|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| WHITE HOUSE ON PNTR | |
 April 6, 2000  |
|
|
The U.S.-China WTO Accession Deal: Why Permanent Normal Trade Relations Is Essential The White House China Trade Relations Working Group
|
|
America Must Grant Permanent Normal Trade Relations To China To Obtain The Full Market Opening Benefits We Negotiated. Without PNTR, American Farmers, Workers, And Businesses Would Be Left Behind. Failure to enact permanent NTR would deprive the United States of virtually all market access provisions negotiated in November for services, meaningful market access for goods, key elements necessary to safeguard American workers from unfair import surges from China, and special rules and vital enforcement rights like access to WTO dispute settlement. To compete effectively, American companies, farmers and workers need the ability to export and distribute goods in China -- rights currently denied, but which will be permitted under the agreement. These rights will allow our businesses to export to China from here at home, and to have their own distribution networks in China, rather than being forced to set up factories in China to sell products through Chinese partners. Our firms also need access to China's fast-growing services market in sectors like telecommunications. If Congress were to refuse to grant permanent NTR, our Asian, Latin American, Canadian and European competitors would reap these benefits, but American farmers, workers, and businesses would be left behind. WTO Rules Require That We Grant Permanent Normal Trade Relations To China. A fundamental principle of the WTO is that you treat imports from all WTO members the same. You cannot give special advantages or impose special disadvantages or hardships on some countries' products and not others. GATT Article I requires that all WTO members grant each other "any advantage, favor, privilege or immunity" provided to other countries "immediately and unconditionally." The United States grants NTR/MFN treatment to all countries with whom we share and enjoy all the benefits of the WTO without the condition of an annual review. Receiving NTR tariff treatment is clearly an "advantage" or "privilege" under the WTO, and obtaining that treatment without going through an annual review is likewise an advantage or privilege. Subjecting one WTO member to an annual review of its NTR status -- whether tied to Jackson-Vanik's specific emigration-related conditions or not -- is a clear and discriminatory condition that disadvantages imports from that country. A mandatory annual or periodic review of whether products from China will be treated the same or differently than products from all other WTO members will inject uncertainty and unpredictability into business decisions affecting imports from China. NTR/MFN status provides non-discriminatory treatment of products both at the U.S. border and after the products enter into commerce within the United States. A mandatory review of NTR/MFN status is discriminatory and disadvantageous and violates the fundamental WTO principle that all WTO members must be treated the same, and that all "advantages" and "privileges" must be granted "immediately and unconditionally". If we do not grant China PNTR and continue to condition NTR/MFN status upon mandatory periodic reviews, we lose the full benefits -- to our farmers, workers, and companies -- of the strong, rules-based and enforceable market opening agreement we negotiated in November.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Source: White House China Trade Relations Working Group |
||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||
| ||||
|
|
| ||
| ||||
| ||||
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||||
