99-2947 MOREPRESS RELEASE
PRESS/TPRB/110
15 July 1999
TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES
TPRB'S EVALUATION
The Trade Policy Review Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concluded its fifth
review of the United States' trade policies on 12 and 14 July 1999. The text of the Chairperson's
concluding remarks is attached as a summary of the salient points which emerged during the
discussion. The review enables the TPRB to conduct a collective examination of the full range of
trade policies and practices of each WTO member countries at regular periodic intervals to monitor
significant trends and developments which may have an impact on the global trading system.
The review is based on two reports which are prepared respectively by the WTO Secretariat
and the government under review and which cover all aspects of the country's trade policies, including
its domestic laws and regulations, the institutional framework, bilateral, regional and other
preferential agreements, the wider economics needs and the external environment. A record of the
discussion and the Chairperson's summing-up together with these two reports will be published in due
course as the complete trade policy review of the United States and will be available from the WTOSecretariat, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.
Since December 1989, the following reports have been completed: Argentina (1992 & 1999),
Australia (1989, 1994 & 1998), Austria (1992), Bang ladesh (1992), Benin (1997), Bolivia (1993),
Botswana (1998), Brazil (1992 & 1996), Burkina Faso (1998), Cameroon (1995), Canada (1990,
1992, 1994, 1996 & 1998), Chile (1991 & 1997), Colombia (1990 & 1996), Costa Rica (1995), Côte
d'Ivoire (1995), Cyprus (1997), the Czech Republi c (1996), the Dominican Republic (1996), Egypt
(1992 & 1999), El Salvador (1996), the European Communities (1991, 1993, 1995 & 1997), Fiji
(1997), Finland (1992), Ghana (1992), Guinea ( 1999), Hong Kong (1990, 1994 & 1998), Hungary
(1991 & 1998), Iceland (1994), I ndia (1993 & 1998), Indonesia (1991, 1994 & 1998), Israel (1994),
Jamaica (1998), Japan (1990, 1992, 1995 & 1998), Kenya (1993), Korea, Rep. of (1992 & 1996),
Lesotho (1998), Macau (1994), Malaysia (1993 & 1997), Mali (1998), Mauritius (1995), Mexico
(1993 & 1997), Morocco (1989 & 1996), New Zeal and (1990 & 1996), Namibia (1998), Nigeria
(1991 & 1998), Norway (1991 & 1996), Pakistan (1995), Paraguay (1997), Peru (1994), the
Philippines (1993), Poland (1993), Romania (1 992), Senegal (1994), Singapore (1992 & 1996),
Slovak Republic (1995), the Solomon Islands (1998), South Africa (1993 & 1998), Sri Lanka(1995),
Swaziland (1998), Sweden (1990 & 1994), Switzerland (1991 & 1996), Thailand (1991 & 1995),
Togo (1999), Trinidad and Tobago (1998), Tunisi a (1994), Turkey (1994 & 1998), the United States
(1989, 1992, 1994, 1996 & 1999), Uganda (1995), Uruguay (1992 & 1998), Venezuela (1996),
Zambia (1996) and Zimbabwe (1994).PRESS/TPRB/110
Page 2/3
MORETRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES
CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON
We have had serious, positive and open discussions.  Members of the TPRB are clearly
impressed by the United States' recent outstanding economic performance which is reflected, inter
alia, in strong growth, low unemployment and low inflat ion.  No doubt, this performance is partly due
to the considerable trade and investment liberalization achieved by the Uruguay Round and WTO
Agreements.
Members acknowledged that the U.S. economy is among the most open and transparent in the
world.  This openness and its recent impressive economic performance have meant that the UnitedStates has played a pivotal role in supporting the world economy in the wake of the Asian financial
crisis.  At the same time, imports, often at lower prices, have served as an important safety valve for
the U.S. economy, helping to meet domestic demand and subdue inflationary pressures that might
otherwise have emerged.  Further, foreign invest ment has enabled the U.S. economy to grow faster
than would have been the case had it relied solely on domestic saving.
Members acknowledged that while the resulting large and widening U.S. current account
deficit, and difficulties faced by some sectors (notably steel and agriculture), have led to certain
protectionist pressure, hitherto the Administration has,  by and large, resisted these pressures, to the
benefit of the multilateral trading system.
Nonetheless, one senses that Members are worried that if the U.S. economy slows
substantially, and unemployment starts to edge up, it may become more difficult for the
Administration to resist domestic protectionist pre ssures.  Moreover, given that the United States is
the world's single largest trader and the importance that Members attach to its leadership role onmultilateral issues, delegations asked clarification or voiced concerns about a number of features of
the U.S. trade and investment regime and recent developments therein, particularly those of a
unilateral or extra-territorial nature.   Among these features were:
- the impact of regional initiatives on the WTO-based multilateral system;
- the existence of tariff "peaks", often embodied in specific rates, and tariff 
escalation;
- some recent high profile anti-dumping (notably in steel), countervailing and 
safeguard ( inter alia , lamb) actions;
- conditions attached to the GSP;
- import protection and the export enhancement programme for agriculture;
- rules of origin, especially with respect to textiles and clothing;- speed and scope of implementation of commitments pertaining to the ATC;
- measures, notably 301 and related actions, aimed, inter alia , at securing 
market access abroad for U.S. exporters;
- actions by the U.S. in matters that have not fully worked their way through 
WTO disputes settlement procedures;
- extra-territorial application of U.S. and sub-federal laws (including those 
pertaining to labour, health, sanitary and environmental standards);
- state-federal relations relating to U.S. WTO commitments;PRESS/TPRB/110
Page 4
END- protection of U.S. shipbuilders and providers of shipping services;
- government procurement, in particular the Buy American Act.- harmonization of U.S. intellectual property rights with international practice.
Clarification has been brought to these issues and we look forward to written replies on
outstanding matters.
The U.S. commitment to the full implemen tation, and compliance with, WTO rules and
principles has to be noted.  Although the above matters may appear to be relatively insignificant for
an economy as large as the United States, some can have extremely serious repercussions for U.S.
trading partners, especially smaller less-developed economies.
Looking to the future, Members expressed some worry over the Administration's difficulty,
for the time being, in securing "fast-track" authority, which many Members perceived as a reflection
of a certain erosion of support within the United States for trade liberalization.  While noting that"fast-track" was not needed for negotiations and the endeavours of the U.S. Administration to build
overall (domestic, institutional and international) support for a meaningful, transparent trade agenda,
with the next Ministerial being hosted by the United States in Seattle later this year, Members look to
the United States to demonstrate its traditional leader ship role in undertaking future multilateral trade
negotiations.