1.29%,对巴西大豆进口上涨0.67%,对阿根廷大豆进口上涨0.66%,对其他国家进口上涨1.03%。中国市场增长和加征关税,将会造成国际大豆贸易创造效应,并激发非传统国家进入大豆贸易市场。     

国内外棉花市场价格的动态关系分析——基于VECM模型

本文运用协整检验、误差修正模型及脉冲响应函数等方法,分析了我国加入世贸组织后国内棉花价格与国际棉花价格之间的动态关系。结果表明,国内棉价与国际棉价具有长期均衡关系,其中国际棉价波动对国内棉价有较强的冲击,对国内市场起引导作用;而国内棉价波动对国际市场影响较小,并在此基础上提出了政策建议。     

The optimal tax on antebellum US cotton exports

The US produced about 80% of the world’s cotton in the decades prior to the Civil War. How much monopoly power did the US possess in the world cotton market and what would have been the effect of an optimal export tax? This paper estimates the elasticity of foreign demand for US cotton exports and uses the elasticity in a simple partial equilibrium model to calculate the optimal export tax and its effect on prices, trade, and welfare. The results indicate that the export demand elasticity for US cotton was about −1.7 and that the optimal export tax of about 50% would have raised US welfare by about $10 million, about 0.3% of US GDP or about 1% of the South’s GDP.